lct Posted October 1, 2009 Share #161 Posted October 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...You state that auto white balance is totally useless as you shoot raw. However, even if you shoot raw, it's still preferable to record those raw files with a white balance that is at least close to accurate... Not sure to understand, zlatkob. Do you mean that in-camera WB settings have the least influence on raw files really? Never seen this so far but i may be wrong. Anyway, as i said above, auto WB is totally useless for me to the point that my Epsons are set to B&W go figure. I may use a grey card from time to time but my favorite WB tool is iCorrect by far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 1, 2009 Posted October 1, 2009 Hi lct, Take a look here M9 – A Giant Leap in the Right Direction – Still Some Distance To Go. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
pascal_meheut Posted October 1, 2009 Share #162 Posted October 1, 2009 Is anyone aware as to why Leica decided to abandon the sapphire screen of the M8.2 for the M9. it couldnt be so as to charge an upgrade fee as an after fit option, could it? They abandonned it for cost reasons. I do not know why they do not offer it as an option. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 1, 2009 Share #163 Posted October 1, 2009 Nikon, Canon, Pentax (K-7) and Olympus (E-3) all sell weather-sealed bodies. Nikon, Canon and Pentax systems include weather-sealed and non-weather sealed lenses. I don't know weather Olympus offers any weather-sealed lenses. All those brands are selling weather-sealed or waterproof sealing mount lenses, zlatkob. Not the case of Leica as far as Ms are concerned. Would it be possible to keep M lenses small, manual and weather-sealed altogether, i don't know but so far i would not pay a cent over $7K to get a weather-sealed M10 if lenses behave like pouring holes on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2009 Share #164 Posted October 1, 2009 Hmm... Having stepped away from this for 24 hours or so it's sad to come back and find that what started as a good-natured albeit robust exchange of views and exploration of different viewpoints has degenerated into the usual exchange of personal insults and OT bickering. It seems that some of the massive egos, unreasonable demands, blinkered thinking and ingrained bigotry that were the unfortunate hallmark of the M8 forum have sadly migrated to the M9. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJP Posted October 1, 2009 Share #165 Posted October 1, 2009 WOW nearly ten pages of wisdom! Anyway sealing the on/off switch & shutter knob + the baseplate might be an improvement. The lenses should be resonably water resistant due to the grease in the helical threads etc. Having said, the reports we have seen of M8's failing due to humidity are from cold/hot and RH changes, not as far as I can recall from submersion (Tina and at least 2 others have had their M8 under water for several (tens?) of seconds. To deal with the worst of the humidity/condensation problems all they need to do is to apply a water repellent laquer on the PCB. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted October 1, 2009 Share #166 Posted October 1, 2009 Ulkrift, I was expressing my opinions, you are entitled to hold different ones. Not arguing. No negative language or confrontational tone in my post.[quote=ulrikft;1060423]Hoppyman: You say: "Current size/configuration already suitable for purpose" For your purpose? I find it quite hard to asses critical focus on the current M9 screen, the D700 screen is far superior here, no contest. Yes for my purpose and the purposes for which it was designed by Leica. It is not a dSLR. The D700 appears to be an excellent dSLR design. The M9 isn't one and doesn't intend to be. "More a theoretical than practical. If you need to shoot <1 sec from raising camera you can have the camera ON in your hands (& set Auto pwr OFF)." Actually a very practical problem, if you have auto power off, you'll drain the battery in no-time, if you have auto power on, you will have to adapt workarounds like tapping the shutter on the way up to your eye or something like that. I lost quite a few shots while running around with the M9 the first few days, beacause it would not shoot for a second. This is core decisive moment stuff in my opinion, the camera should fire exactly when i want it to. The delay is so 1999... That style of photography may be an aspiration or preference for some people. The HCB fantasy. It is not the exclusive purpose of Leica cameras. I even sometimes put mine on a tripod (gasp!) and shoot scenery with it. LiveView or chimping with magnified preview images is at odds with the 'decisive moment' style that you profess is your core pupose surely? Really truely put your hand on your heart, you have had an M9 in your hands for a maximum of 3 weeks (unless you were a beta tester?) but turned off and you haven't practised a workable technique that suits you, balancing battery life with what you are trying to achieve? You've turned the camera on as you raised it to your eye, you have composed and focused all within that second or so for it to power up? I've lost shots through forgetting to turn my M8 on, certainly. If I am working hard at shooting when I expect a brief opportunity to pop up then my camera is on but perhaps asleep and I start depressing the shutter release as I raise it as you noted works.. "Already on the back when powered. 