jruffolo Posted September 21, 2009 Share #181 Posted September 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wish people would stop saying higher resolution. The M9 has no higher resolution then the M8 for the same sq area of the sensor.The M8 has 21223.xxxxx pixels per sq mm and the M9 has 21732.xxxx pixels per sq mm. That is just over 500 pixels per sq mm the M9 has over the M8 and that is if all the numbers Leica has supplied are correct. Not much when you think about it. So the M9 does not a higher resolution sensor. It does have a bigger sensor and can capture a wider and taller image then the M8 for any given lens focal length. I'm not trying to down play the M9 or up play the M8. But these are just the facts. If I had $7000 of truly disposable cash I would be in line for a M9. But even then I'd keep my M8. This is getting ridiculous- the M9 sensor has more resolution than the M8 sensor. Pixel density is what is the same; and as the M9 has the same pixel density as the M8 but with a larger sensor, it has more resolution for a similarly framed image. A Canon point & shoot with a 7.1MP sensor has a pixel density of 286521.xxxx pixels per sq. mm; does this mean that it can resolve more in the same framed image than an M8 or M9? I don't think so... Ulrikft makes the very valid example of filling the frame on both cameras with someone's head- you will have more detail in that shot than in the M8; as you would if you took similar pictures of e.g. a building or landscape; you will have more detail in the M9 picture. No one is trying to justify the purchase of an M9, and no one is saying that the M8 is inferior; it is just a fact that the M9 has more resolution in the overall image due to the larger sensor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 21, 2009 Posted September 21, 2009 Hi jruffolo, Take a look here Who hasn't bought an M9 and why?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gwelland Posted September 21, 2009 Share #182 Posted September 21, 2009 If you take two shots of the same subject and fill the frame using the M8 & M9 then yes you can argue that there is more resolution in the M9 image. However, you will have used different lenses or shooting position to achieve that. If you shoot the same image from the same position using the same focal length lens then you will have a larger image with the M9 than that shot with the M8. If you crop the M9 image to the exact same view to that of the M8, then Shootist's point about resolution is true - you won't have a significantly higher resolution shot since the pixel density (like for like shots) will be the same. People are comparing apples & pears in a lot of these discussions! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dng88 Posted September 21, 2009 Share #183 Posted September 21, 2009 The sound does not seems to be very low cf with M8. I thought I will upgrade to less noisy shutter through maintenance programme or trade in with M8.2 (now M9). But no urge now. Too noisy compared with M3. Once you lost the urge, cold headed would say that might be using the money saved and now to-be-saved to get more lens instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jruffolo Posted September 21, 2009 Share #184 Posted September 21, 2009 Agreed; it's not something we should be wasting time arguing about. This seems to be more about crop factor vs. full frame than the resolution of the sensors. To say that the resolution is the same because of the crop factor in my opinion doesn't really matter too much to me; when the M8 with a cropped sensor was released many people adjusted their preferred lenses to accommodate this relative to the 35mm format; now people will adjust back to full frame. When I make the composition now I would either be using different focal lengths on the M8 / M9; or as you stated change my position to try and get the same image, irrespective of what camera is being used. As long as everyone is happy with what they have and what works out best for their style of shooting, it doesn't matter one bit. Both are excellent cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted September 21, 2009 Share #185 Posted September 21, 2009 I wish people would stop saying higher resolution. The M9 has no higher resolution then the M8 for the same sq area of the sensor... Just to clarify, I think there is confusion between [sensor] resolving power (measured in lines or line pairs per unit of length) and [sensor] resolution (typically measured in megapixels). The M8 and M9 have the same [sensor] resolving power but the M9 has a higher resolution. Both these indicators, are just that: indicators of the camera's capabilities. Other factors such as lens, aperture, ISO, noise, color gamut, etc. will determine the actual resolving capabilities and other subjective quality of the system. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted September 21, 2009 Share #186 Posted September 21, 2009 Simple - because I am still in love with film and I have too many D2s I am having fun with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guidomo Posted September 21, 2009 Share #187 Posted September 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Isn't the question about resolution moot? In fact, I think people discussing here all understand what the others are saying. But like so often, it depends what you want to do. (1) If you are after a high-resolution image of an object that you can cover with a decent lens (the face example), then the M9 will be superior to the M8. Full stop. (2) Shootist's argument about the resolution of the sensor (the pixel pitch) being the same would come in if the lens was the bottleneck. Think Macro. If you use a lens at its closest focussing distance and your object fits into the M8's frame, then you cannot get more image infomation out of the M9. It will just give you more stuff around the object. You would have to get closer with the M9, but you cannot, because of the lens being on the limit. But I want to upgrade to an M9. Because (1) for me is more important than (2). