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

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

because of the lenses.

no canon lens is made to be used wide open.

OK but the shallowest DoF is not always requested and we can use Zeiss or even Leica lenses on Canon bodies can't we. And we are not limited by some compromises like slow burst mode, low flash sync, no AF & no zoom hence slow operation compared to the cheapest DSLR. Don't get me wrong, i've been a Leica freek for 30+ years and i will remain so now that a 'true' digital M will be launched finally, but i wouldn't even think to bring a Leica M for my job where i need speed first of all. Horses for courses.

[fishblimp]

re the leaked PDF:

 

does anyone else find it strange that the images take up most of the brochure? I know Leica uses good imagery in its brochures but this one seems to be slightly off in my opinion. I am used to brochures from Leica that highlight their gear more than a narrative about (in this case) boxing.

 

It actually sort of looks like a spec-spot for an adidas commercial (notice all the adidas gear).

 

Also the typography seems a bit off to me (the kerning of the font is not consistent with official stuff off Leica's site). Again, it's subtle but I'm using my spidey-senses.

 

Trust me, I'm hardly trying to fan this fire of "is it or isn't it" but I just wanted to point this out.

[perb]

With 16 bit, the DR would be 96 dB

 

Hmm, let's see, 10^(96/20)=63096 and since 2^16=65536 I can see how you got from 16 bits to 96 dB.

 

However...

 

I can assign whatever I want with my set of binary numbers, so, take e.g. a 1-bit A/D converter and let's say it converts voltage to a binary number. If I assign 0 V to the binary value 0, and 1 V to the binary value 1 (extremely crude, I know), then my DR is actually 1/0=infinity in terms of voltage.

 

If, on the other hand, I take a 2-bit A/D converter and assign

 

1 V => 00

30000 V => 01

60000 V => 10

90000 V => 11

 

this gives me a DR of 90000/1 or 99 dB in terms of voltage with only two bits.

 

So, while I can see how you equal a DR in dB's to a certain number of bits it doesn't have to be like that in general.

 

Regards

Per

[egibaud]

re the leaked PDF:

 

does anyone else find it strange that the images take up most of the brochure? I know Leica uses good imagery in its brochures but this one seems to be slightly off in my opinion. I am used to brochures from Leica that highlight their gear more than a narrative about (in this case) boxing.

 

It actually sort of looks like a spec-spot for an adidas commercial (notice all the adidas gear).

 

Also the typography seems a bit off to me (the kerning of the font is not consistent with official stuff off Leica's site). Again, it's subtle but I'm using my spidey-senses.

 

Trust me, I'm hardly trying to fan this fire of "is it or isn't it" but I just wanted to point this out.

 

I was too surprised by the picture style. Too much post processing for me, I think it would more "honest" or "realistic" to show more "stunning" and real color pics. Something "straight from the oven". I thought the M9 would be the perfect Film M but being digital... so results should be based on camera results not computer ones. So Leica, please show us something less artistic.

 

I also would like people to check the darker red pair of shorts (the guy mostly on the left) they look burnt to me with a loss of texture.... what do you think?

[vertekijker]

I'm very pleased with the specs and looks of the M9.

Two little things though that I'm personally a little disappointed about: 1) no battery charge indicator on top - pressing the info button seems a bit cumbersome. Seems like they left the space open for an indicator on the top plate though... 2) no chrome version.

Otherwise it looks like a phenomenal tool . Can't wait!

-----------

Frans

[PRPC]

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

 

Still, there is something I do not understand:

since the body of the M9 is as thick as the one of the M8, and both have a magnification of 0.68, so, framelines appart, the viewfinder of the M9 and M8 should in principle be identical....

However, they have manage to fit the framelines of the 28mm in the M9 but the M8 does not have framelines for the 21mm (which gives the same angle of view in the M8 than the 28 in the M9).....

I guess I am overlooking something.....

[thrid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the point that Egibaud is trying to make is that unless you are very well off or making tons of cash from your photography, the M9 is a very expensive piece of gear that is out of reach for the vast majority of working photographers or enthusiasts.

 

$6500 for a body is a lot of cash. Even more so for one that is specialized. Not everyone is brave enough to do macro or tele work with a Visoflex...

