Jump to content

Leica M (type240) vs Leica M9 – Night Landscape Photos Comparison


lovelyleica

Recommended Posts

Here is some comparison I made between Leica M 240 and M9 for a night photo made at ISO 200, 1250 and 3200-2500. Enjoy !

 

Leica M (type240) vs Leica M9 – Night Landscape Photos Comparison

 

Thanks a lot! I am a little bit confused, is the labeling correct? The M9 files in the direct comparison have a pink touch, but the large files not, see e.g. the M 2500.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There was some difference in white balance. I reposted the full jpegs.

 

Thanks a lot, so to me it seems that M9 at ISO 1250 is more or less identical with M 240 at 3200. The exposure time for the picture with the M9 is 3 times longer, all in there is a 1.5 stop advantage of the M 240 over the M9. Would you agree?

 

This advantage of the M 240 nice, but not dramatic. Moreover, the M9 looks not to bad at 2500.

 

Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks a lot, so to me it seems that M9 at ISO 1250 is more or less identical with M 240 at 3200. The exposure time for the picture with the M9 is 3 times longer, all in there is a 1.5 stop advantage of the M 240 over the M9. Would you agree?

 

This advantage of the M 240 nice, but not dramatic. Moreover, the M9 looks not to bad at 2500.

 

Thomas

 

Yeah, that's about my interpretation too - it's a bit hard to judge because there's so many aspects - dynamic range, chroma noise, colour saturation.

 

It's interesting because it my handheld tests (short exposure) M ISO3200 is more like M9 ISO800, but again, hard to judge.

 

- Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is some comparison I made between Leica M 240 and M9 for a night photo made at ISO 200, 1250 and 3200-2500. Enjoy !

 

Leica M (type240) vs Leica M9 – Night Landscape Photos Comparison

 

Very interesting indeed, thanks very much!! But I must say I am surprised. If I compare M240 against M9 at Iso 1250 I see hardly no difference! Or do I have a problem with my eyesight or computer?? I do a lot of night-photography with my M9 so I really would like to understand this.

 

/Anders

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree that the difference is very thin between the two cameras, and this is because M9 is already a very good camera until ISO 1250.

 

I see 2 advantages:

1) we can bring M to higher ISO 3200 with an image quality that looks very much like ISO 1250 on M9, plus advantage of 24 Mpix instead of 18 Mpix.

2) M is less prone to clipping highlights easily at high ISO as M9 is doing (see picture below) and it is particularly evident.

 

Here are M ISO3200 vs M9 ISO1250 comparison pictures of different parts of the image :

http://www.farines-photo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-08-at-19.33.45.png

http://www.farines-photo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-08-at-19.32.49.png

 

But anyway life is not so perfect in Leica's world and there could be a major drawback at ISO 3200 on Leica M: some light banding is appearing on the picture. But firmware is young, and maybe this will be corrected in a future release... (that's only to reassure myself)

 

Example here below (I need to mention that I pushed exposure to see it more clearly, but I remarked this problem before, without doing this trick):

http://www.farines-photo.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Screen-Shot-2013-03-08-at-20.08.59.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course not - how could it? Anyone expecting it to will have been over-optimistic.

 

Skim the forums the months before samples became available.

 

A CMOS imager outperforming the CCD based MM at high ISO was the consensus expectation. Other attributes were expected to drive B&W only photographers to the MM, including its rich tonality.

 

Two points:

 

i) the M240 ISO performance is below expectations

 

ii) the MM ISO performance is above expectations.

 

It also took some time for the assessment of the MM to shake out.

 

I suppose this is worth remembering, in looking at the M240, where people (myself included) are jumping to conclusions based on a few reviews or early days of use. some basics like a workable color profile, are not even yet available.

 

the M240 could be better or worse than the consensus of the various camps.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I suppose this is worth remembering, in looking at the M240, where people (myself included) are jumping to conclusions based on a few reviews or early days of use. some basics like a workable color profile, are not even yet available..

 

Tend to agree here.

 

re color profile - Lightroom 4.4 RC makes a huge difference to colour.

re conclusions - my 2nd M9 is off to a happy new owner and my new #2 M-240 is winging it's way to me. I have to work hard to earn my money and don't part with it lightly, but the combination of ALL the M-240's features including IQ have made it an easy decision for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me?

 

The M9 looks better noise-wise at 1250 (look at the side of the building very bottom left).

 

The M9 1250 looks better than the M at 3200. I would say there is maybe one stop advantage.

 

More purple edge problems with the M as compared to the M9. I thought this was supposed to be solved? Or, is this just lateral chromatic aberration from the lens that just happens to be more noticeable in the M photo in this instance only?

 

I am getting the M (not a hater :)) but, much better ISO doesn't seem to be as big of an advantage as I hoped judging by internet images like these, IMHO.

Edited by RickLeica
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to work hard to earn my money and don't part with it lightly, but the combination of ALL the M-240's features including IQ have made it an easy decision for me.

 

I don't believe a rational and informed decision can be made, even at this date. You're rolling the dice. This is unlike any release from a major vendor like Nikon or Canon, at a time when Leica is behaving in other ways more like these companies.

 

The marketplace drives M9 users to sell ahead of the release date, while Leica's early queueing system via distributors pushes potential purchases out on a limb. Few images available (many just awful), and just a handful of reviews from truly independent 3rd parties. a rather closed community of folks (many of whom have business relationships with Leica) provide a mixture of overenthusiastic hype and low resolution jpegs, with just a handful of comment from other quarters.

 

with such a major platform migration, from CCD to CMOS -- not from a major sensor manufacturer with track record -- and a boatload of firsts for Leica in the electronics, this is intolerable.

 

we're just starting to see more than a trickle, and even some DNGs, but we're without a color profile for proper evaluation of color!

 

Quite a mess for any serious Leica user whose number comes up at his vendor.

Edited by photomeme
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...