bobbyrab Posted September 9, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Try dpreview. I did, they have one shot at 1600 that doesn't look that wonderful, but I find their samples difficult to draw any conclusions from. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 9, 2009 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi bobbyrab, Take a look here 1st pictures with the M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ddp Posted September 9, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 9, 2009 Try here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-m9-portfolio-hagen-en.html and here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-m9-portfolio-schmidt-en.html Jaap - thank you for those links. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
futureancient Posted September 9, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 9, 2009 I thought the sample at 1600 was reasonable. Much better than I could achieve on my 8.2 / 8, not that I rate the samples on dp that highly. We need more Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
futureancient Posted September 9, 2009 Share #24 Posted September 9, 2009 Try here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-m9-portfolio-hagen-en.html and here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-m9-portfolio-schmidt-en.html It seems to handle colours very well. And there's some serious detail.. the portrait is excellent, and mind boggling at full resolution. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #25 Posted September 9, 2009 This one at 1,600 by ErikFive is not too bad, looks processed though, detail is holding up reasonably well: Flickr Photo Download: Leica M9 ISO 1600 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlmuck Posted September 9, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 9, 2009 i have just tried out the CV 15mm M mount model and -with firmware 0.922 it gives horrible cyan-purple corners. but it is sharp all the way, even wide open. maybe there will also be a firmware fix for this.. peter I guess I don't understand, where is the cyan shift coming from? Was this WITH an IR filter on? Did you try it WITHOUT filter, that's what I'm interested in... c. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandymc Posted September 9, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I guess I don't understand, where is the cyan shift coming from? Was this WITH an IR filter on? Did you try it WITHOUT filter, that's what I'm interested in... c. Umm, see here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/97058-m9-lens-coding.html#post1019027 That, if DPReview is right, they have the shift in the corner of an FF sensor the same as that on the M8, is a major achievement in itself. Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Negative Posted September 9, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 9, 2009 I can't quite put my finger on it yet, but I've noticed in a few shots from both dpreview.com and lenstips.com - are the corners a bit soft? I know I saw it in the Tri-Elmar shot, but even a 2/50 Summicron seems to show it a little. Server problems are keeping the latter images offline at the moment, argh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted September 9, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 9, 2009 Umm, see here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/97058-m9-lens-coding.html#post1019027 That, if DPReview is right, they have the shift in the corner of an FF sensor the same as that on the M8, is a major achievement in itself. Sandy If the filter is under the microlenses, the light at that point is more perpendicular to the sensor surface, and therefore the cyan corners due to the frequency shift won't be as much of a problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Henry Posted September 9, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 9, 2009 Hi Pascal and All, I took M9 in hand this afternoon and took some photos with a 50mm lens . I compared the same shot and picture with M8.2 that my dealer had in his shop (the M8.1 is any more sold) but unfortunately with a 24mm lens. My first impression is: -the picture (both in DNG) seems more contrasting and better defined in comparison with M8.2 by making crops -the release shutter seems more silent On the contrary I do not like the new form of the upper bonnet notably to its left side: it is cut now, pointed in the left edge and not rounded as before:not very aesthetic according to me. The pictures counter and the state of the battery disappeared and to have this information it is necessary to look now at the screen (consumption of battery?) The camera seems a little heavier. I could not compare with M8.1 I must come back shortly with the same optics to compare better and with my M8.1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted September 9, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 9, 2009 Well, I'm in line. Anyone have a DNG they want to throw up? I'd love to know how Aperture does with the M9 RAWs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmx_2 Posted September 9, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 9, 2009 Well, I'm in line. Anyone have a DNG they want to throw up? I'd love to know how Aperture does with the M9 RAWs. Send me a mess and I'll mail you one! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lxlim Posted September 9, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 9, 2009 This one at 1,600 by ErikFive is not too bad, looks processed though, detail is holding up reasonably well: Flickr Photo Download: Leica M9 ISO 1600 Thanks, KM25. It seems to be a bit under exposed. The face looks a little blotchy with yellow patches but otherwise its quite a bit better than my M8 can do at 1250. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted September 9, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 9, 2009 Well, I'm in line. Anyone have a DNG they want to throw up? I'd love to know how Aperture does with the M9 RAWs. Check the link above that KM-25 put up. I'm looking at the ISO 1600 file right now in Aperture and it looks a huge improvement over ISO1250 on the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nryn Posted September 9, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 9, 2009 Saw that. I agree, the 1600 is pretty decent, though it's a photograph I wouldn't take (no offense, Erik). Store lights, no real subject, etc. Even though better high ISO performance wasn't really on my list of wants, I'll take it . I'd like to see what Aperture is doing with the files. I've heard you get at least a stop better on the highlights. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.