Reichmann's M9 field report live now.

[ceflynn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ironically, it was a German theologian, Dietrich von Hildebrand, who noted that when we fail to appreciate the value of other people's work, we reveal a character defect in ourselves.

 

The secular version of this insight involves a story recounted in Art News magazine. A wonderful article included interviews with guards at some of the world's leading museums. A guard at the Louvre recalled a woman who said that she did not like some of the paintings. His reply: "The paintings are not on trial, madam. You are."

[Advertisement]

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

[ho_co]

Of course, it is the high quality of the comments that make [Greenspun's] blog worth reading.

:D I don't know about the rest of the blog, but the page you cited shows neither wit nor insight nor even basic understanding of what Leica is about.

 

"Canon and Nikon do things differently from Leica." Well, duhh...

 

Now if he could internalize that and try to understand it, he might be able to understand Reichmann's review.

 

 

 

Ironically, it was a German theologian, Dietrich von Hildebrand, who noted that when we fail to appreciate the value of other people's work, we reveal a character defect in ourselves.

"Ironically"? Please help. I don't see the irony.

 

Interesting that Hildebrand noted that. I thought the insight was already recognized by the Buddha?

[ceflynn]

If you read all the comments on the page, you will see many that contradict the original posting by Phil Greenspun. Some of them were written by people who seem to know what differentiates Leica from its competitors.

 

I made no claim about whether Buddha or Dietrich von Hildebrand was first with the observation about the value of other people's work. Dietrich von Hildebrand would no doubt note that all truth is a unity, which comes from Christ, who does not possess the truth, but who is the Truth.

[KM-25]

One of the things Leica glass is famous for is drawing specific combinations of light and specularity in wonderful, nearly 3-D manners of color and contrast. I have yet to see that in a single M9 image...

 

That baffles me..

 

And I know it is not the camera's fault.

[ceflynn]

If you search on the page at:

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/m9-paris.shtml

 

for the word:

 

dimensional

 

the second hit refers to this property of Leica lenses. Michael Reichmann does not express any disappointment with regard to this aspect of Leica performance when the lenses are used with the M9.

 

I know what you mean, and I have not seen much of this advantage in the samples I have seen on the Web so far. But the camera is new, and the Web may not do it complete justice. There was a remarkable photo of the interior of the Pantheon in these forums a few months ago. When I look at it, I see something special that other cameras rarely provide.

[scott kirkpatrick]

this blog posting by a professor of computer science at MIT:

 

 

No, not a professor at MIT, although he organized and taught a course at MIT on website design very early on that was influential. He's also a founder of a flying club at Hanscomb field and instructs in helicopters. Also, of course, the founder of photo.net. In short, a jack-of-all-trades.

 

To me it is interesting that long and frequent contact with Leica aficionados has caused him to adopt a posture of high snarkiness, just as Michael Johnston has also done. What does that say about both of them? Or about us?

 

scott

[GMB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A good chef can make a tastier steak from the supermarket than an average chef can do with the finest Kobi cut.

 

Wrong. If the ingredient is not good, the end product cannot be good. A good cook my be able to cover the bad product, but he or she can never produce something really good. A bad cook, though, can destroy even the best product. Not sure it has something to with picture making though, as I think a good post processor can make more out of a technically bad RAW file than a good cook can make out of a bad product.

[markowich]

hard to see what one can learn from this review except that mr reichmann should get the AF of his canon 5D mark II checked or shape up his AF technique.

peter

[ho_co]

One of the things Leica glass is famous for is drawing specific combinations of light and specularity in wonderful, nearly 3-D manners of color and contrast. I have yet to see that in a single M9 image...

 

I'm curious whether you've found this kind of drawing in other brands, or whether you've found it at all in digital?

 

I ask because I think that somehow digital has changed a lot of things we didn't expect.

[tom0511]

.... That said, I have little respect for someone who calls himself a pro and then compares a Leica rangefinder to a Canon D-SLR. It's like comparing a Nissan Mizmo with an Armada....

 

As far as I understood it he did not compare the cameras but just the IQ - whats wrong about this?

