Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 31 of 31

Thread: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

  1. #1
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I feel I need to write this here:
    Having used M6, RD1 and then M8/M9 (and many DSLRs from various brands).
    The M9 (and the M8 is pretty close IMO) is the near perfect camera for me.
    I have tried all kind of DSLRs, M4/3 ETC but I allways come back to the conclusion that for me the M9 is near perfect.
    why?
    1) IQ - for some reason I just prefer the IQ of the CCD of the M8 and M9 over the cmos from Nikon/Canon/Pentax. Even though colors are maybe sometimes a little tricky the clarity and microdetail of the images is superior for my taste.
    Noise is not the great over 1000ISo but then you have lenses which are fully usable at f1.4 to compensate.

    2) Size: camera and lenses much smaller than most DSLRs - you can bring it nearly everywhere (Big plus)

    3)Handling: great. simple user interface, nice viewfinder (specially for 35 and 50mm which I like a lot)

    4) Focus: you need some patience and eventually send lenses in for calibration but once you have the right lenses it works very well. I get at least as precise focus with my M9 than with all DSLRs I have tried (except maybe Nikon which offers the best AF IMO).

    5) Lenses: just amazing what lens options you have if you are a prime shooter. Many of them fully usable at f1.4. Sharp, nice bokeh, good contrast and color and small. ALso many options from Leica, Zeiss, Voigtländer and others.
    Sliding hoods make the small lenses even more portable.

    The only downside I see are the limitation regarding tele and sometimes AF would be nice for action. However I much prefer a precise rangefinder about a not so precise AF. Still a fast and precise AF (ala Nikon D3 or D700) allows to shoot some things which you cant get (reliable) without Af. And its expensive (but with stable value and very good used market)

    Thank you Leica!

  2. #2
    Workshop Member ptomsu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Austria, close to Vienna
    Posts
    3,867
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    I feel I need to write this here:
    Having used M6, RD1 and then M8/M9 (and many DSLRs from various brands).
    The M9 (and the M8 is pretty close IMO) is the near perfect camera for me.
    I have tried all kind of DSLRs, M4/3 ETC but I allways come back to the conclusion that for me the M9 is near perfect.
    why?
    1) IQ - for some reason I just prefer the IQ of the CCD of the M8 and M9 over the cmos from Nikon/Canon/Pentax. Even though colors are maybe sometimes a little tricky the clarity and microdetail of the images is superior for my taste.
    Noise is not the great over 1000ISo but then you have lenses which are fully usable at f1.4 to compensate.

    2) Size: camera and lenses much smaller than most DSLRs - you can bring it nearly everywhere (Big plus)

    3)Handling: great. simple user interface, nice viewfinder (specially for 35 and 50mm which I like a lot)

    4) Focus: you need some patience and eventually send lenses in for calibration but once you have the right lenses it works very well. I get at least as precise focus with my M9 than with all DSLRs I have tried (except maybe Nikon which offers the best AF IMO).

    5) Lenses: just amazing what lens options you have if you are a prime shooter. Many of them fully usable at f1.4. Sharp, nice bokeh, good contrast and color and small. ALso many options from Leica, Zeiss, Voigtländer and others.
    Sliding hoods make the small lenses even more portable.

    The only downside I see are the limitation regarding tele and sometimes AF would be nice for action. However I much prefer a precise rangefinder about a not so precise AF. Still a fast and precise AF (ala Nikon D3 or D700) allows to shoot some things which you cant get (reliable) without Af. And its expensive (but with stable value and very good used market)

    Thank you Leica!
    I agree!

    After sending my K5 back and rethinking lot of my cameras, I decided to finally go for the M9 (after the more than 1 year abstinence after my M8) and make my M lenses fly again. Especially my 1.4's and my 1.0 Nocti

    And for the rest use my Nikon (currently D700) and my H3D39.

    Cheers

    Peter

  3. #3
    Subscriber Member jaapv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    250

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    You have to rethink the statement about noise. We ( the users on various forums, in long threads) have figured out the technique for clean ISO 2500..
    JAAP
    http://www.jaapvphotography.eu
    The colours of my generation are black and white.

  4. #4
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Hi Tom
    Quite in agreement, except that I think the increased clarity is more due to the lack of AA filter rather than the CCD vs CMOS situation.