 

A basic kit of one M9 body and a single lens will run you anywhere from around $8000 to over $10,000. Make that around $17,000 is you are brazen enough to pare it with a Noctilux.

 

Prices like that makes something like a Nikon D3x look like a bargain.

 

back when film was still king, a friend of mine used to joke that in order to make the prices he was paying for his Leicas look more reasonable, he would occasionally pull out the Hasselblad catalog and flip through a few pages. That seems to still hold true today.

 

Any serious pro is going to need two bodies. If you purchased 2 x M9 bodies with the 1.4/35 Lux ASPH

and 1.4/50 ASPH you would be looking at a solid $20,000 - 21,000. Some of these people live on that amount of money for a year.

 

Even if you go with the cheaper Summicron or Summarit lenses were are talking about a very serious amount of money.

 

The vast majority of photographers are poorly paid. Most photojournalists, whom everyone idolizes as the epitome of the scarf clad Leica shooter, hold a second civilian job to be able to eat. The M9 isn't even on their radar screen.

 

So, while I am very happy to see the arrival of the M9, I know I will not be buying one anytime soon. $6500 buys a mountain of Tri-X and a used IMACON scanner or a mountain of Tri-X and an airplane ticket to some far flung corner of the world to take pictures.

 

I'm also a little ticked off that Leica released the X1, instead of a digital CL with an optical viewfinder / RF. Where is that more reasonably priced alternative to the M9, that is also a serious tool for serious or working photographers and not a fancy and very expensive point and shoot for the well healed? EVF is for kids. There's not a single professional camera out there that uses one and there are several very good reasons why.

 

Leica better watch out, because the moment there is a viable alternative on the market a lot of people that feel burned are going to turn on them and take their money elsewhere. Now, some people may say in response: 'Good, see you later and don't let the door hit you in the rear end on the way out' . But they should also remember what happened to Leica in the 1960's, when the Nikon F came out.

[zlatkob]

With Leica you are able to shoot wide open but with Canon you can't.

 

Sorry, but that's complete rubbish. New cameras from Canon and Nikon have pushed the envelope of available light shooting, so ISO 5000 and 6400 are not only usable, but used regularly and well, with fast lenses wide, wide open.

 

And saying he wasted his money on 5D2's is rubbish too. Egibaud uses these cameras for his work, but somehow you know that he should use different cameras for his work. Oh please ....

[ennjott]

I do not consider the 6400 mode (which is 3200 pushed by one stop) on the 5D2 usable. Its signal processing causes quite visible pattern noise.

 

For shooting wide open, I have the Sigma 50/1.4. Canon's 50/1.2L isn't bad either.

 

Still, Leica lenses are in a different league.

[zlatkob]

Any serious pro is going to need two bodies.

I agree with your points generally, except that 2 bodies are not enough. I shoot Canon for weddings and have never had one fail at a wedding. Nevertheless, four cameras is the minimum for my comfort zone and it would be the same with Leica or any other brand. With only two cameras, if one fails, you would only have one left ...

[Guest guy_mancuso]

I think the point that Egibaud is trying to make is that unless you are very well of or making tons of cash off your photography, the M9 is a very expensive piece of gear that is out of reach for the vast majority of working photographers or enthusiasts.

 

$6500 for a body is a lot of cash. Even more so for one that is specialized. Not everyone is brave enough to do macro or tele work with a Visoflex...

 

A basic kit of one M9 body and a single lens will run you anywhere from around $8000 to over $10,000. Make that around $17,000 is you are brazen enough to pare it with a Noctilux.

 

Prices like that makes something like a Nikon D3x look like a bargain.

 

back when film was still king, a friend of mine used to joke that in order to make the prices he was paying for his Leicas look more reasonable, he would occasionally pull out the Hasselblad catalog and flip through a few pages. That seems to still hold true today.

 

Any serious pro is going to need two bodies. If you purchased 2 x M9 bodies with the 1.4/35 Lux ASPH

and 1.4/50 ASPH you would be looking at a solid $20,000 - 21,000. Some of these people live on that amount of money for a year.

 

Even if you go with the cheaper Summicron or Summarit lenses were are talking about a very serious amount of money.