Anybody knows the difference between a rangefinder and a DSLR.

And many also understand that there is -besides differences-also some overlap where you could use or type of camera.

[ceflynn]

Scott,

 

Thanks for the correct about Phil Greenspun. I first became aware of him years ago, when he reviewed audio equipment.

[nhabedi]

Thanks for the correct about Phil Greenspun.

 

Greenspun wrote a successful book and founded an IT company, both in the second half of the 90s. The book was interesting and influental at that time and it showed that Greenspun was a guy who was intelligent and funny, but also loudmouthed and swank - also demonstrated by the Ferrari in front of his company and other stuff.

 

The company went downhill after the dotcom crash (see for example here for details), but its demise apparently left at least Greenspun with enough money so that he can now do what he wants. He seems to like costly hobbies like flying, fast cars, and photography, and he also likes writing about them, usually in a style where the punchline is more important than the content.

 

Even though he once started photo.net, I wouldn't take his opinions about photography more seriously than those of any other amateur shooter. Maybe even less so - in spite of all his ramblings about cameras I have yet to see one photo from him that I really like. (And if you're reading his IT books and articles you're actually forced to look at them.)

[delander †]

hard to see what one can learn from this review except that mr reichmann should get the AF of his canon 5D mark II checked or shape up his AF technique.

peter

 

I liked his review but I agree he should get his Canon (1ds3) crop in focus.

 

Jeff

[Guest EarlBurrellPhoto]

Wrong. If the ingredient is not good, the end product cannot be good. A good cook my be able to cover the bad product, but he or she can never produce something really good. A bad cook, though, can destroy even the best product. Not sure it has something to with picture making though, as I think a good post processor can make more out of a technically bad RAW file than a good cook can make out of a bad product.

 

Sorry to say but your rambling shows only that you either missed the point or purposely misconstrued it for the sake of disagreeing. In the case of a Canon 1DS-III vs a Leica M9 we are not talking about bad vs good (despite a few outlying fringe fanaticists who might be silly enough to do that), rather comparing two very goods looking for a winner. In that regard postprocessing plays an even greater role. However to understand and agree with that, you have to consider my other, and more relevant point (which you conveniently ignored, for whatever reason): what is important in the world of professional photography is the end product, be that a print or a print-ready file. Comparing raw files at 100% on a monitor in order to declare a winner between cameras is a passtime of amateurs engaging in the mine-is-bigger show-and-tell of internet forums. A pro considering equipment choices is not (or shouldn't be...not everyone who has business cards printed that say he's a pro has his priorities straight) affected by files that are in a state the client will never see.

[johnbuckley]

Dear Mr. Burrell, your insulting tone in regard to Michael Reichmann and now other people on this forum is offensive. There are a lot of people on the forum with strong points of view, and sometimes feelings are expressed sharply. But your put-down of Reichmann, whose work is known here (yours isn't), and now GMB is rude. Go be a troll someplace else.

[larry]

Sorry to say but your rambling shows only that you either missed the point or purposely misconstrued it for the sake of disagreeing. In the case of a Canon 1DS-III vs a Leica M9 we are not talking about bad vs good (despite a few outlying fringe fanaticists who might be silly enough to do that), rather comparing two very goods looking for a winner. In that regard postprocessing plays an even greater role. However to understand and agree with that, you have to consider my other, and more relevant point (which you conveniently ignored, for whatever reason): what is important in the world of professional photography is the end product, be that a print or a print-ready file. Comparing raw files at 100% on a monitor in order to declare a winner between cameras is a passtime of amateurs engaging in the mine-is-bigger show-and-tell of internet forums. A pro considering equipment choices is not (or shouldn't be...not everyone who has business cards printed that say he's a pro has his priorities straight) affected by files that are in a state the client will never see.

 

You're not making points or friends. If you'd make an attempt to be constructive, helpful and enlightening instead of confrontational, insulting and bitter, your POV might have some credibility.

[stevme]

I think we've reached the point in this "discussion" where an adult beverage might be in order!

