efftee Posted September 5, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 5, 2009 Posted September 5, 2009 Hi efftee, Take a look here M9 full specs and pictures are out. Let's discuss.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted September 5, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 5, 2009 Option for compressed or uncompressed DNGs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 5, 2009 Author Share #23 Posted September 5, 2009 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? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradhusick Posted September 5, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 5, 2009 Prices? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted September 5, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 5, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard.no Posted September 5, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 5, 2009 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". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted September 5, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 5, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manolo Posted September 5, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 5, 2009 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 ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted September 5, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 5, 2009 no mention of sapphire screen - maybe to keep cost down? no chrome - maybe a-la-carte? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted September 5, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 5, 2009 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... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted September 5, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 5, 2009 no visoflex, no live-view, no electronic framelines, no zooming finder... no worries Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
okram Posted September 5, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 5, 2009 Last picture in the pdf is hopefully an evidence of green blob and pixel blooming solved... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manolo Posted September 5, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 5, 2009 M9 body is thicker, there was a long and tedious thread about why... thanks,so they couldn't do .72? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHAG Posted September 5, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 5, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted September 5, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 5, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted September 5, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 5, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 5, 2009 Share #37 Posted September 5, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 5, 2009 Share #38 Posted September 5, 2009 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpattinson Posted September 5, 2009 Share #39 Posted September 5, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandymc Posted September 5, 2009 Share #40 Posted September 5, 2009 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 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.