2 or 3 secs longer for occasional batt/frames check with M9. " And you use more battery when turning on the LCD, so, harder to check, uses more battery. You need the camera to be ON before the top frame counter/battery remaining display works or do anything else with it too. Are you honestly disadvantaged by changing the battery after a couple of hundred shots and whatever LCD use you elect? If you find battery life to be a major driver for you, turning off preview is very helpful. More akin to the classical experience too, I would think. Really this is silly. Two minor display functions were moved to the back (and now offer more accuracy if that is important to you). You need to press one button when you want to read them. "Sounds attractive without taking into account design cost/complexity. Does not take into account lenses at all. Any change there would be anathema to owners of those thousands of M lenses out there right now that work. It may be possible to improve weather resistance around the shutter release and shutter speed dial perhaps in a future model. Again I have no issues with the current design. " You don't need weather sealed lenses for a weather sealed body to be an advantage. Weather sealed buttons, and not a tract for water to enter like the current shutter, would be an important upgrade in the future. I think you meant to say around the shutter speed dial there? Is there a sigle documented case of water entering the M8 camera body via the buttons which are all on the back? I already agreed that it may be useful to improve weather resistance around the shutter speed dial and shutter release button too in the future. Still M cameras have managed to operate world wide for some fifty plus years now with that design. Discounting all of the cameras prior to those with any electrical components I still don't recall any evidence that the cameras are especially weak in that area. Suggesting that those areas are a 'tract for water to enter' is opinion and emotive language rather than fact. Something like 30,000 M8s sold. Can you cite any facts at all that there has been a significant problem reported? Are you really happy to subject your Leica M lenses to conditions where a weather resistant body would be important? "I don't want to give up any viewfinder image size to fit any more complex displays in there. " Well, good for you. Some of us would love a more accurate meter-reading ("more than one stop.. ok?"), I would also, actually, love an actual spot meter on the M10, but I guess that is not too feasible. Other than that, I'm not asking for shots left/virtual horizon or anything complex. I'm asking for shutter speed, iso and a meter. You would not give up viewfinder image size for that. How rude of you. My opinion stated, You can differ without dismissing my opinion. It meters just like an M. What do you mean more accurate, more than a stop? Do you mean to refer to the accuracy of the displayed figure in aperture priority mode? Can you illustrate how that is not sufficient for you? Half stop increments actually in manual shutter speed selection and aperture selection. Spot metering could be implemented instead. Matrix or other could not. Anything other than the current arrangement would render it less suitable for other purposes (and different from every other M with a meter ever produced). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 1, 2009 Share #167 Posted October 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) 1) Why is assessing correct focus a DSLR-thing...? Please elaborate. 2) If you want to shoot landscapes on a tripod, a more suited camera would be a large format film-camera, it is of course great that a leica M9 can be used for it, and I have no doubt that it will be great as the resolution/color/dr of it is amazing at lower isos. But I would say that using it as a travel/pj/street camera is closer to the core "m-experience", without trying to define that sharply. That said, I did say that I had adapted a technique (Tapping the shutter release on the way up), I just think that it is a bit "lazy" of leica to use sub-par electronics on such an important (for many) area. 3) I would have to be able to trust a Leica M9 to beer, water, wind and snow if I were to use it as my main camera, maybe old Leica Ms, without electronics could manage great, but I doubt that M8s and M9s are too happy about moist inside the camera housing, and rubber gaskets are small, cheap and a good way to insure that your equipment has another line of defence against malfunction. I just don't see any good/rational reasons for not putting it in the camera. 