Jump to content

Does M9 make sense for an M10 owner?


LPettigrew

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, BarberShop said:

Can you please tell me why you personally prefer the M9 over the M10?

+ I loved the M10 as a camera to handle and work with. The rangefinder is the best ever in an M. My hard to focus lenses like Summilux75 and Summicron 90 AA were much easier to focus right, I didn’t need the 1.4 loupe so much anymore. The shutter sound is great, for theatre for instance, nobody in front of you notices. I do not care so much about high ISO’s but the M10 has a lovely noise between 1600 and 3200, which comes close to some slidefilms I used to like very much in the 80’s for their grain, for instance Agfa 50L. If you print big enough you can attain a nice pointillism effect with that. The B&W conversions from the M10 are very good and rich in possibilities. 

- In 2017 there has been a whole article in LFI to prove that the colors of M10 images can be just as neutral as from the M9. Well, I did not succeed to replicate that finding, not in CaptureOne, but in LR even less. The colors are oversatured with a preference for yellow and I was not able to correct that to my built-up M9 taste. The SL sensor has practically the same sensor. During my last big travel to Patagonia I had both the M9 and the SL with me and the SL shots are systematically warmer/yellower. I compare it as follows: M9 is Kodachrome25, M10 is Kodak Elitechrome. Nothing wrong with Elitechrome at all,  but not always and it took me too much time to get what I am looking for, so I sold my M10 after a year for an SL which has a broader functionality, owning several M’s already. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, otto.f said:

I would reconsider if I were you 😁

My M-E is one of the latest made, sold as new September 2016. It is on latest sensor, since 2018.

Also I'm not grasshopper with deep pockets to jump at every new camera made as well. So, I would use M-E for some years and then look at reconsidering :) 

Should be plenty of lightly used M10 by then. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, DandA said:

Ko.Fe.,

In the article (at the very end(, he explained why the film scans look subpar.  He added this postscript....

"I finally have an explanation regarding the poor results from my film scan. The film I used on this blog post was damaged by X-Ray. I had forgotten about them, and have been traveling with them unprotected. This was never a problem when I used to shoot film, back in the day, since I never shot pass ISO 200"

Dave (D&A)

Looks more like bad developing, scan, which does odd colors, but it is good he admitted it was obviously something wrong.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/29/2020 at 1:43 AM, raphael said:

Not to me. I'm a film shooter and the M9 images are far from what I'm getting from film.

What do you mean with "more organic"? I mean we're talking about pixel, aren't we? 😜

Sorry but that has been discussed over and over, so not getting into the CCD vs CMOS argument again. 

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...