 

I thought Reichman was trying to give expression to the relationship among the photographer, tools and the art of photography. Obviously, Leica's latest adds something to the mix. I was going to attempt a more scholarly response to the comments here and looked up some of my history of photography notes. Too much work. Nevertheless, as I did so, it quickly became apparent, as if I had forgotten in the excitement of this new camera, that very great photographic images can be made with some very primitive tools like, say, the calotype process. William Fox Talbot anyone? There are a lot of great images made long before rangefinder photography, as you must all know. From this perspective, and I believe it is the most important one, one particular tool or other takes on distinctly secondary importance.

 

Too often, it seems to me, although it is, of course, to be expected in a forum of this sort, individuals here seem to be chasing the holy grail of the perfect tool, rather than the perfect art, if there is such a thing. It is true that rangefinders can involve you more in the picture taking process, like having to focus, for instance, or zoom with your feet, than other tools from Japan. But this doesn't necessarily make your art any better.

 

I think the M9 advances the rangefinder tool, and Reichman's piece was trying to remind us of its place in the photographic process. When, if ever, I can afford it, I surely plan to pick up an M9 (or maybe it will be the M10 by then).

 

Now I will soon have that beverage! My work is here: http://www.freespacesjournal.com.

 

Steve

[Tony Wright]

[quote name=stevme;1062588

 

I think the M9 advances the rangefinder tool' date=' and Reichman's piece was trying to remind us of its place in the photographic process. When, if ever, I can afford it, I surely plan to pick up an M9 (or maybe it will be the M10 by then).

 

Now I will soon have that beverage! My work is here: http://www.freespacesjournal.com.

 

Steve[/quote]

 

nice work Steve! I have to agree with your sentiments. I've looked around for a better digital rangefinder camera than the M9 but can't see one at the moment - I think I'll order one. If a better one turns up while I'm waiting I can always cancel the order.

 

Tony

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[tashley]

I agree with John Buckley's comments.

 

If you would like to see just how questionable an assessment of the M9 can be, take a look at this blog posting by a professor of computer science at MIT:

 

Philip Greenspun’s Weblog The Leica M9, one for the marketing textbooks

 

Of course, it is the high quality of the comments that make this blog worth reading.

 

Man, I left a comment on his blog to the effect that his 'analysis' was trite and ill-informed and demonstrated why paid content on the internet may have a chance after all (and I also made some serious points, such as that all current MF back manufacturers use CCD, which he describes as 'what Japanese companies were using 10-15 years ago')

 

Guess what? He deleted it. What a prat!

 

T

[sean_reid]

Man, I left a comment on his blog to the effect that his 'analysis' was trite and ill-informed and demonstrated why paid content on the internet may have a chance after all (and I also made some serious points, such as that all current MF back manufacturers use CCD, which he describes as 'what Japanese companies were using 10-15 years ago')

 

Guess what? He deleted it. What a prat!

 

T

 

I've never posted much on Photo.net (have no strong feelings about it one way or another) but its worth keeping in mind that many of the blogs, etc. publish as they like, edit posts when they want to and remove (or censor) comments as desired.

 

It reminds me to always keep in mind that a given blog, web site, etc. may be presenting only one side of a coin (even when many voices are supposedly speaking) and that comments which support the publisher's points of view are much more likely to be published than those that do not. There are some forums (not this one) that operate in much the same way.

 

So when we see a given point of view published on a blog, web site, or forum (which is then followed by lots of comments that seem to support it) we may well be looking at "all the news that's print to fit". It sometimes creates the impression of broad agreement when the reality is not so uniform.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

P.S. - I just looked at Philip Greenspun's post and its basically one version of a perspective one encounters often. Those who think of RF cameras as antiquated devices with no particular advantages tend to be skeptical of the M8, the M9, the M10 (when it comes) etc. His comments are a variation on comments I've heard for years about RF cameras in general. If an RF camera's advantages hold no interest for a given photographer then it's only natural that he or she might prefer the various DSLRs. It's a debate that's decades old and can never be resolved in any general way.