Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nugat

M9 full specs and pictures are out. Let's discuss.

Recommended Posts

It sounds like the same as auto ISO on the M8. Exposure bracketing is new though.

 

Auto ISO is one of the few features, along with Protect, User Profiles, etc, that I don't use so I wouldn't really know. Then again, I don't remember reading the same description on auto-ISO on the M8 manual and other literature though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 bit per channel color information....

peter

 

This is actually very interesting. Even D3x does 14 I believe, as that's how many come from the sensor. So how did they manage 16?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Specifications do not make me running........ like stated a FF M8.2 with some extra pixels.

Have to waite till my M8 stops functioning and will replace it than with the latest technology. No need to hurry for now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Internet is full of m9 brochure download sites, specs, pictures from the official microsite etc.

We can discuss them without links, right?

My first impression: it's an M8.3 with a full frame sensor.

 

It sure looks promising. A very nice brochure. I haven't yet seen any sample files, let alone DNG's, so time will tell.

 

One thing. They are bragging about its endurability, but it seems like the sapphire LCD cover is gone (?). I guess it's a trend, if we are to judge from the S2. I don't really mind, but it doesn't fit with "a brick of brass for life".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is actually very interesting. Even D3x does 14 I believe, as that's how many come from the sensor. So how did they manage 16?

 

yes, D3x does 14 bit/channel. MFDBs do 16.

peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
VF: 0.68x, -0.5dpt, framelines 28-90/50-75/35-135, 1m.

 

can someone explain why the MP & M7 have .72 magnification and the M9 .68 ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can someone explain why the MP & M7 have .72 magnification and the M9 .68 ?

 

M9 body is thicker, there was a long and tedious thread about why...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not being grumpy here, but…

One problem I have with a future purchase is the following :

adjusting all my M lenses to my M8 body for front- or backfocusing

has been pretty difficult and costly (my 75 being even not quite satisfatorily

adjusted until now).

In fact, the only lenses which did not need any adjustment were

my 50 Lux and my 28 Elmarit bought new last january and my 50 Summicron.

Otherwise, Noctilux, 75, 21, 35 Lux, 50 pre-ASPH and 90 Elmarit needed adjustment.

I fear the same problems with the M9 : re-adjust everything to that

second body specifically, meaning I could not keep the M8 a a backup.

According to DAG.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
no visoflex, no live-view, no electronic framelines, no zooming finder... no worries

 

But if the body is the same size as the M8 why no Visoflex?

 

Chris

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
M9 body is thicker, there was a long and tedious thread about why...

 

Dimensions in the specs make it the same size as the M8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if the body is the same size as the M8 why no Visoflex?

 

It's a joke directed at one of our more obsessive members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dimensions in the specs make it the same size as the M8.

 

But thicker than the M6/7, which is what I think the origina; poster was referring to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But if the body is the same size as the M8 why no Visoflex?

 

Chris

 

I mean no super-dooper electronic EVF visoflex... of course you could use the old one - although a 5DMk2 does seem a rather more practical alternative

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is actually very interesting. Even D3x does 14 I believe, as that's how many come from the sensor. So how did they manage 16?

 

It doesn't say anywhere that its 16-bit. 16-bit is an assumption (probably a wrong assumption) based on the data size.

 

Sandy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×