    Agree with Jaap about the noise. He's done a great FAQ at LUF (although I missed information on Aperture rather than Lightroom.

    Still think there's a place for other cameras, even if it's onle for macro and telephoto.

    All the best

    Just this guy you know

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    If needed I also use up to max. Limit.
    However I allways found ISO1000 and lower much more unproblematic.
    I have to read those threads. Thank you for the hint!

    Of course there are things where other cameras work better - sports, action, wildlife.

    I also could still se a place for a K2 ah S5 or what was it again?

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post

    I also could still se a place for a K2 ah S5 or what was it again?

    Don't mention the wares

    Just this guy you know

  7. #7
    Subscriber Member jaapv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    250

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Thanks, Jono. I didn't include Aperture because the noise control is not nearly as good as that of ACR 6. I also find that it struggles with the high edge contrast of the AA filterless sensors of Leica, creating more color aliasing than other RAW converters. There have been a number of examples over the Internet.
    JAAP
    http://www.jaapvphotography.eu
    The colours of my generation are black and white.

  8. #8
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    OK.. I am not a Leica user... but i do live with one... and have used one ...and while i totally accept that the choice of camera is absolutely entirely personal I do have to speak out in response

    1) IQ... the lenses make nice pictures.. sensors are a constantly moving platform...I care more about the quality of the image than the image quality... thats just me .. your priories may differ

    2/3) Size and handling in my opinion are awful... the body is too big and is ergonomically only usable to me with a third party Thumbs up. Time to show a image on the LCD is lamentable. The fact you cant see shutter speed in VF in Manual is a a silly oversight... all in all it gives me the impression of a company that was dragged kicking and screaming to the digital age

    4) Focus... well here we enter a odd place...I fully get the whole rangefinder paradigm...I can make it work.... though i never really got the outside the frame thing...but i can live with that... what i dont get is the dance that seems to happen to get the rangefinder and the dioptre and the lens to somehow work in harmony without a man from Solms...

    5) Lenses are stunning... I will not dispute that... but nothing beyond 90mm and focussing closer than 0.7m are a odd set of restrictions in my world.

    If it is the perfect camera for you then all the best to you... but my view is that it is a very fine camera when all is in harmony,,, but like a supermodel does seem to be awfully high maintenance.


    everything above has been written in the spirit of genuine debate.. all opinions are mine and mine alone, and as such hopefully will not get me in too much trouble :-)

    For the record i shoot entirely for my own pleasure on Olympus e-p1, 510 and Canon 5D Mk2 with all sorts of native and legacy lenses... including Leica


    peace and a happy new year when it comes

    K

  9. #9
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by kevinparis View Post
    OK.. I am not a Leica user... but i do live with one... and have used one ...and while i totally accept that the choice of camera is absolutely entirely personal I do have to speak out in response

    1) IQ... the lenses make nice pictures.. sensors are a constantly moving platform...I care more about the quality of the image than the image quality... thats just me .. your priories may differ

    2/3) Size and handling in my opinion are awful... the body is too big and is ergonomically only usable to me with a third party Thumbs up. Time to show a image on the LCD is lamentable. The fact you cant see shutter speed in VF in Manual is a a silly oversight... all in all it gives me the impression of a company that was dragged kicking and screaming to the digital age

    4) Focus... well here we enter a odd place...I fully get the whole rangefinder paradigm...I can make it work.... though i never really got the outside the frame thing...but i can live with that... what i dont get is the dance that seems to happen to get the rangefinder and the dioptre and the lens to somehow work in harmony without a man from Solms...

    5) Lenses are stunning... I will not dispute that... but nothing beyond 90mm and focussing closer than 0.7m are a odd set of restrictions in my world.

    If it is the perfect camera for you then all the best to you... but my view is that it is a very fine camera when all is in harmony,,, but like a supermodel does seem to be awfully high maintenance.


    everything above has been written in the spirit of genuine debate.. all opinions are mine and mine alone, and as such hopefully will not get me in too much trouble :-)

    For the record i shoot entirely for my own pleasure on Olympus e-p1, 510 and Canon 5D Mk2 with all sorts of native and legacy lenses... including Leica


    peace and a happy new year when it comes

    K
    Hi Kevin,
    I just respond to your points:
    1) Yes sensor technology is moving but I can only tell about what existst today and what I have prefered over the last years and I find do prefer the image quality I gor from my M8 and get from the M9 slightly over that from my Nikon D700.

