HankBar Posted September 7, 2009 Share #381 Posted September 7, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) This discussion is running so fast, maybe I missed something? Someone asked about the coding. The question was: is it possible to put the lens values in the camera? Not only for the EXIF but also for corrections. I could not find this in the brochure, although there the possibility of coding is mentioned. Hank Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 7, 2009 Posted September 7, 2009 Hi HankBar, 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!
delander † Posted September 7, 2009 Share #382 Posted September 7, 2009 There's no step next to the rangefinder window, unless you mean the horizontal one that's been there for decades. On the other side, there's a step between the surround of the viewfinder window and the curved end of the top plate - but that's been there for decades too. The body still has a smooth curve - compare with the pic of the M7 in the same brochure. I mean the new step down in the top plate on the right side of the camera as you look at it. Where the battery inidcator is on the M8. Also look at the top plate viewed from above. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevelap Posted September 7, 2009 Share #383 Posted September 7, 2009 (edited) Just to touch another point... seems that 135 frame is again in the VF : someway logical, to keep the 6-frame principle and starting from 28, but obviously without a magnifier it will be poor in a .68 VF... anyway, I do not understand completely the sentence that is added in the 135 3,4 description into the famous brochure: "it must be closed at least 2 stops" : why such a detail ? I would have understood better if they simply would have written that "a 1,4x Leica magnifier is highly reccommended" (i.e. "mandatory"). In the accessories page they do say that the 1.4x magnifier is recommended ("makes focusing significantly easier") for 75mm and above. Edited September 7, 2009 by stevelap Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 7, 2009 Share #384 Posted September 7, 2009 AFAIKThere are two CoC standards for the 36x24mm frame. The "imperial" was 1/100inch=0.0254mm (for print of 8x10inches looked at from one foot)... Is it related to the Zeiss-Sinar formula (sensor diagonal divided by 1730)? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 7, 2009 Author Share #385 Posted September 7, 2009 Is it related to the Zeiss-Sinar formula (sensor diagonal divided by 1730)? Wiki: Circle of confusion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia There are several different definitions, 1/100th inch is just one (good in imperial measure countries). All boils down to human vision acuity of circa 30 cycles per degree. From Wiki: Dallmeyer and Abney Thomas R. Dallmeyer's 1892 expanded re-publication of his father John Henry Dallmeyer's 1874 pamphlet On the Choice and Use of Photographic Lenses (in material that is not in the 1874 edition and appears to have been added from a paper by J.H.D. "On the Use of Diaphragms or Stops" of unknown date) says: "Thus every point in an object out of focus is represented in the picture by a disc, or circle of confusion, the size of which is proportionate to the aperture in relation to the focus of the lens employed. If a point in the object is 1/100 of an inch out of focus, it will be represented by a circle of confusion measuring but 1/100 part of the aperture of the lens." This latter statement is clearly incorrect, or misstated, being off by a factor of focal distance (focal length). He goes on: "and when the circles of confusion are sufficiently small the eye fails to see them as such; they are then seen as points only, and the picture appears sharp. At the ordinary distance of vision, of from twelve to fifteen inches, circles of confusion are seen as points, if the angle subtended by them does not exceed one minute of arc, or roughly, if they do not exceed the 1/100 of an inch in diameter." Numerically, 1/100 of an inch at 12 to 15 inches is closer to two minutes of arc. This choice of COC limit remains (for a large print) the most widely used even today. Sir Abney, in his 1881 A Treatise on Photography, takes a similar approach based on a visual acuity of one minute of arc, and chooses a circle of confusion of 0.025 cm for viewing at 40 to 50 cm, essentially making the same factor-of-two error in metric units. It is unclear whether Abney or Dallmeyer was earlier to set the COC standard thereby. [edit] Wall 1889 The common 1/100 inch COC limit has been applied to blur other than mis-focus blur. For example, Edward John Wall, in his 1889 A Dictionary of Photography for the Amateur and Professional Photographer, says: To find how quickly a shutter must act to take an object in motion that there may be a circle of confusion less than 1/100in. in diameter, divide the distance of the object by 100 times the focus of the lens, and divide the rapidity of motion of object in inches per second by the results, when you have the longest duration of exposure in fraction of a second. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted September 7, 2009 Share #386 Posted September 7, 2009 Thanks for the link. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest New2LeicaRF Posted September 7, 2009 Share #387 Posted September 7, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) any update on the actual price of M9? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 7, 2009 Share #388 Posted September 7, 2009 I mean the new step down in the top plate on the right side of the camera as you look at it. Where the battery inidcator is on the M8. Also look at the top plate viewed from above. The step down in the top plate obviously can't affect the baseplate. Apart from that, the corner of the top plate by the viewfinder window on the M9 looks the same as on the M7 and M8. I can see no sign that might be a corresponding angle on the M9 baseplate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShyTot Posted September 7, 2009 Share #389 Posted September 7, 2009 A lot of this will depend on how the M9 actually performs and how much it costs. But bottom line, if you don't like the camera you are using, you are not going to make the best images you can with it and therefore, you will not reach your earning potential. As much as I tried to like the M8...and I gave it a really good go, I