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted September 21, 2009 Share #188 Posted September 21, 2009 Think what you like but you haven't seen the other knowledgeable people on this forum disagree with me. I know you have to justify your $7000. Ok fine. First of all, I have not bought a M9 yet, and I won't do so before they are way down in used prices. Secondly, quite a few people disagree already. The only time, in real life use, your point is valid, is if you are at near focus limit. Other than that, your point implies that you compose differently with a crop sensor than you do with a full frame sensor. Weirdly enough, I compose the same both with 1.6, 1.3 and fullframe sensors. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vilsonius Posted September 21, 2009 Share #189 Posted September 21, 2009 Since my M8.2 is just two months old, upgrading to the M9 would mean a huge loss of money (considering the time period i've used it). Now, i'm not trying to fool myself that the M9 isn't superior, FF, 18mp (very useful for cropping) and one stop advantage are the right ingredients for a M camera to last for many years before need to upgrade again, but I will spend the rest of my money to a Summilux 50, at this time it seems like a better option for me. I am not a wide angle shooter (my 28 Elmarit is more than enough for my shooting style) so that makes it easier for me to avoid the upgrade. In the end, I think it all comes to what needs every individual has, singe it is obvious (at least for me) that if money wasn't the issue, almost every Leica user would get an M9 (M cameras are wonderful but they are also too expensive to follow the upgrade rate in the digital era) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted September 21, 2009 Share #190 Posted September 21, 2009 My pictures are not nearly good enough to justify so large an expense and they won't get better by that amount. It's out of my league. Very well put. +1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyp Posted September 21, 2009 Share #191 Posted September 21, 2009 Because after taking photos for 38 years, new Leicas are and always have been too expensive for me to purchase. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craftsman Posted September 21, 2009 Share #192 Posted September 21, 2009 No M9 in my future unless I win the lottery. My new MP was a stretch, but I love it. I use my sons D40 sometimes and that's good enough for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andydg Posted September 21, 2009 Share #193 Posted September 21, 2009 Not yet, due to lack of funds. The price doesn't scare me as much as what my wife might say when I open the box. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PATB Posted September 22, 2009 Share #194 Posted September 22, 2009 No money. Otherwise, I would. The resolution question reminds of the question of whether, for the same film (say Delta 400), medium format has more resolution than 35mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likealeica Posted September 22, 2009 Share #195 Posted September 22, 2009 I am wondering if there is a $7,000 difference or improvement between me using an M9 and using my M6 or my M3 or my M2 . Buy a roll of film, shoot the roll, get the film developed and scanned. I just saved $7,000. I like my Dlux 4 because for $699 I don't feel bad about buying it, enjoying it, then buying something new when that comes along. 7 G's is too major and long-lasting a commitment when I already have the M film stuff. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicamr Posted September 22, 2009 Share #196 Posted September 22, 2009 No M9 for me, not yet anyway. I was caught in the initial wave of M8, pre ordered before having a demo. Inaccurate frames and focusing prevent me using it even now. I realise that the M9 is a very accomplished product. If I hadn't bought the M8 I would certainly have bought the M9 now. I will wait for the secondhand market. I will stick with my DMR's and may start my black and white shooting with my M7. I miss using my M kit. Mark Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted September 22, 2009 Share #197 Posted September 22, 2009 I am wondering if there is a $7,000 difference or improvement between me using an M9 and using my M6 or my M3 or my M2 . Buy a roll of film, shoot the roll, get the film developed and scanned. I just saved $7,000. I like my Dlux 4 because for $699 I don't feel bad about buying it, enjoying it, then buying something new when that comes along. 7 G's is too major and long-lasting a commitment when I already have the M film stuff. If you shoot a lot, a M9 is made in within a year or two with the film/developing prices in norway. If I shot 1/4 as much analog as I do digtal, I would shoot for about $6900 USD (film and developing included, not scanning) a year. (In norway you end up with about 25-30 USD pr roll for film cost and development.) I guess I could say that i only shoot 1/10 or so, I would still shoot a M9 in 3-4-5 years. I don't think an used M9 in a year or two is a very bad investment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted September 22, 2009 Share #198 Posted September 22, 2009 No M9 for me, not yet anyway. I was caught in the initial wave of M8, pre ordered before having a demo. Inaccurate frames and focusing prevent me using it even now. I realise that the M9 is a very accomplished product. If I hadn't bought the M8 I would certainly have bought the M9 now. I will wait for the secondhand market. I will stick with my DMR's and may start my black and white shooting with my M7. I miss using my M kit. Mark Get your M8 upgraded, it transforms the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimleicam3 Posted September 23, 2009 Share #199 Posted September 23, 2009 My dealer says I can't get one until Christmas or beyond. So I will continue to have fun with my M8, and save like crazy. Do you think my wife could tell the difference between a M8 & M9, just by looking? As always, the advice in these forums is outstanding!! Enjoy!! Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted September 23, 2009 Share #200 Posted September 23, 2009 My dealer says I can't get one until Christmas or beyond. So I will continue to have fun with my M8, and save like crazy. Do you think my wife could tell the difference between a M8 & M9, just by looking? As always, the advice in these forums is outstanding!! Enjoy!! Jim Your M8 was maybe 'converted' to an M9 because a little bit of paint on the lower left 'wearing off,' if you get my drift. ;) The other differences (changed corner shape at one end) are too subtle for a non-user to detect, hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.