Last edited:
dpreview: M9
- Thread starter gommy
- Start date
- Status
NorthernLights
Senior Member
That's the point I was trying to make.
The end result is key when you place two printed A3 photos side by side. The situation is ambient light and needs ISO 6400, shutter speed barely matches focal length, you need some depth of field.
The M9 (11K) can only shoot at ISO 1250 and probably use a Noctilux that costs a bomb (another$10K) wide open at f1.0 and frankly, you will not know if the area in focus is really in focus because the DOF is so thin in a low light situation.
Alternatively, use a D700 ($3.2K) and a cheaper 24-120 VR lens (>$1K) @50mm utilising 3 stops of vibration set at f4, ISO set to 6400. Or, a 5Dmk2 (>$3.8K) with 50mm f1.4 ($540)stopped down to f4 and ISO 6400.
I am very sure both the latter combos will produce better printed picture at a fraction of the cost. They are certainly more versatile because whatever the M9 can do, the latter can do and whatever the M9 cannot do, they can also do.
I am very sure I will not spend $21k to enjoy the process of photography.
I am also using DRF (M8) and have nothing against the DRF obviously. But spending >$10k on a camera with a lot of restrictions and below par performance, and having to spend even more on large aperture lenses to compensate is crazier.
I have learnt to live with the DRF and shooting certain subject matter that suits the style and the DRF fits for that purpose.
However, on the merits of this camera alone and such ISO performance, which is really key, vs price point, it is very disappointing. I am not happy with Leica's M8.2 plans as well, although I do not own one.
hookonclassic
Senior Member
I am convinced that M9 hopefully is THE "last" digital RF I will used for many years. I have a M8.2 and still enjoy shooting using this beautiful and sexy instrument more than my Nikon DSLR. Don't be mistaken that I don't use DSLR, I do and depends on the occasion of the shoot. But passionately, I love my digital M8, depending on what you are shooting, I don't even feel the need for high ISO above 640 with M mount fast glass.
Some guys only like M film body, some guy don't and some guy like me like both. Some like spicy indian cusine , some like classy french, some prefer only chinese, etc....... we are living in a complex world. If digital RF is your cup of tea, then to date, M9 may be the ideal one. If you are happy with your DSLR, stick to it and produce good picture. I find no meaning comparing racing car with a SUV/sedan, although they are cars.
Some people may buy a watch for more than 100K and some buy one for less than 10 bucks. They all tell time.
It really depends on what individual needs are..... In my opinion, Leica has hit a home run this round with the this great marketing and new product launch.
I don't care what people dislike about my camera. I only care how I would really enjoy with my camera.
yes bro, I think the barrier has finally being broken. I salute leica for this ff rf present. I dont want to draft out a long essay on red dot vs dslr. so allow me to summarize in point form:
1. leica is hand-assemble and built in germany with high qc therefore cost is extremely high.
2. leica opens up the widest array of super exotic lenses (to me this is very important. I use canon system and have many L lenses but thats about it. I always wonder "the other side" - nikon that is. of course you can get adapters for all major lenses for dslr but in all honesty, they are all so corrected and performances are so near, its getting boring to me after shooting awhile)
3. we must aknowledge that 1Ds series of cameras are VERY well built even by japanese and went through the highest qc in Japan too.
4. all dslr are work horses, low light performance will beat leica hands down at a fraction of a cost.
5. m9 is cheap by any leica standard. its ff rf with a red dot for goodness. smallest digital unit you can find in the market. I would expect the price to be 20k?!!? ow much does the 1ds3 cost when it first launch?
6. leica should not be compared directly with dslr. I will think it is more suitable for artistic expression for example, a classic b&w portrait job for a book author in this case a dslr will be too "clean" and "corrected" as a leica can use old classic pre-war lenses, less perfect for this job. for a football match, a dslr with a tele-lens with fast fps, there is no competition.
7. leica is the only camera with shutter you can trigger safely in a library.
8. iso 640 plus f1.0 is not enough for dark alley kind of low light. f1.4 at 3200 is. f1.0 is not god.
I have people comparing the IQ of 1ds3 pictures with phaseone and I think its a joke. Same thing goes on here, dslr and rf are never meant to be compared. they are 2 different system, yes you cannot compare a lx3 picture with a m8 too right?
some like half-cup some like full-cup. life is a joy in discovering new things. I honestly will be bored to death if i can only shoot with my canon. and i will be frustrated to death if i can only use my leica for commercial work. the line is getting thinner by m9 but there is still a line of difference.
Can we have some low light m8/8.2 pictures here to convince?
Last edited:
Okay here is my 2 cents worth...
Leica can never be position together with canon/nikon/hasselblad/fuji/sony/panasonic/olympus...
If you want a premium lifestyle camera that can make you feel good while taking pictures as a hobby, leica is definitely for you.
But if you want a workhorse tool that performs tiredlessly and not worrying about getting even just a hairline scratch on your camera body, then go the the rest...
In the past leica dominated and was the only tool any professional photographer preference of choice when it comes to camera.... today it is different...
And I dont think you can find any old leica which was actually being used day in and day out and still in good shape... because in those times, they are being used as a tool...today it is different...
Today leica has all sorts of marketing gimmicks and drives... that results in limited editions white body, safari body... do you see that in a 1Ds or D3?
Oh yeah and the ala carte program... enough said...
All these are to satisfy the leica purists and this is also what leica choose to position itself these days...
But I do want a MP with a slux or cron 50mm and I will use it like a tool day in and day out like how I use my pentax K1000...
Leica can never be position together with canon/nikon/hasselblad/fuji/sony/panasonic/olympus...
