Jump to content

M9


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't get the comparisons to DSLR's. Any 35mm DSLR with a pro lens from a digital rebel to a 1Ds MKIII or Nikon D3 (or an M8) can produce great results in print. Every one will have there own opinions about IQ but in a blind test no one will be able to identify what camera shot what image if I showed you tear sheets from 1 and 2 page magazine ads or 11 x 17 ink jet prints. 35mm was never about optimum IQ, you used MF or LF if that was your priority.

 

If the M8 did not exist I would not lug around a D3 or 5D. I'd accept the lower dynamic range and IQ and use something like a Ricoh GRD with an optical vf in the hot shoe for the type of work I'd use an M8 for. Rght now the M8 is in a class of one, not in image quality or number of features but in something approaching a small, simple RF reportage camera. It does not really come up to the bar set by the film M's but it comes closer then any digicam currently available.

 

The attraction of the M8 is in the compact size and the viewfinder which does not present a view of the world distorted by the narrow DOF and constricted view of an SLR.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I was flamed back in this thread for saying "restricted view" in connection with DSLR's.:o I wonder what will happen to your "constricted view"....;)

 

When using long lenses, macro or doing a head and shoulders portrait close to wide open with a lens like an 85 or 135 the SLR view is an advantage (to me). It's pretty much WYSIWYG in those circumstances. But on the street with a normal to wide lens I find it more limiting then an RF viewfinder. Shooting an M3 with a 50 with both eyes open having the crop marks sort of suspended in the scene in front of you is my benchmark for a transparent user interface. Nothing between you and your subject. Being able to see what's outside the frame even with the camera to your eye.

 

It's a matter of personal preference and has nothing to do with being better or worse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

However, a larger sensor would require a larger mirror, which would make it almost impossible to swing the mirror up, while still using existing "R" glass. This problem is made even more significant by the need to make the registration (the distance from lens flange to sensor/film plane) a few millimeters shallower than on previous R cameras, in order to allow for an adapter, so existing 'R' glass can be fitted, while still focusing to infinity. Should the sensor be made square, this would be virtually impossible, for the mirror would have to be much larger!

 

Perhaps not, among the different MF cameras I've used, I recall the Bronica S2 had a mirror that did not flip up on a fixed pivot below the focusing screen. Instead, the mirror would flip down & slide under the lens which solved some issues regarding the clearance of some of the wide angle lenses. An auxiliary shutter covered the focus screen to prevent light from enetering the chamber. In its day, the S2 was a very innovative camera!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hank, You've expressed my feelings on this one exactly. Although, if the M8 didn't exist I'd still be using an M6 and scanning for the type of work and focal lengths for which a RF is best suited. I've never felt at ease with digital point and shoots, even though I've bought a couple thinking they might be fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Rght now the M8 is in a class of one, not in image quality or number of features but in something approaching a small, simple RF reportage camera.

 

The main reason I use the M8 is that I do feel it is in a class by itself in image quality. To my eye, the images more closely mimic film than images from any other digital camera I've used. I very much hope Leica will keep this look with the M9. If future digital Ms produce images that have the ultra-smooth, plasticy look of other digital cameras, I will opt to stay with the M8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rweisz
So, you're telling the people at New Jersey you don't trust them to work on your M8.

 

I didn't have to tell them, or the reason why, because they know me and have my case on file from my M7 last year. Three times there repair "team" couldn't fix one little switch, finally I had to go over there heads and the powers that be gave me an exchange for a demo.

 

At the same time you're telling them you want a loaner, even though you are not a registered Leica Pro, and you can't understand why you got "attitude?" :rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

I offered to become an LPS member if they would send my M8 to Solms and give me a loaner. They refused to do either, with a dose of New Jersey attitude. Totally unwarranted considering they were the one's who destroyed my confidence in there competency to begin with. In fact the gal in Solms apologized for NJ's lack of cooperation and poor customer service, but she said they (Germany) have no control over the policies of there distributors in that regard.

 

If you were there with me in NJ when I brought my dead M8 in, I apologize for not introducing myself. However if you weren't there at the time, I think you should stop trying to pervert the facts of the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See your PM from the moderator. Also, refer back to post #199 in this thread.

 

I didn't have to tell them, or the reason why, because they know me and have my case on file from my M7 last year. Three times there repair "team" couldn't fix one little switch, finally I had to go over there heads and the powers that be gave me an exchange for a demo.

 

 

 

I offered to become an LPS member if they would send my M8 to Solms and give me a loaner. They refused to do either.

 

If you were there with me in NJ when I brought my dead M8 in, I apologize for not introducing myself. However if you weren't there at the time, I think you should stop trying to pervert the facts of the situation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

but in a blind test no one will be able to identify what camera shot what image

 

 

if looking at the sorts of shots that you typically see in magazines/press etc.. then fair enough

 

but soon as you start using say lux glass wide open, noctilux etc. with a large absence of field then I disagree, you can often tell because wide open the fingerprint is so strong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest rweisz
See your PM from the moderator. Also, refer back to post #199 in this thread.

 

I didn't see the personal attack in that post. If not for you pointing it out so everyone would go back and take another look, I would never have needed to respond to it.

 

 

They do run a Pro service, but I do not think they have their Prima Donna service implemented yet.

 

Of course they do. It's exclusively for rich dentists who own 2 M8's and don't need to make a living from photography.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if looking at the sorts of shots that you typically see in magazines/press etc.. then fair enough

 

but soon as you start using say lux glass wide open, noctilux etc. with a large absence of field then I disagree, you can often tell because wide open the fingerprint is so strong.

 

Yes the Noctilux has a pretty easily identified fingerprint wide open but I don't use one. I find it's strong personality a little to intrusive. The Luxes are really great, I love my 35/1.4 ASPH but the wide open signatures of the Zeiss 150/2.8 FE (for Hasselblad) or the Canon 135/2 or an old Pentax 50/1.4 that you could pick up for $50. on eBay or lot's of other lenses are no slouches either. I love Leica optics but I don't think there is any magic to it. I think any manufacturer could turn out spectacular fast primes if they could charge $3500. for a prime lens. Produce a Summilux that you can sell for under $1,000 then I'll really be impressed.

 

I really was thinking more of the M8 as street camera. If you look at all the iconic Leica M images from Cartier-Bresson, Klein, Friedlander, Frank, etc they were almost all shot stopped down pre-focused on the fly. Fast grainy films used for most of the photos did not deliver lots of resolution. It was emotional content over technical perfection. Which is why I think the real competition for the M8 are not DSLR's but small sensor camera's like the GRD that are small, discreet and give tons of DOF because of the small size. I wouldn't trade my Summilux and M8 for any of the current crop of small sensor cameras but some have and are turning out great B+W work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...