 

The vast majority of photographers are poorly paid. Most photojournalists, whom everyone idolizes as the epitome of the scarf clad Leica shooter, hold a second civilian job to be able to eat. The M9 isn't even on their radar screen.

 

So, while I am very happy to see the arrival of the M9, I know I will not be buying one anytime soon. $6500 buys a mountain of Tri-X and a used IMACON scanner or a mountain of Tri-X and an airplane ticket to some far flung corner of the world to take pictures.

 

I'm also a little ticked off that Leica released the X1, instead of a digital CL with an optical viewfinder / RF. Where is that more reasonably priced alternative to the M9, that is also a serious tool for serious or working photographers and not a fancy and very expensive point and shoot for the well healed?

 

Leica better watch out, because the moment there is a viable alternative on the market a lot of people that feel burned are going to turn on them and take their money elsewhere. Now, some people may say in response: 'Good, see you later and don't let the door hit you in the rear on the way out' . But they should also remember what happened to Leica in the 1960's, when the Nikon F came out.

 

 

It's not the money per say although a big factor for Pro's . Remember many are shooting MF gear and those that are shooting 35mm have 2 or more bodies and a ton of glass. But the real reason have much more to do with usage and limitations. Speed is also a part of it as well, some folks use AF all the time and either there needs depend on it or they like it. Obviously without a doubt a DSLR is much faster to work with in those area's and long lenses , macros and T/S capabilities are a must for some folks.

 

I'm a classic example of a Pro that went all M8 and it worked most of the time in shooting situations but sometimes it is a real struggle as well and obviously depends a lot on what type of market you are in. It is safe to say most people love the M8/M9 concept to a certain degree. Top quality in a smaller package but also the investment to get in is large and they can build a very large DSLR system for much less and it is just a plan more versatile system to use. Does not mean the M has less value per say but for many it has less working value for the costs given the limitations of RF photography. I finally and reluctantly sold my system and moved up to MF and that has worked out but when I need something else it is not a M system I think of immediately to get something done it is a DSLR with speed.

 

The M system is a wonderful system with high quality and that is a great thing and i wish I still had the system but it does not always work in a Pro's favor of there type of work they do, nothing wrong with that but we need to match our shooting needs to our gear. the M9 will be very nice with very high quality but not much was added here in the speed and versatility dept. either. You get some higher ISO but some things they did not touch and that is focussing faster with confirmation aids or magnification of finder or faster FPS. So it really addressed FF and higher quality image with a few good niggles in their as well and for many M8 shooters a very welcome camera and will sell very well and help float the boat. The s2 makes more sense for Pro work to be real honest. But even than it has it's limitations just like I do today with my Phase system. It's all about compromising on needs and wants plus what works for your type of work.

[egibaud]

I agree with your points generally, except that 2 bodies are not enough. I shoot Canon for weddings and have never had one fail at a wedding. Nevertheless, four cameras is the minimum for my comfort zone and it would be the same with Leica or any other brand. With only two cameras, if one fails, you would only have one left ...

I fully agree, I actually use to go with 2 M8 bodies + 1 lumix FZ30 in case both would failed. Luckily it has never happened. lately I was going with 2 M8 and 1 5D MKII and now with 2 5D MKII and 1 M8, I am soon to get a third 5D MKII and a G11.

 

I think many photographer do not realize the need for backup camera bodies until everything goes wrong. I would add a back 50mm for the Canon, as autofocus lenses can also go wrong or fall on the floor. Being pro is also spending a lot on gear. So when you start adding up prices.... Canon or Nikon do make a big difference.

[thrid]

I agree with your points generally, except that 2 bodies are not enough. I shoot Canon for weddings and have never had one fail at a wedding. Nevertheless, four cameras is the minimum for my comfort zone and it would be the same with Leica or any other brand. With only two cameras, if one fails, you would only have one left ...

 

Ok, let's say two bodies is the minimum, three is very nice and four is ideal.

 

But by the time you get to that point you have no more kidneys left to sell.

8-)

[thrid]

But the real reason have much more to do with usage and limitations.

 

Very true. That's what I meant when I said that $6500 is a lot of money for a camera body and that is even more so the case, when it is a specialized piece if gear, with certain limitations.

 

Not too many people are going to shoot sports photography with an M-body (Garry Winogrand excluded).

