gwelland Posted September 3, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Chris, You're warming the cockles of the Leica marketing department's hearts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Hi gwelland, Take a look here Practical benefits of the M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
chris_tribble Posted September 3, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 3, 2009 Chris, You're warming the cockles of the Leica marketing department's hearts. Probably - but I'm buying in, so they must be getting a bit of a warm glow whatever I say! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 3, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 3, 2009 Chris, You're warming the cockles of the Leica marketing department's hearts. Yes. I can't help think that there's a certain amount of 'revisionist history' going on here. It wasn't that long ago that the M8 was the bloody bee's knees - the best camera in 35mm format, blah blah. Now that the M9 has popped up, the M8 is suddenly some sort of barely acceptable compromise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted September 3, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 3, 2009 Yes. I can't help think that there's a certain amount of 'revisionist history' going on here. It wasn't that long ago that the M8 was the bloody bee's knees - the best camera in 35mm format, blah blah. Now that the M9 has popped up, the M8 is suddenly some sort of barely acceptable compromise. +1000 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted September 3, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 3, 2009 Of course, if the shipping M9 produces images with some horrible compromises to provide FF then all bets will be off won't they? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted September 3, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 3, 2009 Yes. I can't help think that there's a certain amount of 'revisionist history' going on here. It wasn't that long ago that the M8 was the bloody bee's knees - the best camera in 35mm format, blah blah. Now that the M9 has popped up, the M8 is suddenly some sort of barely acceptable compromise. Again - you hit the nail squarely on the head! I can't believe the way people are suddenly finding that the M8 is a loathsome beast of a camera - barely better than a throwaway compact in comparison to the wonderful Leica-glow and greater detail of the M9. The M9! How wonderful to finally experience the digital rendition of Leica lenses the way that was always intended! The way this sensor renders is beyond comparison! I love the low-light quality! And finally my Noctilux looks the way it should on digital! So much better than film! Bliss! Errrm hang on... Maybe I should wait to actually see if the camera exists before eulogising it. Who knows, it might suck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBA Posted September 3, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) One practical benefit is that many people will sell their M film gear and maybe a few lenses to defray the cost of an M9, so there will probably be some good bargains to be had. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falk61462 Posted September 3, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 3, 2009 I have (hopefully) hedged my bets. Sold my M8.2 via fleabay at a very good price some time ago when I was reasonably sure that the M9 will come. Kept my lenses (CV15, 21/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/2.8, 35/1.4, 50/1.0, 50/2.0, 75/1.4, 90/2.8), my Nikon D700 plus lots of nice gear (14-24, 24-70, 70-200, 70-300, 35/1.4, 50/1.2, 50/1.4, 85/1.4, 105/2.8) and my Dlux-4 and have an option on a M9. Should the M9 not manage its challenges (significant improvement over M8 in terms of high ISO performance, handle vignetting!!!!, and usability of critical lenses, i.e. 50/1.0 and 75/1.4 because of shallow dof) I am prepared to a) go back to (a significantly cheaper?) M8/M8.2, use the lenses with a re-badged GF-1 (probably not because of 2x crop) and sell the Dlux-4 also or sell the lenses and say good bye to Leica M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 3, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 3, 2009 C'mon guys - quit the hyperbole. It does your credibility no good at all. Where did ANYONE on this thread say "the M8 is suddenly some sort of barely acceptable compromise","is a loathsome beast of a camera","barely better than a throwaway compact". That's Bill O'Reilly-Karl Rove* propaganda technique - putting phoney words in other people's mouths. In blunt language, it's called "lying". *right-wing American political pundits, for those who don't know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted September 3, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 3, 2009 C'mon guys - quit the hyperbole. It does your credibility no good at all.Where did ANYONE on this thread say "the M8 is suddenly some sort of barely acceptable compromise","is a loathsome beast of a camera","barely better than a throwaway compact". ... In blunt language, it's called "lying". Oh come on that's ridiculous. Of course no-one said the M8 "is a loathsome beast of a camera". This isn't lying as anyone here is adult enough to recognise - it's self-evidently a rhetorical device that is caricaturing the frenzy of hyperbole around the M9. Please don't force me to trawl through the many, many posts on this forum and others where people are stating that the M9 is vastly superior to the M8, and that at last we're free of all the horrible compromises and quirks of the current camera. We actually have