Puts on M9--IQ achievable with M8

[nugat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"The differences are quite small and may be due to the statistical variations, which always create a margin when testing lenses and equipment. The image quality of the M9 pictures could be improved when you take advantage of the bigger sensor area: you can get closer to the scene to capture the same angle and this helps in the recording of fine detail. When the M8 is used expertly and within its limits of angle of view, the image quality is very close to that what you get with the M9. In this sense the M8 is not obsolete. "

 

M9, part1

[leica007]

"The differences are quite small and may be due to the statistical variations, which always create a margin when testing lenses and equipment. The image quality of the M9 pictures could be improved when you take advantage of the bigger sensor area: you can get closer to the scene to capture the same angle and this helps in the recording of fine detail. When the M8 is used expertly and within its limits of angle of view, the image quality is very close to that what you get with the M9. In this sense the M8 is not obsolete. "

 

M9, part1

 

oops! there's already two threads on this !

[nugat]

kill this one, moddy.

[Ozkar]

"The differences are quite small and may be due to the statistical variations, which always create a margin when testing lenses and equipment. The image quality of the M9 pictures could be improved when you take advantage of the bigger sensor area: you can get closer to the scene to capture the same angle and this helps in the recording of fine detail. When the M8 is used expertly and within its limits of angle of view, the image quality is very close to that what you get with the M9. In this sense the M8 is not obsolete. "

 

M9, part1

 

I don't give a rats butt about pixel quality. It's about the aesthetic. I don't want my 24mm to shoot like a 32mm nor my 35mm to shoot like a 50mm. M8 pixel quality is already good enough. It's just the half frame crop that ruins it for me.

[jaques]

when the M8 came out I remember reading all about it. I was turned off immediately by the cropped sensor.

the exact opposite thing happened when I read about the M9- and I immediately sold off my extensive hasselblad camera collection, ordered an M9, bought an M6, a Visoflex 3 and 4 lenses (summicron 50/2, Hektor 135/4, CV 35/1.4, CV 28/2)...

 

I just knew I would use an M9 way more than any DSLR- or Hasselblad camera- and I realized that for me that was everything.

 

and concerning the pixels- I have never once- ever- looked at a great photograph and wished it was sharper, larger, displayed less chromatic aberrations, or more sharpness at the edges... In fact when I look at photography I never think about the equipment as such- it is only an afterthought.

 

I owned a portfolio of original prints by Paul Strand- "the Mexican Portfolio". The images were taken in the early 1930's on glass plates, and the second edition reprinted in 1962 from memory (photogravure). The quality was outstanding- the prints beautiful... If the m9 could come close with slightly smaller prints- that has to be good enough to produce superlative photography.

 

The rest is ridiculous- like saying Picasso could have made better paintings with finer tipped brushes... Even though it may be arguably true: who cares?

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Jaques,

 

"Even though it may be arguably true: who cares?"

 

Ehhh, welcome to the world of pixel peeping vs actually taking pictures... it turns out that on the internet there is a huge amount of people who care a lot.

 

.

[brill64]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't give a rats butt about pixel quality. It's about the aesthetic. I don't want my 24mm to shoot like a 32mm nor my 35mm to shoot like a 50mm. M8 pixel quality is already good enough. It's just the half frame crop that ruins it for me.

 

blah! blah! blah!