4) When it comes to metering, I want to have a meter that goes from -3 or -2 to +2 or +3, that way i can more easily meter different parts of a scene, according to the importance of them in my composition, I do this all the time on spot-meter cameras, and I find it limiting not to have the possibility on a modern digital camera like the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2009 Share #168 Posted October 1, 2009 3) I would have to be able to trust a Leica M9 to beer, water, wind and snow if I were to use it as my main camera, maybe old Leica Ms, without electronics could manage great, but I doubt that M8s and M9s are too happy about moist inside the camera housing, and rubber gaskets are small, cheap and a good way to insure that your equipment has another line of defence against malfunction. I just don't see any good/rational reasons for not putting it in the camera. I spent the first six years of my working life at a company that made "packings, jointings, seals and gaskets for industry". They supplied them to watch makers at one extreme and to the Thames Barrier at the other. It is not just as simple as bunging in a bit of rubber, as you seem to imply. There would be significant R&D effort and manufacturing change required in weatherproofing something like a digital M. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 1, 2009 Share #169 Posted October 1, 2009 I spent the first six years of my working life at a company that made "packings, jointings, seals and gaskets for industry". They supplied them to watch makers at one extreme and to the Thames Barrier at the other. It is not just as simple as bunging in a bit of rubber, as you seem to imply. There would be significant R&D effort and manufacturing change required in weatherproofing something like a digital M. Regards, Bill Of course it is more than just "bunging in a bit of rubber", and i did not imply such a thing either. But "significant" R&D, I disagree. weathersealing like on the 5D mkII would not put much demand on the engineers at Leica R&D cost wise, compared to other changes that people gladly welcome. Just a small feature like removing the top lcd for battery/shots left would introduce manufacturing change. So I'm not sure how big an impact such an argument has. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2009 Share #170 Posted October 1, 2009 Of course it is more than just "bunging in a bit of rubber", and i did not imply such a thing either. But "significant" R&D, I disagree. ..then you would be wrong. Please share the basis for your assertion. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 1, 2009 Share #171 Posted October 1, 2009 ..then you would be wrong. Please share the basis for your assertion. Regards, Bill You would have to compensate for the minimal size of a few rubber gaskets/lines, and this would have to be accounted for in the production process. But implying that this is a staggering and impossible task is way off. It would take R&D and it would take changes in the production, but all changes demand these things, it is not that putting on minimal weather sealing would be a impossible task for Leica, it is a choice, and I would love to know which priorities lie behind this choice. And you? What is your basis for the assertion "significant" R&D? More than redesigning the RF? More than fixing the angle of light-problem with fullframe..? I think not, those are areas of significant R&D, weather sealing is not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 1, 2009 Share #172 Posted October 1, 2009 Not sure to understand, zlatkob. Do you mean that in-camera WB settings have the least influence on raw files really? Never seen this so far but i may be wrong. Anyway, as i said above, auto WB is totally useless for me to the point that my Epsons are set to B&W go figure. I may use a grey card from time to time but my favorite WB tool is iCorrect by far. For photographers who shoot color, accurate AWB is a time saver because there will be fewer files needing further adjustment for white balance. Erratic AWB means more files to adjust, whether they're raw or jpeg. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted October 1, 2009 Share #173 Posted October 1, 2009 I think not, those are areas of significant R&D, weather sealing is not. At least, we know that you think that what you think is more valuable that the opinion of someone working in a field you seem to know nothing about... What was it already you said before about arrogance ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted October 1, 2009 Share #174 Posted October 1, 2009 Of course it is more than just "bunging in a bit of rubber", and i did not imply such a thing either. But "significant" R&D, I disagree. weathersealing like on the 5D mkII would not put much demand on the engineers at Leica R&D cost wise, compared to other changes that people gladly welcome. Just a small feature like removing the top lcd for battery/shots left would introduce manufacturing change. So I'm not sure how big an impact such an argument has. It seems that for Leica to be satisfied with the weatherproofing of the S2 was a long process. And that camera was designed