The M9 three days on...

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Jamie the soft release feature has nothing to do with and will not affect the sound of the shutter in any way.

Not sure why you brought it up in response to the shutter sounds between M8.2 & M9.

 

As I said Ed, I don't have an M9. I'm only going by what people have reported, and reportedly the soft release has an effect on noise. If not, then that's fine too. There's still more than enough reasons to buy an M9 for me.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[efftee]

Sure! Happy to. If you don't 'get it' from the list, let me know and I'll elaborate more clearly when I get time (off to do some shooting--it's still wedding season!)

 

Ways IMO the M9 is a tremendous improvement over the M8:

 

• no green streak artifacts. This alone has been a showstopper for many of my colleagues, and yes, I've lost shots to it as well (4 times over 3 years). I regret losing those shots, but none were a deal-breaker. But then, I'm not Jeff Ascough, and I've had to cover myself shooting R or Canon or Nikon as well... just in case the conditions were ripe for unfixable artifacts. With the M9, for the first time, I'm considering shooting all M.
  
• Full-frame. Can't tell you what it's like to be so backed into a corner with a Leica 21, 24 or 28 that I can't get the shot. Also how hard it is to get speed wide. Heck, I couldn't even get 35 1.4 equivalent!! On the M9, my 35 Lux will rule
  
• One stop *right now* better noise--without sacrificing any printable detail from the glass!! This is awesome, since up to ISO 1000, the M8 was only a wee bit behind my D3. But 1250 on the M8 was dodgy; 2500 unusable. The few poorly lit (IE real-world) samples I've seen from the M9 have already convinced me it's brilliant; printing will be excellent to 1600, which is more than a stop better than the 640 I rely on all the time.
  
• Colour can be excellent. C1 handles better than the M8--don't know why, but I suspect Kodak has created a truly amazing sensor that my Nikon, for example, can't touch. Needs profiles obviously, but the first firmware is so much better than the original M8's is so impressive, and will get better; Jenoptic knows their stuff.
  
• Uncompressed 14bpp RAWs!!! Can I put more exclamation marks there? This means, at last, the promise of DMR-like file quality in a high res. package.
  
• Better electronics. Haven't heard about any lockups yet.
  
• All the ergonomic improvements
  
• quieter shutter than M8u; quieter shutter release than the M8.2
  
  

Those are the big ones for me. I can't believe there is no PC flash connection on the camera but that's about the only drawback I can see. I'll live with it, thanks.

 

Hey Jamie, thanks for the list. I was out today and I missed having my M8 with me. I'll pick up the M9 I've preordered and will, in all likelihood, love it. Not really for any points on your list, though it's hard not to amazed by the ff and the jaw-dropping mouth-gaping images that never fail to flatter my half-baked talent, but quite simply because it is a Messsucher and there is nothing in world like it.

[giordano]

#4 of Chris' photo's, the portrait, shows the one and only reason for an M9: bo-keh

 

Lotw, this is perhaps the most pseudish and imbecilic sentence I've ever read. Fortunately on the internet it can be hard to tell whether someone's joking or not. So I'd better give you the benefit of the doubt and congratulate you on taking the mick out of the bokeh-worshipping depth of field fetishists.

[rosuna]

It may, of course, be too soon to summarily judge the M9 but from the scores of reviews, interviews, sample images, etc on the M9 that have already been published, there are at least a few salient points that all had concurred:

1. The M8 and M9 produce very similar images, both in signature and quality.

 

2. The high ISO performance and IR management were both, to some extent, improved on but not fully resolved.

 

3. The controls and feature/function selectors were now more ergonomically incorporated for easier and more convenient handling.

 

4. Manual selection of lenses, ‘soft’ shutter and exposure bracketing are completely new features that users will find very useful.

 

5. Certain changes, ie top plate screen, no sapphire glass, etc, were made to keep the M9 at a price that more prospects, especially existing Leica users, would be willing to pay.

 

At this juncture, I’d like to say that the following is a critique based on my personal opinion on what I have read and seen of the M9, the tests conducted and published, images, etc. If you need to see my credentials in photography, engineering or access to Leica’s inner sanctum, I thank you not to read on.

 

On points (1) and (2), since both the M8 and M9 share CCDs from Kodak and processors from Jenoptics, images are expectedly similar. Without a major overhaul, it is also expected that old issues could at best be improved on but not completely fixed. The Kodak choice (as opposed to the rumored CMOS) was obviously welcomed but how much difference would the final IQ be -- plugging the high ISO and IR issues into the equation -- if the M9 had used a Maestro chip instead? Maybe no improvements at all but I guess we'll have a better idea when the S2 reviews and more sample images become available. But what struck me most off chord was the 'official' rationale behind foregoing the Maestro chip -- time -- that Leica simply wouldn't be able to roll out the M9 for at least another year otherwise.

