Guest malland Posted October 18, 2013 Share #21 Posted October 18, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for the thread links. I'm an Aperture user so I am converting this advice for that software. Very helpful.Simey, not sure that this will work well with Aperture, because it depends on the excellent Noise Reduction facility of LR4/LR5. In a post somewhere around #101 or #110, I give a list of the all steps in shooting and processing in LR4/LR5. Another issue is that, starting with LR4, Lightroom uses process PV2012, which crushes highlights and shadow values like film rather than blowing out highlights — this is also what makes this technique so effective. I used to use Aperture but, when I got the M9-P last February, I reluctantly switched to LR4: the results were much better. At first, Id didn't like the user interface, but I you get used to it there was no problem. In my view, the color results with Lightroom for the M-E/M9 are so much better that it's really worth switch. Also, LR5 now has a Radial Filter tool that is much better for burning and dodging than anything that Aperture has. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 18, 2013 Posted October 18, 2013 Hi Guest malland, Take a look here Welcome to talk More about M-E. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
darylgo Posted October 19, 2013 Share #22 Posted October 19, 2013 Every great while a camera comes along that is an instant classic, despite it's frailties and quirks the M9/M-E is that camera for me. Despite having an M my M9 is a beloved companion and the photos are pure joy to view and print. Am I the only one that likes the M-E color alot, and the chrome dial and shutter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted October 19, 2013 Share #23 Posted October 19, 2013 No, Daryl, I like it too. I was going to get one in February, but the dealer in Paris still had a new, black M9-P that was still available at the Leica promotional price that had expired on December 31, and which was only a few hundred dollars more than that of an M-E. —Mitch/Paris Tristes Tropiques [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Emile de Leon Posted October 19, 2013 Share #24 Posted October 19, 2013 I want an M-E..simple, basic and to the point.. Havent seen any for sale locally though.. Maybe they have been discontinued.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted October 19, 2013 Share #25 Posted October 19, 2013 They have not been discontinued. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mijo Posted October 21, 2013 Share #26 Posted October 21, 2013 Love my M-E almost as much as my M6. Classic Leica rangefinder. Works like a charm. Follow the advice on this forum regarding cards and deleting images etc. and you'll have no issues. I have the same exact set up, ME and an M6. I bought the M6 after I'd been using the ME for a couple of months, for a film class I'm now taking. It's a pretty seamless transition going from digital to film, with these two M bodies, with the only issue being that I sometimes forget to advance the film after I take a shot. I like my ME a lot, and didn't feel like I really needed the extras associated with the M9-P. I put the money I saved towards lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simey Posted October 22, 2013 Share #27 Posted October 22, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I collected my first prints today taken with the M-E. I don't have my own printer and so up until now the only output I have seen has been on a computer screen. The prints are A3 size and I am completely blown away by the quality. Even the shot that was taken at ISO 800 could pass for having been shot on slow film. 20,000 Dirhams well spent! It was nice also when the staff asked "which camera did you shoot that with?" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Kellner Posted November 4, 2013 Share #28 Posted November 4, 2013 For me the M-E is not the "Entry = E", it's the more consequent M9 without needless frame-leveler and USB-port. It is made to be a workhorse. The only possible modification I would like to see on M-E is the upgrade à la M9-P. Even the windows of the top cover of the M-E should be made of sapphire crystal nowadays. Hence the workhorse would be perfect. Dear Mr. Daniel, please. You should do us that favour. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mijo Posted November 4, 2013 Share #29 Posted November 4, 2013 For me the M-E is not the "Entry = E", it's the more consequent M9 without needlessframe-leveler and USB-port. It is made to be a workhorse. The only possible modification I would like to see on M-E is the upgrade à la M9-P. Even the windows of the top cover of the M-E should be made of sapphire crystal nowadays. Hence the workhorse would be perfect. Dear Mr. Daniel, please. You should do us that favour. At first I thought the same thing about the sapphire crystal not being implemented into the M-E, since it's incorporated into the M9-P. However after using my M-E for several months, I don't really care that the LCD isn't sapphire since the resolution is so bad. I only use the LCD for the menus and checking composition. If the resolution on the LCD were better to the point where I could accurately / quickly check the focus of my shot, it might make more of difference to me. In the interest of keeping costs down, I'm fine with features that were left off of the M-E. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Kellner Posted November 4, 2013 Share #30 Posted November 4, 2013 At first I thought the same thing about the sapphire crystal not being implemented into the M-E, since it's incorporated into the M9-P. However after using my M-E for several months, I don't really care that the LCD isn't sapphire since the resolution is so bad. I only use the LCD for the menus and checking composition. If the resolution on the LCD were better to the point where I could accurately / quickly check the focus of my shot, it might make more of difference to me. In the interest of keeping costs down, I'm fine with features that were left off of the M-E. I agree with you, Mijo. But let the dream come true as an optinal choice. For those who prefer the basic configuration everthing ist fine. People who are not fanatic by "Red Dot Stickers" but appreciate "Heavy Tools" (Professional) instead would be happy about this possibility. Where displays comes in sapphire crystal these days there'll be no handicap to have this finish for the windows of the cameras top cover as well. I'd like to see a upcoming M-E-P in this stage of expansion. *KeepMyFingersCross* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted November 5, 2013 Share #31 Posted November 5, 2013 Sean Reid's review of the M240 appears to indicate only a slight improvement in image quality over the M9 at base iso Im new to the whole Leica thing, but I thought the M iso at base, while slight improvement over the M-E, it can reach the same iso performance at 3200 when the M-E is at 640iso Also, how much improvement over the M-E is the M? Is it detail, a stop, or noise? Im seriously thinking of skipping the M queue and get an M-E now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica lux Posted November 5, 2013 Share #32 Posted November 5, 2013 here an article on leica rumors from DxoMark: "The latest 24-megapixel CMOS sensor offers not only six million extra pixels but DxOMark’s Sensor Scores indicate a +1 Stop improvement in overall image quality compared to the previous 18Mp CCD sensor. As well as offering more consistent Colour Sensitivity across the ISO range there’s also an impressive extra +1.6 Stops boost for Dynamic Range and its low-light ISO scores are improved too, again beating previous versions by around +1 Stop. So a big step in the right direction although the new sensor doesn’t quite match the heights of the best sensors DxOMark have tested or those of flagship DSLRs. Compared to the best sensors the Leica M is a little off the pace with the Sony RX1 and Nikon D800 boasting around +1 Stop better image quality overall." cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted November 5, 2013 Share #33 Posted November 5, 2013 @ Leica Lux, that's a really interesting point from DxOMark, but why is it that when I use a 5Dmk3 and a D800, I don't get the amazing "look" I find pleasing from the M240 at the same focal length etc... I wonder how that happens, the lens? It was a summicron after all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leica lux Posted November 5, 2013 Share #34 Posted November 5, 2013 the lens? It was a summicron after all. Yes definitely. The leica lense has more to do with this pleasing "look" than the difference between CCD & CMOS. I use a 5Dmk3 and a D800, I don't get the amazing "look" I find pleasing I also don't get it when I adapt leica lenses on a Fuji ;-). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xdayv Posted November 6, 2013 Share #35 Posted November 6, 2013 I would love to have an M-E someday... except that the M9P discreet styling is better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kena Posted November 7, 2013 Share #36 Posted November 7, 2013 I sent my M8.2 in to New Jersey for the dreaded "coffee stain" and I took them up on the upgrade offer only to find out the M-E is backordered. No idea how long, they said they would contact when it ships. Anybody know how long the back log is? Eagerly waiting in L.A..... Ken Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted November 7, 2013 Share #37 Posted November 7, 2013 @ Mitch Alland: so would LR 3.6 not work effectively with the 640-push technique? In re the M-E, this being just my personal opinion of course, but with barely-used M9s (not -P) selling for around $3600 on the 'bay, I think I would go that route at this point, and risk it not needing $2000-worth of repairs in the next 2 years. Especially as Leica has thus far been replacing the sensors (for cracks and dead-pixel lines) gratis out of warranty, and those appear to be the M9's achilles heel. But I'm not averse to buying used. If I were, however, I would get the M240. The technology is newer, there are some significant improvements, and the difference is only $1500, about 20% of the M240's price. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest malland Posted November 7, 2013 Share #38 Posted November 7, 2013 @ Mitch Alland: so would LR 3.6 not work effectively with the 640-push technique?...I don't know about "effectively," but it would not work as well: not only would you be using Process PV2010, but the black and white sliders also work quite differently than in LR4/5 and the Noise Reduction facility is nowhere near as good. —Mitch/Bangkok Looking for Baudelaire [WIP] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcraf Posted November 7, 2013 Share #39 Posted November 7, 2013 They have not been discontinued. I'd heard that M-E production has been pretty much halted to allow Leica to get Ms out of the door. That is now happening, as most of us know; a certain London Leica (authorised!) dealer very close to Holborn tube station had a black M in stock today to take away. The M-E has always looked good value to me. I hope they keep it, or something like it in production. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luke_Miller Posted November 8, 2013 Share #40 Posted November 8, 2013 I routinely check my dealer's website and it appears that he has filled his M pre-orders since he now shows the M in stock occasionally. I have not seen an M-E listed in months. I suspect one could take delivery of an M quicker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.