from scratch. Lucien Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 1, 2009 Share #175 Posted October 1, 2009 Install/remove cards and battery without baseplate removalWorks fine now for me. Structural rigidity may possibly be a concern if cut outs added? If you look at the magnesium alloy frame on this page, you'll notice it already has very large cutouts. It seems to be structurally rigid despite those very large cutouts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 1, 2009 Share #176 Posted October 1, 2009 At least, we know that you think that what you think is more valuable that the opinion of someone working in a field you seem to know nothing about... What was it already you said before about arrogance ? Is it arrogant to think that rubber gaskets are a minor part of the R&D for an entire camera? How enlightening.. I would love to know how producing rubber gaskets makes one an expert on how much R&D a camera company would have to invest in to manage to weather seal a camera.. You are just jumping on beacause you lack arguments, as usual. I think I'll just block you and spare myself the garbage you come with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2009 Share #177 Posted October 1, 2009 You would have to compensate for the minimal size of a few rubber gaskets/lines, and this would have to be accounted for in the production process. But implying that this is a staggering and impossible task is way off. It would take R&D and it would take changes in the production, but all changes demand these things, it is not that putting on minimal weather sealing would be a impossible task for Leica, it is a choice, and I would love to know which priorities lie behind this choice. And you? What is your basis for the assertion "significant" R&D? More than redesigning the RF? More than fixing the angle of light-problem with fullframe..? I think not, those are areas of significant R&D, weather sealing is not. *sigh* I am not going to indulge your penchant for subjective debate. I have given you the basis for my assertion at the outset. At no point did I imply that anything was "staggering and impossible" - such hyperbole is hardly appropriate. Let me instead ask the following questions: 1. How much weatherproofing is "enough"? Which Category? 2. How much would the market be willing to pay for a weatherproofed Leica? 3. How many more Leicas could be sold if they were weatherproofed? 4. What type of gaskets should be used? 5. What type of rubber should be used to manufacture the gaskets? 6. How should the gaskets be fitted to the camera? 7. Should the mount be weatherproofed? 8. Should lenses be weatherproofed? 9. If the mount is weatherproofed, how should backward compatibility be maintained with existing lenses? 10. If the mount is weatherproofed how does that impact lens coding? ...and so on. Nothing is "staggering", much less "impossible", but you are really not thinking this through. Come to that, no user requirement that starts with "Just a..." has ever been thought through. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted October 1, 2009 Share #178 Posted October 1, 2009 It seems that for Leica to be satisfied with the weatherproofing of the S2 was a long process. And that camera was designed from scratch. Lucien Quite. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted October 1, 2009 Share #179 Posted October 1, 2009 Is it arrogant to think that rubber gaskets are a minor part of the R&D for an entire camera? No, it is arrogant to explain that you know better that someone working in this area when you are not. But clearly, you missed this point too... I think I'll just block you and spare myself the garbage you come with. Please do so. According to the way you are talking to several members of this forum, you'll soon be able to read your messages only. And they are not really that interesting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted October 1, 2009 Share #180 Posted October 1, 2009 *sigh* I am not going to indulge your penchant for subjective debate. I have given you the basis for my assertion at the outset. At no point did I imply that anything was "staggering and impossible" - such hyperbole is hardly appropriate. Let me instead ask the following questions: 1. How much weatherproofing is "enough"? Which Category? 2. How much would the market be willing to pay for a weatherproofed Leica? 3. How many more Leicas could be sold if they were weatherproofed? 4. What type of gaskets should be used? 5. What type of rubber should be used to manufacture the gaskets? 6. How should the gaskets be fitted to the camera? 7. Should the mount be weatherproofed? 8. Should lenses be weatherproofed? 9. If the mount is weatherproofed, how should backward compatibility be maintained with existing lenses? 10. If the mount is weatherproofed how does that impact lens coding? ...and so on. Nothing is "staggering", much less "impossible", but you are really not thinking this through. Regards, Bill Be careful Bill, I think you might overload our friend mind Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.