nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Waiting for Sean's part 2 with picture appraisal. Reichmann's review is rather anecdotal than factual, others don't come up yet. So here is the fullest test I found yet from the Polish portal Optyczne.pl - testy aparatów, testy obiektywów, testy lornetek, inne testy ,aparaty cyfrowe, obiektywy, lornetki, artyku?y, nowo?ci, opinie komentarze - Optyczne.pl that usually has English version LensTip.com - lens review, lenses reviews, lens specification - Lenstip.com . The English server was down and the full test text is not there yet. So what do we have: Polish original: Test Leica M9 - Wst?p - Optyczne.pl Google translation: Google T?umacz Lenstip.com section on raw comparisons: Leica M9 and its full frame competitors - RAW comparison - Lenstip.com and a graph showing that M9 has the highest of all FF cameras resolution. The Polish price is 5.400 euro including 21% VAT. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/96168-first-full-m9-review/?do=findComment&comment=1027277'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 10, 2009 Posted September 10, 2009 Hi nugat, Take a look here First full M9 review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
futureancient Posted September 10, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 10, 2009 This doesn't surprise me, the detail in a lot of the images I've seen so far seem to suggest a step up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted September 10, 2009 Share #3 Posted September 10, 2009 Waiting for Sean's part 2 with picture appraisal. Reichmann's review is rather anecdotal than factual, others don't come up yet.So here is the fullest test I found yet from the Polish portal Optyczne.pl - testy aparatów, testy obiektywów, testy lornetek, inne testy ,aparaty cyfrowe, obiektywy, lornetki, artyku?y, nowo?ci, opinie komentarze - Optyczne.pl that usually has English version LensTip.com - lens review, lenses reviews, lens specification - Lenstip.com . The English server was down and the full test text is not there yet. So what do we have: Polish original: Test Leica M9 - Wst?p - Optyczne.pl Google translation: Google T?umacz Lenstip.com section on raw comparisons: Leica M9 and its full frame competitors - RAW comparison - Lenstip.com and a graph showing that M9 has the highest of all FF cameras resolution. The Polish price is 5.400 euro including 21% VAT. so what is the meaning of comparing the M9 with a top lens and the DSLRs with a lousy sigma lens??? peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 10, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 10, 2009 Waiting for Sean's part 2 with picture appraisal. Reichmann's review is rather anecdotal than factual, others don't come up yet.So here is the fullest test I found yet from the Polish portal Optyczne.pl - testy aparatów, testy obiektywów, testy lornetek, inne testy ,aparaty cyfrowe, obiektywy, lornetki, artyku?y, nowo?ci, opinie komentarze - Optyczne.pl that usually has English version LensTip.com - lens review, lenses reviews, lens specification - Lenstip.com . The English server was down and the full test text is not there yet. So what do we have: Polish original: Test Leica M9 - Wst?p - Optyczne.pl Google translation: Google T?umacz Lenstip.com section on raw comparisons: Leica M9 and its full frame competitors - RAW comparison - Lenstip.com and a graph showing that M9 has the highest of all FF cameras resolution. The Polish price is 5.400 euro including 21% VAT. The challenge with a test like that is that it is testing the lenses as much, or perhaps even more than, the camera. It is very hard to isolate the variables without normalizing the lens and that's not possible when comparing RF to SLR. So I think we might want to consider those results in that context. By the way, "full test" is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted September 10, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 10, 2009 so what is the meaning of comparing the M9 with a top lens and the DSLRs with a lousy sigma lens???peter The results don't surprise me either. But, really, why would anyone bother to do this with a Sigma macro lens? And then only test at f/5.6 and smaller apertures. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted September 10, 2009 so what is the meaning of comparing the M9 with a top lens and the DSLRs with a lousy sigma lens???peter The Sigma is probably the only model shared by the three SLR platforms so at least between them the results can be normalized. My guess, I'm no expert. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted September 10, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 10, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Sigma is probably the only model shared by the three SLR platforms so at least between them the results can be normalized. My guess, I'm no expert. that may be. but it remains a poor lens. there is a famous meta-theorem in mathematical logics, which says: from correct statements you conclude only correct statements, from false statements you can draw arbitrary conclusions. p Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 10, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 10, 2009 The Sigma is probably the only model shared by the three SLR platforms so at least between them the results can be normalized. My guess, I'm no expert. True but it doesn't normalize for the Leica so one is left with a big confounding variable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nugat Posted September 10, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted September 10, 2009 I have no connection to the portal (that put up such a test second in the world that I know of--first was Puts with MTF graphs). Here is explained their methodology on resolution. Pretty bad google translation though. The key is "kit lens" I figure (Leica Summicron could be "kit")--or I might be wrong altogether... Google T?umacz Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted September 10, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 10, 2009 For 2+ years I have been wondering why the M8 engineers discarded the choice of an interference filter at the sensor (as is used in all DSLRs) to get a sharp IR cutoff at the edge of the visible specturm. You apparently asked that question in Solms, and report in your review that "dichroic filter doesn't work." WHY doesn't it work? (I know, as a physicist and engineer, I'm not satisfied with being told the answer without the reason behind it...) Did they explain further? It could be that you can't put microlenses over one of them; it could be that the red vignetting is stronger and harder to correct; and I am sure they have more to say on this subject. (a second nit -- isn't the reason that the new framelines are correct at 1m mostly because that's how the M7 works, and this was the mechanism from which the M9's viewfinder was evolved?) regards, and thanks for a great job of getting real insight into the P864. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 10, 2009 Share #11 Posted September 10, 2009 For 2+ years I have been wondering why the M8 engineers discarded the choice of an interference filter at the sensor (as is used in all DSLRs) to get a sharp IR cutoff at the edge of the visible specturm. You apparently asked that question in Solms, and report in your review that "dichroic filter doesn't work." WHY doesn't it work? (I know, as a physicist and engineer, I'm not satisfied with being told the answer without the reason behind it...) Did they explain further? It could be that you can't put microlenses over one of them; it could be that the red vignetting is stronger and harder to correct; and I am sure they have more to say on this subject. (a second nit -- isn't the reason that the new framelines are correct at 1m mostly because that's how the M7 works, and this was the mechanism from which the M9's viewfinder was evolved?) regards, and thanks for a great job of getting real insight into the P864. scott Hi Scott, That's something I could look at in a later follow up. Obviously I don't have the answer to that myself but I do know who does and so do you. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.