jamriman Posted September 8, 2009 Share #61 Posted September 8, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) So don't buy M9 for life, buy it for life quality and enjoy it to bits till something better comes about Can't dispute that logic! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 8, 2009 Posted September 8, 2009 Hi jamriman, Take a look here M9: An Investment for a Lifetime. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
manolo Posted September 8, 2009 Share #62 Posted September 8, 2009 The current dynamic range of the senors is pretty much limited by physics - you can't work around that. What you can do is to use pixel binning but then you are effectively reducing the no. pixels in postprocessing. Higher DR => less pixels, one way or the other. When I think that a fly has N number of minute eyes in each eye I think that there is some room for improvement still. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Sprow Posted September 8, 2009 Share #63 Posted September 8, 2009 My belief is that while the M9 will undoubtedly be a fine step forward, we will in a couple of years be tempted by an M with, for example: - Much improved viewfinder system, perhaps with digital framelines. - Improved metering (pretty sorry now, in my view) - Smaller body, maybe like the M7, due to continued improvements in miniaturization of components - New ways to focus long lenses on the M - Improved LCD As they say, the best is the enemy of the good. And the best will always keep improving. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
exile Posted September 8, 2009 Share #64 Posted September 8, 2009 The surreal nature of this thread can be summed up by a single sentence contained within it. Please stop and really look at it for 20 seconds: "On paper the M9 looks like it should deliver competitive performance for the next 3 -5 years" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted September 8, 2009 Share #65 Posted September 8, 2009 When I think that a fly has N number of minute eyes in each eye I think that there is some room for improvement still. I get the impression that our sensors overtook insect eyes some time back. Flies' eyes only have a few thousand pixels, and the most any arthropod has seems to be a few tens of thousands. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronazle Posted September 8, 2009 Share #66 Posted September 8, 2009 When I bought my M8s I was really enthused with the idea of getting back to a rfdr camera from the more bulky and auto-thinking reflexes. I was especially excited with using my great Leitz lenses and some of the irreplacable Leica accessories (e.g. Reprovit IIa) in a digital mode. In their fashion the M8s fullfilled these requirements. Ignorantly, probably more accurately: stupidly, I assumed that Leitz had waited to fully develop the super camera (in terms of both technical performance and durability) prior to marketing. In the latter case, this was not so and many of us were, to say the least, disappointed in the frequent and slow repairs. What I am saying is that many of us will be more reserved in plunking down big bucks for a requirement that has already been minimally (or better) met. Do not mistake me, I am not a career Leica basher - I love my Leicas. Said more simply, at least for the German audience: I have named my M8s Der Blaue Engel and Der Blaue Engel II. Being an old guy, this may be particularly appropriate naming. regards, ron t. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 8, 2009 Share #67 Posted September 8, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Well, for many it will be an investment of a lifetime... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.