Jump to content

oh! i saw a very good user review of M9 and X1

iluvbibi

By iluvbibi
in Leica M9 / M-E

 Share

Recommended Posts

diogenis

diogenis

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

randomly search in the net, and i found this review, lets have a look...enjoy~

 

by the way..from the review..i have a bit disappointed of M9..

 

 

Leica M9 Hands-on Preview

 

Leica X1 Hands-on Preview

 

 

:)

Everyone would have been disappointed by reading this review indeed. The problem of the reviewer basically is, that this camera begins with Le, instead of Ca or Ni. It also comes from Germany, another con.

More specifically, he throws us a series of ISO photos to compare... Compare what? Blacks? you cannot compare this way...

It takes a bit of skill to focus... yes sure it is not easy to overlap two images shown on a great and bright Viewfinder.. Give me a break...

He wants image stabilisation (lol) live view (lol) and more pixels (Rofl!!!).

Im telling you, what this camera misses is to be named as Leicon d3.2z

 

edit: btw, just for fun go and take a look thru a Leica viewfinder to forever forget LCD screens

Link to post
Share on other sites
ulrikft

ulrikft

Posted
Posted
Everyone would have been disappointed by reading this review indeed. The problem of the reviewer basically is, that this camera begins with Le, instead of Ca or Ni. It also comes from Germany, another con.

More specifically, he throws us a series of ISO photos to compare... Compare what? Blacks? you cannot compare this way...

It takes a bit of skill to focus... yes sure it is not easy to overlap two images shown on a great and bright Viewfinder.. Give me a break...

He wants image stabilisation (lol) live view (lol) and more pixels (Rofl!!!).

Im telling you, what this camera misses is to be named as Leicon d3.2z

 

edit: btw, just for fun go and take a look thru a Leica viewfinder to forever forget LCD screens

 

Live view is actually nice for a few occasions, so is IS. You can say that "if one wanted IS, leica would have to make the M9 larger, therefore they did not choose IS", and that is valid, but "IS IS STUPID!!!" is not a very good argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites
yanidel

yanidel

Posted
Posted

Asking a DSLR user to review a Leica after a couple of weeks of use is like asking a motorcycle driver to review a car. This is the problem about the internet where anybody can be a reviewer but very few really know the inside outs of a product.

I remember a reviewer trashing the DP2 one week after its release ... can one really get the feel for a camera after such little time ? Feels like it is often more important to be the first one to review a camera for increased web traffic then really take time to use the product and have an "objective review". It took me months to fully understand every pro and cons of the M8 and how to get the best out of it, I expect the same with the M9 though this time there will be a lot of commonality, thus it should be quicker.

Except for the few Leica "expert" reviewers (Sean, David, ...), I have read all currently available M9 reviews with a lot of scrutinity. This one to me is about worthless, how can you be credible with statements such as "The rangefinder is difficult to use in low light".... :confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites
dhsimmonds

dhsimmonds

Posted
Posted

I thought that the this M9 review is a fair and balanced report.

 

After all the M9 has no rival RF cameras to compare with and anyone contemplating moving from DSLR to RF for the first time does needs to be aware of the differences. A RF viewfinder does take some getting used to after the blacked out surround viewfinder of a reflex camera.

 

This reviewer told it how it is and should be commended for it. The general summary in my view is extremely favourable to the M9 and justified Leica's trust in providing Andrew Chan with a beta camera for the review.

Link to post
Share on other sites
diogenis

diogenis

Posted
Posted
Live view is actually nice for a few occasions, so is IS. You can say that "if one wanted IS, leica would have to make the M9 larger, therefore they did not choose IS", and that is valid, but "IS IS STUPID!!!" is not a very good argument.

 

Live view is a useless feature never intended for cameras. Live view forces you to hold your camera the wrong way, away from your face, in an unnatural way with your hands extended. This way you create vibrations not only from the wind but from muscle tiring as well... But wait now there is a solution... and its called... IS YEAAAA... but hey IS makes for even bigger cameras which leads to even more vibrations ...

Now if this is not stupidity squared I don't know which is. Sometimes we should know where and how to stop.

Link to post
Share on other sites
carstenw

carstenw

Posted
Posted

I agree, this reads like cut and paste plus a little personal component. The English is in some places very professional and well-written, and in other places it is full of mistakes. Big chunks read like ads; I am tempted to search for some of these sentences and see what comes up; in some places, the sentences in the X1 and M9 review are identical... The ISO "tests" are useless and presumably incorrect. Otherwise I don't see why the noise in the Pull 80 shot should be blurred. Additionally, there is no evidence of colour noise in the high ISO shots, which is not the case in real cameras.

 

My question for the OP: is this your website, or that of a friend? How did you find it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamie Roberts

Jamie Roberts

Posted
Posted

What kills me is the reproduction of the boxing image at the end, which is a picture of an M9 picture. Very odd indeed, and says nothing about the camera, in the final analysis, except that a rangefinder is hard to use (in poor light too). FWIW, I find the opposite--that the rangefinder is easier for me to use, especially in lower light.

Link to post
Share on other sites
thrice

thrice

Posted
Posted

I wonder if the other manufacturers might seek to subvert (by the way of engineered negative reviews/viral forum opinions/images) the M9 bandwagon that is gaining serious momentum, there is a lot of attention for rangefinders and particularly the M9 now as the large numbers of high end DSLR using amateurs are getting frustrated with size.

 

I always told myself I didn't care much about size/weight, until I finally could afford a full compliment of primes, and I started obsessing about efficient/comfortable bags and now have steered all the way into Leica M's and a 4 prime setup with a film and (now, thanks to the M9) digital body. All conveniently stored in the pockets of my vest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
iluvbibi

iluvbibi

Posted
  • Author
Posted

i find it on dpreview. the reviewer posted some photos. it is possible the high iso photos look like heavy noise reduction i dont see why the reviewer will post any fake photos. it is obvious from the photos it is a showroom. i think the reviewer is very nice to share his thoughts and do need to be so mean. we are all photographers trying to share after all and there is no right or wrong review.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jamie Roberts

Jamie Roberts

Posted
Posted
i find it on dpreview. the reviewer posted some photos. it is possible the high iso photos look like heavy noise reduction i dont see why the reviewer will post any fake photos. it is obvious from the photos it is a showroom. i think the reviewer is very nice to share his thoughts and do need to be so mean. we are all photographers trying to share after all and there is no right or wrong review.

 

Reviewing is not about right and wrong; it's about the credibility and capability to actually assess what the camera--as a tool--is capable of providing to someone who knows what they're doing :)

 

I suppose an M9 review that by someone who kind of doesn't know what they're doing with a rangefinder is an interesting data point, but it's not one I'd take seriously.

 

Besides--didn't you say you felt kind of disappointed about the M9 after reading the review? I'd say get one in your hands instead of reading the amateur reviews (though I know that's hard to do right now). If you've never used an RF before, you'll know soon enough if a rangefinder is for you or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...