 

 

Again, where is that more reasonably priced alternative from Leica? The X1 isn't it.

[delander †]

I think the style of the photographs in the leaked M9 brochure are intended to take you to the past reportage glory days of Leica. The location, Cuba, which is stuck back in the 1960s or even earlier has been used to enhance this idea. I think the photos are excellent, they are in colour and look great. I dont see any point in commenting on blown out skies, that is without doubt intentional for the look.

 

There is quite a lot of text about boxing which perhaps could have been less.

 

All in all I think it is a very fine piece of marketing, designed to appeal (very strongly) to new users as well as existing. If the camera is as good as the brochure and it is not too expensive it is going to sell extremely well. Perhaps Leica does not need armchair CEO's after all.

 

I did notice that in the Leica history section they claimed the first digital rangefinder, surely that accolade goes to Epson?

 

It certainly made me want to buy one, but perhaps my head should rule over my heart for just a few more weeks.

 

Delving into the file's metadata it seems that the brochure was designed in Adobe InDesign and finished on 1 July 2009.

 

Jeff

[delander †]

 

Prices like that makes something like a Nikon D3x look like a bargain.

 

But they should also remember what happened to Leica in the 1960's, when the Nikon F came out.

 

The Nikon D3x does not look like a bargain. I'm not saying it is not an extremely accomplished tool it simply is not a Leica M, they are so so different, we all know it. If you want to use a Leica M its no use buying a Nikon D3x it does not get you there.

 

Now the Nikon F - had one for many many years, would love to see a digital version of this type of camera, back to basics and of course much smaller than a D3x.

 

One day, even today's new photographers will feel the urge to get back to photography and away from electronic clutter.

 

Jeff

[delander †]

I agree with your points generally, except that 2 bodies are not enough. I shoot Canon for weddings and have never had one fail at a wedding. Nevertheless, four cameras is the minimum for my comfort zone and it would be the same with Leica or any other brand. With only two cameras, if one fails, you would only have one left ...

 

 

I'm sure four is not enough. What if three failed, then you would only have one left

 

Jeff

[chrism]

It's a little clumsy in the environment of present day sensitivities to have our Cuban Boxer greeting his girlfriend in the photo labelled "Leica M - Accessories"!

Nonetheless, I'm in and have asked to be put on the list at my usual Leica dealership. I hope it will work with the Telyt 560 I scored from KEH yesterday, otherwise I keep the M8.2 for Visoflex usage.

 

Chris

[t024484]

Hmm, let's see, 10^(96/20)=63096 and since 2^16=65536 I can see how you got from 16 bits to 96 dB.

 

However...

 

I can assign whatever I want with my set of binary numbers, so, take e.g. a 1-bit A/D converter and let's say it converts voltage to a binary number. If I assign 0 V to the binary value 0, and 1 V to the binary value 1 (extremely crude, I know), then my DR is actually 1/0=infinity in terms of voltage.

 

If, on the other hand, I take a 2-bit A/D converter and assign

 

1 V => 00

30000 V => 01

60000 V => 10

90000 V => 11

 

this gives me a DR of 90000/1 or 99 dB in terms of voltage with only two bits.

 

So, while I can see how you equal a DR in dB's to a certain number of bits it doesn't have to be like that in general.

 

Regards

Per

 

Your approach is wrong.

In your example 00 should be equal to 0 Volt. Using your way of calculating, the DR should then be 90.000 / 0 equaling infinity, which in fact is true but without meaning.

 

The usable DR is only the largest value divided by the smallest step, which in your example is 90.000 / 30.000 = 3 or 9.5 dB.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[tmanley]

Cameras are tools, Leica as the best lenses but surely not the best bodies at present time. This is why we see Canon bodies with Leica R glass quite often.

 

I disagree. I use Canon bodies with Leica R lenses only because the Canon lenses are so bad. I prefer M8s in almost every situation - macro and telephoto being the exceptions. My M8s give me far better photos needing less post-processing than the Canon files. I'm looking forward to the M9 for all of the reasons stated, but I won't get rid of my M8s. My Canon 5DMII and 1DMII are usually gathering dust on my shelves when my daughter is not using them to shoot weddings. She likes the auto-focus. I don't.

 

Tina

 

Tina Manley