Jump to content

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


nugat

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a couple of remarks about the PDF brochure:

 

[*]Highlights: the highlights in most of images in that brochure are burnt. Seems like either the exposure metering is broken or something is drastically wrong with the dynamic range

 

It's probably close to impossible to judge anything about the DR of the camera from the PDF images, because they were with almost 100% certainty art directed in post. It almost looks like the art director or photographer was trying to emulate the silver retention / bleach by-pass look that was very popular in the movie biz about a decade ago.

 

Let's wait until we see some real RAW sample files.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 435
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

For me the important issue is wakeup time. Canon announces D7 as 0.1 sec, and I lost so many pictures because of M8s almost a second to wake up from sleep....

you've said it "announces" Leica too announced very short lap with the M8... so let's wait and see for the D7, and M9 too

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the round thing on the top plate of the x1 not the shutter speed nor the manual focus ring but the big button on the other edge with nothing written on it?

 

In my dreams, it's a pop-up optical VF. Probably a flash.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The viewfinder is again optimized for 1 meter? Why did they go back? So they can offer me a 2 meter viewfinder upgrade for $$$$?

 

Kirk

 

Yeah - I didn't understand that either. Unless they think that with the extra Mp, no-one will care about having to crop a bit off the sides... which would tend to indicate that they just don't get it...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest malland
The viewfinder is again optimized for 1 meter? Why did they go back? So they can offer me a 2 meter viewfinder upgrade for $$$$?...
That bothers me too, as one of the reasons I got the M8.2 over the M8 were the better frame lines. Sean Reid has written extensively about this, which must have reached Leica — could there be a technical design reason for the 1 meter optimization?

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Scratching the Surface©

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest malland
Exposure to the right (histogram) seems to be a rule most people are afraid to break.

I on the other hand like inpenetrable blacks and "burnt" lights--where they have an artistic justification. Cuba is a hot, sun-scorched place. The artist chose to depict it that way. It would be naive to think that he did not know how to expose or the meter was broken.

Exactly. In fact it's encouraging to see a rather exciting photo-essay in artistic terms in the M9 brochure rather than boring, high resolution pictures with "prefect" highlight and shadow detail.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Bangkok Hysteria©: Book Project

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very pleased to see Iso 80. Besides the advantage for fast lenses in brighter light, I will be curious what the image quality will be. If the M9 is optimized for that Iso, we may see some clear advantages to shooting at iso 80. If it's optimized for 160 but creates the lower iso with additional firmware tricks, like on Nikon cameras, it should lower IQ. As an old Kodak 14N then 14nx upgrade shooter, the iso 80 on the 14N (base Iso) was really superior to the 160 on the 14nx (base Iso), the problem was you couldn't use the 14N above 160 because of noise. If Kodak has conquered the issues and delivered a sensor optimized for iso 80, with low noise throughout the range to 2500, this could prove one of the biggest reasons to upgrade from the M8. best.....Peter

Edited by innerimager
Link to post
Share on other sites

That bothers me too, as one of the reasons I got the M8.2 over the M8 were the better frame lines. Sean Reid has written extensively about this, which must have reached Leica — could there be a technical design reason for the 1 meter optimization?

 

not quite a technical design reason, but a very reasonable as i think:

for quite a few decades leica-photographers have been shooting with frames adjusted to about 1 meter. and they were even shooting on film - some may have complained (inlcuding me) about this, but the majority got used to it and were ok with.

so now the digital M has grown up and is using the very same viewfinder as M4s (the late ones), M6s, M7s and MPs, why should it be different here. especially regarding those photographers using both - film Ms and M9. although the viewfinder and focallengths are the same now i still would have to rethink between using a digital or a film M.

that would be really annoying.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...