Paulus Posted October 2, 2009 Share #261 Posted October 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I think the only thing which makes the camera really great is a viewfinder like the MP/M7 The feel of the MP/M7.and i mean everything like silent schutter etc. and the noisereduction of a Nikon d700. I only have a M8 and a MP . I would like the M10 as described above. But i don't have the experience of a M9. Could somebody tell me if the M9 noise is at the level of an d700. Than I can sell my d700 en get really back to Leica for all my photography. Paulus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 2, 2009 Posted October 2, 2009 Hi Paulus, 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!
Paulus Posted October 2, 2009 Share #262 Posted October 2, 2009 Less is more? I think the only thing which makes the camera really great is a viewfinder like the MP/M7 The feel of the MP/M7.and i mean everything like silent schutter etc. and the noisereduction of a Nikon d700. I only have a M8 and a MP . I would like the M10 as described above. But i don't have the experience of a M9. Could somebody tell me if the M9 noise is at the level of an d700. Than I can sell my d700 en get really back to Leica for all my photography. Paulus. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share #263 Posted October 2, 2009 ... instead of spending your time making up wish lists to transfer DSLR technology to a simple basic and wonderful RF camera. Jeff The transfer of "DSLR" technology was never proposed. The "D" technology is already there. No SLR technology was mentioned. None of the features proposed are inherently DSLR technology. It does so happen that some of the enhancements proposed were first delivered to market in point-and-shoots or DSLRs from Canon or Nikon -- but that doesn't make the features DSLR technology. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted October 2, 2009 Share #264 Posted October 2, 2009 I used the term DSLR technology to cover the electronic stuff not the mirror etc. It is true that the M9 is already more complex than the M8 so for me it is already going in the wrong direction. I'm afraid I find very little of this stuff makes it easier for me to take photos, I just have to waste time wading through it. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted October 2, 2009 Share #265 Posted October 2, 2009 Guys, is this thread some kind of group therapy for you? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted October 2, 2009 Author Share #266 Posted October 2, 2009 Guys, is this thread some kind of group therapy for you? One can only suspect that posters showing emotion and talking about their feelings might be finding this thread theraputic. I'm ok with that. It is wonderful to see the passion with which people are asserting and defending their understanding/interpretation of the M-values, philosophy, essence, or whatever you like to call it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted October 2, 2009 Share #267 Posted October 2, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I know nothing at all about what would be required to weather seal the M body but logic would tell me that Leica would have to be 100% sure it worked - can you imagine to uproar if someones M died because they used it whilst kyaking? There is a big difference between making a device splash proof and submergible. Pro DSLR bodies are splash proof, meaning they can withstand X amount of rain for a specific duration of time. Some tests include wind strength. For a device to be rated submergible it needs to be tested for duration and depth of submersion. A D700 is splash-proof / weatherproof. A Nikonos is submergible. I would imagine that they would need to redesign the entire body shell to accommodate the necessary seals and gaskets, without even thinking about the lenses. The body-shell would have to modified internally, but it should not be the end of the world for them to do this. We would probably lose the threaded shutter release. It seems from what I've read on this forum that the M can quite happily withstand use in bad weather, i.e. out in the rain, snow etc, which is probably adequate for most users. That may be good enough for amateurs, but professionals need a little more insurance, since their income depends on the camera not dying in a drizzle. Obviously it would be impossible to upgrade older lenses to make them fully sealed, but adding a gasket to the lens mount a la Nikon would go a long way. Leica should be designing all of their new lenses to be sealed. But regardless this shouldn't stop Leica from sealing the body. If you have water pouring in to the body through the lens, you probably have bigger problems on your hands. But water can very easily get in to the body through the shutter release, the buttons and probably around the LCD screen. Again its a case of the right tool for the job. If you know your camera is going to get drenched on a regular basis then clearly there are other cameras out there better suited to that task - it's rather like moaning that a Ferrari can't off road very well. You're right. Leica should just stop marketing the M series to professionals who want to use it as it was intended to be used for the last 50 plus years and instead concentrate on lawyers, weekend worriers and posers buying the most expensive 'in-gadget' they can find and wouldn't dream of soiling their new Cole-Haan's in foul weather. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted October 2, 2009 Share #268 Posted October 2, 2009 An extremely valid point! Whilst rubberised sheet gaskets are maintenance free (until they wear through and have to be replaced), those on rotating or push button shafts ('O' rings) need lubrication and/or replacement. If they get grit in they may well fail with no indication until later water ingress results. Whilst this is fine if the camera using them is designed with a short(ish) life in mind, with one designed or intended for higher longevity it means inspections/servicing will be needed periodically. I have a couple of Canon 1DS cameras which are weather sealed - given their high depreciation, I am not certain that they would be worth considering gasket replacement by now (5 years on) as the cost of a full service and replacement would I suspect, make me consider getting rid of them and using the money more effectively elsewhere. On the live view points - I do use it on a 5D2 but IMHO its not my viewing system of choice and is more effective on a tripod mounted camera. I can now a monitor feed from the camera in such situations (into a 7" lcd) which should make live view more useful but..... Then how do you explain the fact that pretty much every pro level DSLR on the market for the past 10 years has been sealed? I'm sorry, but I really don't think this position makes much sense. It's like saying 'Don't build cars, because they could break'. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted October 2, 2009 Share #269 Posted October 2, 2009 .... You're right. Leica should just stop marketing the M series to professionals who want to use it as it was intended to be used for the last 50 plus years and instead concentrate on lawyers, weekend worriers and posers buying the most expensive 'in-gadget' they can find and wouldn't dream of soiling their new Cole-Haan's in foul weather. A lawyer's proposal for a weather sealed Leica from the last 50 years: MBROO http://www.leicashop.com/bilder/shop_gross/15864_3.