adan Posted September 12, 2009 Share #21 Posted September 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I find the "back story" - if any - perhaps an interesting piece of corporate history to read, but totally irrelevant to judging the camera on its merits. Shooting my 21 @ f/2.8 instead of a 15mm @ f/4.5 means the M9 gives me an instant 2-stop improvement in "ISO" performance over the M8, on top of whatever real improvement is there in the pixels. The improvement in IR response I would not call 'to some extent" - but more like from 60% to 99%. My 3-CCD video camera shows more reddish blacks and purple blues than the M9. In the unfiltered M9 shot below, (ISO 320, 35 lux,mixed tungsten spots and doorway daylight, WB from the white Leica lanyard) the man's gray coat reads dead neutral on average - rgbs of 20/19/21, 15/15/19, 14/14/11, and so on. The black shirt zeroes out in red in places. And that's even without a good personal ColorChecker profiling (yet). Both would have been screaming magenta/red with an unfiltered M8. The processor used is mostly irrelevant unless one can show - not theorize, show - what difference it would make. If Leica has figured out how to make their cameras more affordable (all things are relative!!) without compromising their core features (an excellent VF/RF, silence, smoothness, wide-angle performance) - more power to them! Rangefinders are about wide-angle photography, therefore full-frame in and of itself is a 300% improvement over a crop. No, strike that - it is a paradigm shift. It is the M10, M11 etc. that will be "incremental" from 9/9/09 forward. ------ That being said, I suspect the corner processing routines will be fine-tuned and upgraded over time in firmware, as will any noise processing (ideally with more user control). The M9 is not perfect - but it is more perfectable than a cropped camera could ever be. 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/96453-the-m9-three-days-on/?do=findComment&comment=1031393'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 12, 2009 Posted September 12, 2009 Hi adan, Take a look here The M9 three days on.... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
chris_tribble Posted September 12, 2009 Share #22 Posted September 12, 2009 Shooting my 21 @ f/2.8 instead of a 15mm @ f/4.5 means the M9 gives me an instant 2-stop improvement in "ISO" performance over the M8, on top of whatever real improvement is there in the pixels. Couldn't agree more - the key fact about the M9 is that it's full frame. For anyone using an M SYSTEM, the fact that it's at least as good as the M8 (actually better!) is a bonus - not the main reason for getting it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted September 12, 2009 Share #23 Posted September 12, 2009 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. My view is that the AFRIKA Project was happily sailing along to deliver the S2 in the summer of 2009 and then the M9 in mid 2010. Disaster struck with the collapse of world economies and threatened Leica with serious consequences as they continued to build their technical advantage, but little immediate contribution to income. Along came a new CEO to implement the "let's get some cash in quick" strategy and the priorities switched from S2 to the cash cow of the M9, in spite of the M8 not having completed it's life cycle. Maybe that's why the Maestro chip isn't in there and some features are still to be perfected. It had to ship in the last quarter of 2009, regardless. When all said and done, the Leica team have obviously made the right decision and produced a wonderful product under tremendous pressure. Three cheers for them. Respect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted September 12, 2009 Author Share #24 Posted September 12, 2009 Efftee, My M9 is probably going to be late also, but without a doubt, a full-frame M is not a incremental improvement to a 8. when I was formulating my thoughts on my blog page, I was most struck by the effect on my favorite print size (what my old 2200 can print) 13x19 - M8 look simply fantastic at 172dpi... the M9 at the same size is 270dpi... that is 100 dots more per inch. instead of shooting with the 28cron for a 35mm look, I can shoot a 35lux (YEAH) which have a 1 stop advantage, so even if there is no iso improvement what so ever the bigger image and ability to use smaller faster lenses is a big difference. What I really wanted to say is. you already ordered yours, keep it. we both know once you get your hands on it, its going to be love. and more important, its going to be a lot more great images. I for one would not want to wait 1 or 2 years for a FF M, both my work and private images will benefit from FF today. . Hey Bo, you're probably right. I doubt I'd be able to resist if/when I do get to handle one at the store. The saving grace about buying Leica is (1) you'd hardly go wrong, and (2) if you are, you'd recoup most of your investment quite easily. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efftee Posted September 12, 2009 Author Share #25 Posted September 12, 2009 The improvement in IR response I would not call 'to some extent" - but more like from 60% to 99%. My 3-CCD video camera shows more reddish blacks and purple blues than the M9. In the unfiltered M9 shot below, (ISO 320, 35 lux,mixed tungsten spots and doorway daylight, WB from the white Leica lanyard) the man's gray coat reads dead neutral on average - rgbs of 20/19/21, 15/15/19, 14/14/11, and so on. The black shirt zeroes out in red in places. And that's even without a good personal ColorChecker profiling (yet). Both would have been screaming magenta/red with an unfiltered M8. Based on the other images I have seen, especially those in Reid's review, the improvements from the M8 were, imo, marginal. Don't mean to doubt you but wish you had taken the another shot with an M8 though. Sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 12, 2009 Share #26 Posted September 12, 2009 Jamie, can you elaborate please? I want so much to believe you. 