Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
My experience is similar.Yet, he favorably compares the camera to the MM for black and white...which is harder to believe from my handling of the downloaded files...
HI EdwardDid Jono mention anything about the slow start up? I didn't read all the posts but it seems to me he did not. Could it be specific to Ming's body and FW?
Agree that most that take the time to really compare will move to the new M when they feel its ready and when they can afford it .Thanks for the link OP :thumbup: - interesting reading
oh and btw - who is kidding who in here about this or that or the other thing? - all of us will end up owning one of these little puppies
check out what the bloke had to say in comparison to his D800E
Nitpicking aren't we, Steen? It gets better...
A camera reviewer who refuses to post full size images
"I won’t be posting full size images as is my standard policy; there is just too little respect for intellectual property online and poor images are rather meaningless."
Poor images ? I would rather say that web-sized images are rather meaningless in a camera review.
You certainly have a right to your opinion but you have to respect a person's right to protect their artistic property as well. It doesn't mean they're of poor quality... You can gather that much from the words written around the pictures.
A camera reviewer who refuses to post full size images
"I won’t be posting full size images as is my standard policy; there is just too little respect for intellectual property online and poor images are rather meaningless."
Poor images ? I would rather say that web-sized images are rather meaningless in a camera review.
I don't think he actually said that. He does mention 1 EV for the M but nothing about the M9. He says the M has at least 1-2 EV advantage over the M9. According to my experience with overexposed M9 files, the recoverable range is way less than 1 EV for sure. 4 EV is in no way possible.DR ...he seems be saying that the CCD M9 maps more DR into the highlights resulting in better high lights (4 EV? ) compared to the M (1 EV) but at the expense of shadow detail where the reverse mapping favors the new M .
EdI don't think he actually said that. He does mention 1 EV for the M but nothing about the M9. He says the M has at least 1-2 EV advantage over the M9. According to my experience with overexposed M9 files, the recoverable range is way less than 1 EV for sure. 4 EV is in no way possible.
Hi Roger - perhaps my reference to the reviewers Nikon D800E versus M comparison wasn't as clear as I meant.Agree that most that take the time to really compare will move to the new M when they feel its ready and when they can afford it .
Keep in mind that his comparison to the d800E is affected by two very important factors :
1. The glass ..he is using the 50 APO on the new M and Nikkors/Zeiss on his D800E .....
2. The file out of the camera is tuned to a specific color and contrast level..even in the DNG . The D800E .NEF is lower in contrast out of the camera even with Leica R glass. The Leica M file looks finished .
This is a little like comparing the D800 to the D800E ..after processing to an optimum file both are extremely close .
Sean Reid showed the his comparisons with first the actual files and then with a downsized M file to match the M9 . Really a huge difference . Take a D800E and downsize it to the same 18MP standard ...
There are plenty of great learnings in these test reports beyond a consumers reports strengths and weaknesses .
For example what are the practical limits of the new M for high ISO .....
ISO800 if you expect full color and DR and no noise reduction (in post)
IS3200 if you are speaking to acceptable (handled in post ) noise
levels .