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted October 2, 2009 Share #270 Posted October 2, 2009 A lawyer's proposal for a weather sealed Leica from the last 50 years: MBROO http://www.leicashop.com/bilder/shop_gross/15864_3.jpg Yeah, but at some point you need to take it out of that contraption to actually take a picture. ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted October 2, 2009 Share #271 Posted October 2, 2009 Then how do you explain the fact that pretty much every pro level DSLR on the market for the past 10 years has been sealed? I'm sorry, but I really don't think this position makes much sense. It's like saying 'Don't build cars, because they could break'. They are not 'sealed' they utilise gaskets to 'resist' the probability of water ingress - I have seen a pro dSLR stop working due to water ingress (fortunately a night on a hot radiator sorted it although the next day it worked with condensation inside the rear lcd screen). The problem with the existing 'sealing' systems is that they are an unknown quantity as they are designed to 'resist' water entry as opposed to stop (waterproof) it. With an unsealed camera at least the user is aware that it should not get wet and precautions can be taken to ensure that it stays as dry as possible - how wet can you actually get a water resistant camera? Try googling weather sealing specifications and you will see how inadequate they really are and how they can lull people into a false sense of security. I'm fortunate. As a pro underwater photographer/videographer I have access to fully sealed systems which I use above water if required - I don't use water resistant cameras in wet conditions because I cannot judge how effective their 'seals' genuinely are. And I apply this to my 'pro' dSLRs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted October 2, 2009 Share #272 Posted October 2, 2009 Diogenis assured me over and over that a self-cleaning sensor is pointless because a Leica user never has to Photoshop dust bunnies. But there is an M8 & M9 owner in London who has a "serious issue" with sensor dust. Read his post here: M9 Review - Luminous Landscape Forum To summarize, he is delighted with the M9 and he looks forward to M10's and beyond, with more pixels to challenge the lenses and maybe other enhancements like camera based anti-shake, better weather proofing, and a self cleaning sensor. I can hear the smart replies already, so let me say now that I don't know this person, never met him, and did not ask him to write that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 2, 2009 Share #273 Posted October 2, 2009 I think the only thing which makes the camera really great is a viewfinder like the MP/M7The feel of the MP/M7.and i mean everything like silent schutter etc. and the noisereduction of a Nikon d700. I only have a M8 and a MP . I would like the M10 as described above. But i don't have the experience of a M9. Could somebody tell me if the M9 noise is at the level of an d700. Than I can sell my d700 en get really back to Leica for all my photography. Paulus. The M9 retains detail very well up to iso 2500, but iso 2500 is somewhat worse than iso 3200 on the d700 noise wise. Especially the shadows are more blocked and full of color noise, but with noise reduction, the M9 is fully usable at iso2500. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 3, 2009 Share #274 Posted October 3, 2009 Iso400, 1600 and 2500 respectively, center crop and shadow-area-crop, M9 on the left, D700 on the right, d700-files upressed to match M9 resolution: iso 400: http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162332_QdD4e-O.jpg http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162284_9XPHm-O.jpg iso 1600: http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162387_QHSJ3-O.jpg http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162454_S9pSr-O.jpg iso 2500: http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162501_9gq5u-O.jpg http://ulrikft.smugmug.com/photos/668162245_TAehs-O.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted October 3, 2009 Share #275 Posted October 3, 2009 Diogenis assured me over and over that a self-cleaning sensor is pointless because a Leica user never has to Photoshop dust bunnies. But there is an M8 & M9 owner in London who has a "serious issue" with sensor dust. Read his post here: M9 Review - Luminous Landscape Forum Yep I have and I insist! Just tell "your friend" that the m9 is under a month's old camera. He has to be a bit more patient, liquid clean the sensor 2-3 more times and after sometime he will also realize that there won't be any dust specs. To summarize, he is delighted with the M9 and he looks forward to M10's and beyond, with more pixels to challenge the lenses and maybe other enhancements like camera based anti-shake, better weather proofing, and a self cleaning sensor. I can hear the smart replies already, so let me say now that I don't know this person, never met him, and did not ask him to write that. Tell your friend that he has no reason to wait any longer: he can order a brand new d700 right here right now and he will get all these features Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 3, 2009 Share #276 Posted October 3, 2009 ...liquid clean the sensor 2-3 more times and after sometime he will also realize that there won't be any dust specs... He will have some dust specs soon or late like with any dSLR but sensors are so simple to clean that i wonder what's the point of discussing this point if no one has an agenda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogenis Posted October 3, 2009 Share #277 Posted October 3, 2009 I don't know either... I dont understand what these two are trying to prove, or what they fear, but it sure looks as if I talk to http://alice.pandorabots.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ulrikft Posted October 3, 2009 Share #278 Posted October 3, 2009 I would be delighted it people actually argued points, instead of making insinuations and weird comparisons, but no... Why would they? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted October 3, 2009 Share #279 Posted October 3, 2009 Perhaps we should all stop arguing now, people buy various cameras for various reasons, that's it really. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
george_b Posted October 3, 2009 Share #280 Posted October 3, 2009 Diogenis assured me over and over that a self-cleaning sensor is pointless /QUOTE]Dust on the sensor in ALL digital cameras is the elephant in the cupboard SFAIAC. Everyone sees the dust, everyone has to deal with, everyone accepts it but no one talks about it as something that has to resolved. IMHO all sensors need a fundamental redesign in their technology to repel dust, not attract it. Nikon, Canon etc have 'work rounds' to minimise dust and its effect (well documented) rather than getting back to the fundamental design so it is never an issue no matter how often you change a lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.