If you want a premium lifestyle camera that can make you feel good while taking pictures as a hobby, leica is definitely for you.
But if you want a workhorse tool that performs tiredlessly and not worrying about getting even just a hairline scratch on your camera body, then go the the rest...
In the past leica dominated and was the only tool any professional photographer preference of choice when it comes to camera.... today it is different...
And I dont think you can find any old leica which was actually being used day in and day out and still in good shape... because in those times, they are being used as a tool...today it is different...
Today leica has all sorts of marketing gimmicks and drives... that results in limited editions white body, safari body... do you see that in a 1Ds or D3?
Oh yeah and the ala carte program... enough said...
All these are to satisfy the leica purists and this is also what leica choose to position itself these days...
But I do want a MP with a slux or cron 50mm and I will use it like a tool day in and day out like how I use my pentax K1000...
Last edited:
Bro i like how you describe it..
keke
Size of the CCD matters..
D3x still cant come side by side to just P20
just need to know their limits
isnt it about C, D, E or G instead of half or full cup?
;p:sweatsm:
hookonclassic
Senior Member
Some sample downloadable high ISO file from M9 user posted here.
http://gallery.me.com/jackson.robert.rex#100391&view=grid&bgcolor=black&sel=3
Check it out.
http://gallery.me.com/jackson.robert.rex#100391&view=grid&bgcolor=black&sel=3
Check it out.
I am a Leica wannabeBut I think I won't be able to afford in on the near term.
Just one curious question. Why is Leica still sticking to CCD, while the X1 is using CMOS? I would have thought CMOS would give better noise control.
CCD are cheaper compared to CMOS. The noise control is terrible but tonality is excellent as pixels are charged as whole and output as voltage and then reversed as storage data. CMOS on the other hand requires every single pixel to charge for output resulting in low uniformity in image but lower voltage consumption that results in less heat that results in less noise in image. Of course all these plus for CMOS cannot occur without a cleverly designed chip that will eventually make the cost go higher.
Leica have superb high-speed optics that doesn't require the photographer to go high iso. 640iso is more than enough for most occasion. So they rather opt for a cheaper option that can give them unsurpassed uniformity in image output. This only make sense to the company else the M9 will cost 15k.
Why X1 uses CMOS? Because of the low speed and inferior lens. They reckon they will win the war in noise control over the 4/3 systems which has always been the problem. And of course they will. Major.
Last edited:
hookonclassic
Senior Member
For those interested in M9, I personally find the review from Sean Reid on this subject in depth and interesting, but require subscription fee of USD 32.95/year.
http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/
See what other said in L Camera Forum, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/97444-seans-been-busy.html before subscribing.
http://www.reidreviews.com/reidreviews/
See what other said in L Camera Forum, http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/97444-seans-been-busy.html before subscribing.
Personally, I'd love the M9, but will probably have to settle for the X1.
A review from a friend:
http://reviews.photographyreview.com/blog/hands-on-at-the-leica-m9-press-intro/
A review from a friend:
http://reviews.photographyreview.com/blog/hands-on-at-the-leica-m9-press-intro/
the feel of a leica, the fun of shooting with a range finder, the look of the leica M with a 50/2 or any other leica lens...its estasy.
such things cant never be benchmark against money. canon or nikon full frame can give you better photo etc(btw i am nikon user) but when you hold to a leica M. suddenly you find yourself thinking of good things to say...
its like saying why buy a ferrari when you can buy a toyota 7-seater that can fetch more people, send more goods or use less petrol.7-seater is better than a sports car? let just say that i cant afford both, thus a practical solution is best at present.
such things cant never be benchmark against money. canon or nikon full frame can give you better photo etc(btw i am nikon user) but when you hold to a leica M. suddenly you find yourself thinking of good things to say...
its like saying why buy a ferrari when you can buy a toyota 7-seater that can fetch more people, send more goods or use less petrol.7-seater is better than a sports car? let just say that i cant afford both, thus a practical solution is best at present.
if you really like the 'process', you should be shooting M+film and not digital M. What process is there in the latter? The process of point and shoot?
i think the price will drop for sure, just be patient. 2 years down the road it'll just be another old hag waiting to be stock cleared.
i think the price will drop for sure, just be patient. 2 years down the road it'll just be another old hag waiting to be stock cleared.
I think the question here is the price tag. If I can well afford it, I will choose Leica. The reason is simply the asthetic feel of the lens and the camera classical design. Furthermore, it is undisputed that the quality of the lenses is of the highest possible.
NOise is not an issue if I am shooting B&W most of the time; The photos could even look better if there is some noise in it. Unless u are shooting a lot of night shots, it is not an issue at all.
A little limitation in life will slow things a little, so much so that it provides u the pleasure of taking the time to create a beautiful picture/pierce of art.
NOise is not an issue if I am shooting B&W most of the time; The photos could even look better if there is some noise in it. Unless u are shooting a lot of night shots, it is not an issue at all.
A little limitation in life will slow things a little, so much so that it provides u the pleasure of taking the time to create a beautiful picture/pierce of art.
i like it how chris weeks commented on how he feels on using a rangefinder for street photography. mind you, he's been there done there with his access to top end gear (1DsIII and 5DII).
he commented that people who try to put down RF for street work down typically answered 'no' to ever trying RF for street work.
in truth, the digital rangefinder is a specific beast for a particular type of photography. its not for everyone even if they can afford it.
he commented that people who try to put down RF for street work down typically answered 'no' to ever trying RF for street work.
in truth, the digital rangefinder is a specific beast for a particular type of photography. its not for everyone even if they can afford it.
snits
Member
well said!!!!:thumbsup:
- Status
Similar threads