 

Which begs the question -- was there a deadline for the M9 to be rolled out? I sure as hell hope it's not just about 090909! It’s not like the M8/8.2 was so deficient or falling so far behind the competition that we’d dump Leica and buy another camera. Frankly, for those like me who choose to shoot DRF, there is no other camera! So, Leica wasn’t about to lose market share if they did not introduce an M9 now, were they? In fact, other than the select few on the inside track, no one really expected a FF M9 before Photokina 2010. Perhaps there was more than meets the eye in what is to be lost or gained but the additional year may not only give Leica more time to deliver a camera more befitting an M9 than what is now quite essentially an M8ff, but would have also given M8 users 13 more months to amortize their M8 investment for a more justifiable upgrade. All this while still continuing to sell M8.2 and grow its own DRF base. Hmm...

 

So that is not to be and whilst the shortcomings of the M9 are few and not critical in any way, they are enough to irk. My biggest gripe is with the M9’s IR management. I had no issue whatsoever with using IR-cut filters on my M8, grateful even that Leica gave me 2 free ones. It may be a workaround but the problem is solved and with the added protection of the front element! With the M9, I’m not sure if I ought to use the filters or not! Without it, the IR influences are clearly visible; with it, risk cyan drifts. Perhaps future firmware upgrades would make things better but for now, I guess another workaround must be added on top of the IR-cut filters – Cornerfix.

 

Next is the high ISO performance of the M9. From the many published ISO tests, especially from the detailed Sean Reid’s analysis, I thought that the M9 performed only marginally better than the M8. Despite Reid’s attempt to reconcile the ‘real’ improvements to the larger image size and print versus screen discernment, the fact remains – the improvements are unimpressive. Sadly, I am not sure if there is an imminent solution to profoundly enhance noise levels at the status quo but surely no longer applicable to the M9.

 

Points (3) to (5), though well-conceived and much appreciated, are IMHO garnishes on the M9. Don't get me wrong, they are excellent additions/changes and I, for one, am glad that Leica listened to its customers and taken steps to appease us. That said, their absence did not make the M8 a deal breaker and they are certainly not going to carry the weight of expectations of the M9 on their own.

 

The real meat lies in the sole fact that the M9 is full-frame. Not taking anything away from the technical feat of fitting a larger sensor into the existing form factor, but if you’ve not already jumped, is the M9 enough camera for you to make the switch?

 

I have sold my M8 and my preordered M9 is increasingly looking likely to miss its promised delivery date (mid next week), at which time I am no longer obliged to make the purchase. If I do still end up with one, I wonder if it would be because of the M9, or for the Leica glass that I still own.

 

Thank you for reading and if I made any errors or missed anything, I look forward to your corrections.

 

I have handled a M9 today. The camera's response was fast (menus, etc), and faster (feeling) than the M8. The shutter was very silent (similar to the M8.2). The camera is small (just like the M8.2, a black version). The LCD adequate and bright. My feeling is that noise was lower than some people have reported. The look of the files was good even at ISO 1250 or 1600. Better than it was with the M8 (my visual impression). Focus precission with my Summilux 35mm ASPH seems to be better, I don't know why (improved rangefinder?).

 

I got another clue about the M9's timing. Dealers may be forced to buy a S2 camera if they want to sell M9 cameras. Therefore, september 2009 was a real deadline for Leica. The M9 is a powerful instrument for the success of the S2.

[stunsworth]

Dealers may be forced to buy a S2 camera if they want to sell M9 cameras

 

But the S2 is only being sold by certain dealers, so unless something has changed a 'normal' dealer won't be selling the S2.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Well if that is true, at least it would not hurt exposure to the S2 system if every leica M selling dealer had at least one S2 on the shelves and was trying to push it to some pro.

 

 

.

[Rick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The dealer I talked to 3 weeks ago was grousing about having to buy the whole S2 system and all variations of lenses if he was to continue to sell Leica. I think this may actually be what Leica is doing. Steep price to be a Leica dealer I guess.

 

Since, I don't post anything on the M9 (as I don't own one) and I don't feel I have anything to add, I'd like to say a couple of things while I've got the floor.

 

I have been bent from one opinion to the other as far as buying the M9 over the last week. All in all, I really think this camera represents the correct move by Leica. Seeing as how it might have been another year for them to come out with a FF camera that will blow the others out of the water, they delivered what we all were asking for now.

 

Think about it, we really only wanted a FF sensor with better noise. We wanted, right now, an M8.3. We wanted, right now, an upgrade to the M8 that was FF in our current body and we would be happy for now while Leica developed the new M system with new processor and sensor technology with super low noise with no AA filter etc...

 

Leica delivered what I want right now. A FF M with a stop better noise and what looks like better color and better dynamic range than my M8. And, they did it at about the same price. Plus, they fixed some other stuff.

 

I'll sell my M8 for sure and get the new M9. For me, the M8 is still a great camera, but I want the features Leica delivered now. For others, I'd sat that if they can't afford to throw $5,000 USD at the camera (after trade or sell of M8) then you don't need to. The M8 is still basically the same as the M9. I'd hope there are users that just wait for the M10.

 

I've avoided talking about other brands, because they have their problems and and although they have better high iso... it comes at a price of a different image type and ergonomics and optics and artistic/creative style. I already know who I am.

 

I had a blast with the M8 in Italy this summer. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/98155-palazzo-dei-camerlenghi.html I can't imagine travel with a DSLR even if it had 100 mega pixels and clean iso at 100,000. I've bought a new printer HPZ3200 and I can't believe how big this little camera (m8) prints. Can't wait for the M9 with the FF.