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mby Posted September 12, 2009 Share #27 Posted September 12, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) (...) Maybe that's why the Maestro chip isn't in there and some features are still to be perfected. (...)/QUOTE] Maybe you can shed some pros and cons on the use of M9's DSPs over proprietary Maestro? - Thanks. Best regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolo Posted September 12, 2009 Share #28 Posted September 12, 2009 Maybe you can shed some pros and cons on the use of M9's DSPs over proprietary Maestro? - Thanks. Best regards, Michael Not me I'm afraid. Just aware that many expected the Maestro to be in there. I suspect you're holding something back here, Michael. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted September 12, 2009 Share #29 Posted September 12, 2009 I totally agree that M9 firmware should be made available for M8 users. I think your logic is correct. Frank I imagine it is possible that some functions from the M9 firmware might be added to the M8 firmware in a future release. Stefan Daniel did tell us in June that there would be new firmware versions. As a completely unqualified guess, perhaps the manual lens selection would be welcomed, if it were possible. Perhaps the soft release is doable as well? One (M9) function disabling (having caused unintended (M8) complications) is use of discreet advance in combination with continuous release. The electronics and other hardware are different though. For example there is more 'processor' power and memory, I understand. The new firmware is reportedly developed from scratch too, rather than functionality added to the existing M8 firmware. This is much more complex than thinking what Leica 'should' do. My background is military R&D, systems qualification/ integration etc. One standing joke that we had came from a not very qualified industry writer, "its a simple software change and some sheetmetal work". It never is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Ortego Posted September 12, 2009 Share #30 Posted September 12, 2009 It was just about a year ago since I sold my M8 when I perceived that a lot of owner’s were jumping ship. As with some folks, I was very discouraged with the Leica CEO. In the most diplomatic of terms, I felt he wasn’t being honest about the ever-changing upgrade path for what is now the M8.2. "Trust is the hardest thing to achieve and the easiest thing to lose." Anyway, I sold everything and now I regret it, especially the glass. The M9 pulled me back into the fold and I will pay big-time to replace my lenses. This time I will choose very carefully, based on the previous four top end variants I let go. I will most likely get by on two Leica primes from here on out. Regards, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 12, 2009 Share #31 Posted September 12, 2009 quieter shutter than M8u; quieter shutter release than the M8.2 FWIW, my M8.2 shutter (and motor) noise was slightly quieter than the M9 I handled at my dealer yesterday...according to me, the dealer, Leica rep and others. I don't really care one way or another, and this has no bearing on my decision to stick with the M8.2, but I just found it interesting. Perhaps lucky sample variation, I guess. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 12, 2009 Share #32 Posted September 12, 2009 It was just about a year since I sold my M8 when I perceived that a lot of owner’s were jumping ship. Don't know where you got that. IMHO and if my memory is correct the only people that were selling M8's are people that did not like using a rangefinder or those who liked using film better then digital. It seems all the M8's that are put on eBay at a reasonable price, whether from a dealer or private individual, sold without a problem. It's not like there is a warehouse full of used M8's that aren't being sold. Someone is buying them and not for nothing (I just sold one of mine a month+ ago for the current, at that time, going price). As with some folks, I was very discouraged with the Leica CEO. I felt he wasn’t being honest about the ever-changing upgrade path for what is now the M8.2. Trust is the hardest thing to achieve and the easiest thing to lose. I was not one of them in either the trust of the CEO or the upgrade path which I did not do. I like my M8 as it is and didn't see any reason to pay for any of those upgrades. Anyway, I sold everything and now I regret it, especially the glass. The M9 pulled me back into the fold and I will pay big-time to replace my lenses. This time I will choose very carefully, based on the previous four top end variants I let go. Regards, Yes I bet you do and not just now but the day after you sold it. Or should that be the day after it left your hand, whether you dropped it off at a dealer or shipped it out to the new owner. I know I did back in 1975 when I sold the first M3 and the 3 lenses I had at that time to buy a MF system. I've regretted that until I bought another M3 and lenses about 5 years ago. I've bought and sold many M film cameras since then and have even sold some lenses, only because I had others of the same FL or I didn't use them, but I've always had at least one film M and for 2.5+ years at least one M8. Why on earth would you sell the glass? You could of taken a fraction of what you sold the M8 for and bought a film M. This is my biggest complaint with Leica. It use to be most people could afford a Leica M and some Leica lenses if they managed there money well. But today the new film M's are as expensive as the original M8 and the new M9 is just, IMHO, over the top in cost. And look at the lens prices. Most of the good fast lenses are well over $3000 and some well over $4000. You have to be well heeled to afford them today. That put limits on just who can buy them. I couldn't, in today economy, if I had to do it all over again. Good luck and this time when for some unknown reason you get a bug up your butt about Leica don't sell the glass. That is IF you ever think you might own another Leica M. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 13, 2009 Share #33 Posted September 13, 2009 FWIW, my M8.2 shutter (and motor) noise was slightly quieter than the M9 I handled at my dealer yesterday...according to me, the dealer, Leica rep and others. I don't really care one way or another, and this has no bearing on my decision to stick with the M8.2, but I just found it interesting. Perhaps lucky sample variation, I guess. Jeff Ah but were you using the "soft release" feature from the M9? The M8.2 doesn't have that does it? Don't get me wrong, I've never even seen an M9, but reports are that this works quite nicely. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 13, 2009 Share #34 Posted September 13, 2009 Ah but were you using the "soft release" feature from the M9? The M8.2 doesn't have that does it?. Nope, I was comparing apples to apples. The soft release seems like a very nice addition, although I didn't try it in the store. Again, Jamie, please know that I didn't comment for the sake of a "mine is better than yours" type of argument...just stating my experience, since I was curious based on some conflicting early reports about the sound. I wouldn't be surprised if there are small variations between individual cameras. And, the difference I heard was so subtle as to be irrelevant in real world shooting. Heck, I'd like a manual shutter cocking to get a really quiet sound...like my former M7s! Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 13, 2009 Share #35 Posted September 13, 2009 The M9 shutter is the M8.2 shutter. But I wouldn't be surprised if a random M8.2 was quieter than a random M9, or vice versa. I'd be surprised if M9s are consistently quieter than M8.2s (or vice versa), using the same release setting. The soft release setting is extremely cool, if you can live without exposure lock. I'll have to see how simple and intuitive the exp. comp is, but plan to leave the M9 permanently on soft release. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted September 13, 2009 Share #36 Posted September 13, 2009 The M9 shutter is the M8.2 shutter. But I wouldn't be surprised if a random M8.2 was quieter than a random M9, or vice versa. I'd be surprised if M9s are consistently quieter than M8.2s (or vice versa), using the same release setting. The soft release setting is extremely cool, if you can live without exposure lock. I'll have to see how simple and intuitive the exp. comp is, but plan to leave the M9 permanently on soft release. Since I shoot manual, I don't care about exp. lock--this sounds sweet @ Jeff S... my statement wasn't intended to be as taunting as it sounded in my post! LOL!! I was actually asking--since I don't have an M8.2 but only an M8--if he M8.2 had the soft release, and it's also what I meant about it being quieter than the M8. Sorry 'bout that! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted September 13, 2009 Share #37 Posted September 13, 2009 @ Jeff S... my statement wasn't intended to be as taunting as it sounded in my post! LOL!! I was actually asking--since I don't have an M8.2 but only an M8--if he M8.2 had the soft release, and it's also what I meant about it being quieter than the M8. Sorry 'bout that! Funny how the Internet loses the voice inflection...now I see that you had a question, not a retort! And, no, the M8.2 unfortunately doesn't have the soft release. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mby Posted September 13, 2009 Share #38 Posted September 13, 2009 Not me I'm afraid. Just aware that many expected the Maestro to be in there. I suspect you're holding something back here, Michael. Unfortunately not... If I remember the LFI article on the MAESTRO correctly, it goes along the lines that lots of functionality is hard-coded in the chip which otherwise has to be in firmware for DSPs; thus one might jump to the conclusion that you can more easily upgrade and fine-tune the camera's functionality and results post-sales if desired by adjusting the firmware for the latter ones while you would have to exchange the chip for the former ones. Of course, MAESTRO will use less energy, but I can live with the battery consumption of the M9. - Plus MAESTRO has to be faster as the S2 needs to move more pixels, but again, I'm happy with my M9's speed... If this were true, Leica might be caught between a rock and a hard place to go too public about the pros and cons of their camera's inner-workings - but on the other hand I couldn't care less about that as long as it fulfills my requirements, which it does perfectly! Maybe somebody with a bit more of an engineering background can look into pros and cons of DSPs vs. proprietary chips? Thanks and best regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted September 13, 2009 Share #39 Posted September 13, 2009 Ah but were you using the "soft release" feature from the M9? The M8.2 doesn't have that does it? Don't get me wrong, I've never even seen an M9, but reports are that this works quite nicely. 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. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lotw Posted September 13, 2009 Share #40 Posted September 13, 2009 #4 of Chris' photo's, the portrait, shows the one and only reason for an M9: bo-keh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.