no idea what files from the M9 will look like - for instance, there may plausibly be thicker glass in front of the sensor in order to remove the need for external IR filters. I can assure you that the same people will be praising that decision and decrying the extra sharpness of M8 files as being 'too digital' or some such rubbish. I'm as glad as anyone that there's finally going to be a full-frame digital M - I'll be buying it myself when I can afford it if it proves better than the M8. And I clearly recognize that much of this enthusiastic frenzy is psychologically necessary to prepare oneself for such a large (and luxurious) expense. But just as the author of the Swedish book 'Nextopia' explains in regard to the first iPhone - enthusiasm for the product was at it's absolute greatest before it was actually available, and waned gradually afterwards. Anyway, I'm enjoying this comedy. There's something of Moliere over the entire proceedings. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 3, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 3, 2009 "a rhetorical device...caricaturing" = propaganda. No different than drawing Hitler mustaches on pictures of American presidents - past and present. If you want to argue facts, that's something else. Will the M9 really work with my 25-year-old (but coded) 21 Elmarit? A fair question. Will a stronger internal IR filter lead to the kind of reflection problems I found in the Epson R-D1? That can be discussed. Will there really be much improvement in noise if the pixels are still the same size? Room for rational debate. Does the wider field of view offer anything to people who never shoot wider than 28mm? Good point. Rational debate is adult - appealing to emotion through loaded words and symbols is what's childish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted September 3, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 3, 2009 TOP 1: Many new threads in this forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted September 3, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 3, 2009 Rational debate is adult - appealing to emotion through loaded words and symbols is what's childish. Whatever you say Andy. I'm sitting here reading posts by people who've suddenly realized that 18 mega-pixels is definitively the ultimate possible sweet-spot for a digital sensor - the ne plus ultra configuration for any conceivable full-frame camera, in fact. Go back a week and you'd be hard-pressed to find anyone making any such cast-iron proclamation. All of this very human drama is comical, in my opinion. Let's at least wait and see before stating that the new camera is vastly superior to the current one (which itself was supposed to be the ultimate all-time camera just two or so weeks ago). If you call all the raving about a camera no-one here has actually yet seen 'rational debate' and my satire of it 'childish' then so be it. I've no axe to grind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 3, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 3, 2009 Sure, I'll agree that there is a certain amount of - overstimulation - on both "sides". Not that there should be sides. I'll enjoy 18 Mpixels, but would have been equally happy with 10-12 bigger Mpixels. The M8 will continue to be exactly what it was, and for those who kept a 35 or 50 more or less welded to their film Ms, and keep a 28 or 35 welded to their M8s, the M9 probably offers a few minimal conveniences, at best. For me, a wide-angle shooter, the M8 HAS been something of a compromise. A very good one - not "barely acceptable" - and one I happily used while it was the sole alternative. Now I can probably move on, happier still. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted September 3, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 3, 2009 the technical problems of fitting a FF sensor into a m body have little to do with the pixel density...kodak has made larger chips with micro lenses for phase for years.....and the 18mpix for a 24x36 does not come out to be smaller pixels then the P30 or P45 (or even P65).... the hard part is to get the distance from the glass without making the body even thicker.....the micro lenses (and software) should take care of the color shifts and vignetting...for the most part..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julian Thompson Posted September 3, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 3, 2009 If the M9 has an IR solution it would seem fair to say that that would involve some form of filtering. Which for black and white work might not be so important. I will bet that there will be some kind of trade off with the M9 and that there will be a school of thought that still champions the M8 for certain kinds of work - and if I had to guess it will be B/W. I have an M9 on order myself but I love my M8.2 and am not sure I shall take the dealer up on his (sensible) trade in until I know I actually love the M9. Interestingly the only reason I want the M9 in the first place is to get a full frame result from my 21mm Elmarit so I hope I am making the right decision because I also love the results from the M8 using the 75 Summicron! I guess I can't have both fields of view without keeping both bodies! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pinocchio Wood Posted September 4, 2009 Author Share #37 Posted September 4, 2009 I suppose the point is that whether you are staying with the M8/8.2 or not for now, if you are investing in new lenses you have to do bearing in mind that there will never be another cropped sensor M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.