just never got along with it well. This is my particular case and I would have to think it is fairly unique. Daniel, Sure, if you can't get to like your tools, then income will suffer. Hadn't realised you felt that strongly about the M8. I'll also admit to not settling with my M8 as quickly, or as well, as I did with the film M's. Hope that doesn't follow on with the M9 - HELL !! How much it costs is crucial, as a professional I'd like a backup/second lens camera. That's £9,500 at the rumored prices and whilst not impossible, like you, something(s) will be leaving the kit locker. Retaining the M8 would be more viable, but I agree it's better to have a matched pair. If the M9 is all we hope for, do you anticipate moving completely away from film after your terrific Kodachrome project is finished ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KevinA Posted September 7, 2009 Share #390 Posted September 7, 2009 Wiki: To find how quickly a shutter must act to take an object in motion that there may be a circle of confusion less than 1/100in. in diameter, divide the distance of the object by 100 times the focus of the lens, and divide the rapidity of motion of object in inches per second by the results, when you have the longest duration of exposure in fraction of a second. Ok done that, now did anyone see where it's gone? So I can get a sharp picture of it. Kevin. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted September 7, 2009 Share #391 Posted September 7, 2009 I've combed through the brochure but can't seem to find any info. Does anyone see if the M9 will have EV-/+ compensation when in AE mode like the M8.2? IE: you lock exposure then turn the wheel for 1/3 -/+ exposure compensation. I would assume that it would, but so far can't confirm.......I own an M8 classic so this would be a nice added feature for me. thanks. .a Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 7, 2009 Share #392 Posted September 7, 2009 35'cron - good question. I don't see a specific reference, but section on viewfinder says it still shows warning light if +/- EV is set - so there must be a way to set it. M9 does have exposure bracketing. Looks like we'll need the leak of the manual as well as the brochure to know for sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted September 7, 2009 Share #393 Posted September 7, 2009 Ok done that, now did anyone see where it's gone? So I can get a sharp picture of it. Kevin. hihihihihi:D:D:D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thpeters Posted September 8, 2009 Share #394 Posted September 8, 2009 In the First page of his whole tread, 20 page long now, sombody was asking about dust removal: BUT there is not an answer yet.!!!!!!! Have the M9 and the S2 a build in sensor cleaning system????? Please dont come now with telling me stories "clean it", ( I Do) but how good we clean our sensors after 10.000 picture from thailand dust cleaning at my pictures is not my favor job to do. I hope finally somebody cand answer this, but I guess I have to wait till wednesday 9-9-9 Theo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted September 8, 2009 Share #395 Posted September 8, 2009 Thanks Andy, Reading through all the M9 related threads, you've been really concise with "factual" info of what's been leaked online--very helpful in determining what's new and different. 35'cron - good question. I don't see a specific reference, but section on viewfinder says it still shows warning light if +/- EV is set - so there must be a way to set it. M9 does have exposure bracketing. Looks like we'll need the leak of the manual as well as the brochure to know for sure. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted September 8, 2009 Share #396 Posted September 8, 2009 Theo, IF there were active dust removal system in the M9... it would be a feature worth a page in the catalog. . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thpeters Posted September 8, 2009 Share #397 Posted September 8, 2009 Theo, IF there were active dust removal system in the M9... it would be a feature worth a page in the catalog. . It sucks, I think if it is not avaible in both cameras M9 and S2. Theo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted September 8, 2009 Share #398 Posted September 8, 2009 I don't know if it's been mentioned. But the Black M9 uses the same hand grip as the black M8.2 (part number 14486. Luckily the same battery as well Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted September 8, 2009 Share #399 Posted September 8, 2009 (edited) Theo, IF there were active dust removal system in the M9... it would be a feature worth a page in the catalog. . Olympus introduced that in the E-1 in 2003-4, and only licensed its patents to other Japanese companies 2-3 years later. I suspect they held some aspects back, because they still are reported to do the dust-shaker job better than their competitors. Their technology also let them introduce in-body image stabilization. The whole package of these enhancements makes the image chip and its substrate noticeably thicker. I can see the cost, thickness, and firmware support requirements taking these features off the table fairly early in the KISS development process that the M8/9 team appear to have followed. But I have owned an E-1 and E-3, and the features are highly valuable. scott Edited September 8, 2009 by scott kirkpatrick Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 8, 2009 Share #400 Posted September 8, 2009 RE: Dust removal - I believe dust removal systems either vibrate the sensor package, or vibrate a sensor cover plate, ultrasonically, to shake off the dust. Vibrating the sensor means you have to have a sensor whose position is somewhat loose - in order for it to shake (yeah I know, in millimicrons - but still). Or you need a cover glass separate from the sensor (i.e with an air gap) so that the glass can shake independently. I imagine Leica sees the first as imprecise, and the second as adding more glass layers to the sensor - something that is unfriendly to M lenses. I'm sure dust removal is on their "things to do when we can do it without affecting lens resolution" list. And, knowing Leica, they'll come up with an ingenious, M-lens-friendly, oddball solution eventually. A squeegee - an air puffer - mini-vacuum system. I guess that's similar to what Scott said. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.