    Regarding "quality of he image" vs "image quality": I hear this sentence constantly and my answer is: I care about both. I dont see any reason why people who care a lot about image quality should care any less about the quality of the images.

    2/3)
    I guess size is indeed a personal thing and while it works well for me it seems to not wokr for you. I dont understand why you find it too big/ which alternatives do you have regarding smaller cameras?
    I agree your point regarding missing exp in vewfinder when using M, but I use A 90% anyways so I can live with it (still would prefer to have it).

    4) Sending lenses in for eventuall calibration can indeed be a pain.
    On the other side the experience I have with other brands lenses is not any better. Decentered/ not sharp on one side, and I had several lenses from Nikon and Canon in the past which I had to send in or exchange to get a good sample. So I would say even for all brands. Better quality control would be highly appreciated.

    5) Yes, lens range is restricted regarding focal length(by the way there is a nice Macro lens as well which does go much closer than 0.7m)
    Not a camera for someone who often likes to shoot Tele. Thats why I also like to have a DSLR for those times when longer than 135mm is needed. (I my case mainly for sports or action)

    Your answer does show me again how personal the choice of the "right" camera is. I occasionally use a E-P2 and while I like it I allways feel that it is somewhat overloaded with (confusing) functions. On one vacation I brought the M8 and the E-P2 with M adapter but found out quickly that I much prefer the viewfinder and the handling of the Rangefinder camera.(And you found out the opposite for yourself)
    (Still think the M4/3 deliever great IQ/flexibility and a very good value)
    I am sure the combo of a 5DII and the M4/3 offers great flexibility for all kinds of photographic tasks. I am also convinced for me that I can shoot 80-90% of what I do like with the M9 and 3 lenses (even though I admit I have some more lenses).
    Thanks for your answer -I find some exchange of preferances and opinions regarding user interface makes threads like this more interesting and usefull Tom

  10. #10
    Senior Member kevinparis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    919
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    tom

    thank you for taking the time to respond to my rant - I fully respect your opinions and wish you many happy images in 2011

    cheers
    K

  11. #11
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
    Thanks, Jono. I didn't include Aperture because the noise control is not nearly as good as that of ACR 6. I also find that it struggles with the high edge contrast of the AA filterless sensors of Leica, creating more color aliasing than other RAW converters. There have been a number of examples over the Internet.
    Each to his own I guess - sometimes there is colour aliasing, but I've made consistent comparisons . . . . and on several occasions considered changing - but I've always come back to aperture as doing best all things considered. On the rare (very rare) occasions I actually want to do any noise control - I'd rather use Nik anyway. For me the local adjustment tools in Aperture, together with CA controls seem to work much better.

    Nothing is perfect I guess

    Just this guy you know

  12. #12
    Subscriber Member jaapv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    250

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Jono - I know, discussing postprocessing programs and raw converters is like discussing developers in the film days. Everybody has his own preferences and the only thing that counts is the result However, this new ACR 6.0, I used to be a staunch C1 fan, but now... I switched computers and OS and I did not even bother to change my C1 5 pro license to Mac - don't use it any more. Went through some withdrawal symptoms, but there you are.
    JAAP
    http://www.jaapvphotography.eu
    The colours of my generation are black and white.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    90
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Compared to upcoming SD1

    I'll be looking forward to seeing comparisons with the upcoming Sigma SD1 15MP X3 Foveon sensor.

    With no need for demosaicing and no AA filter, we could be looking at the equivalent of a bayer 30+ MP from an APS-C sensor with micro-contrast and edge sharpness as good as it can get.

    I probably won't be getting one (nor a M9) but the contest should be interesting....

  14. #14
    Subscriber Member jaapv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    770
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    250

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    It won't be a contest - the cameras are too different in concept. It is not just about pixels - the using of the camera is much more important.
    JAAP
    http://www.jaapvphotography.eu
    The colours of my generation are black and white.

  15. #15
    Senior Member johnnygoesdigital's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    1,579
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I am close to purchasing an M9, I absolutely love rangefinders! However, I just found an M6 (analog) in a local camera store. It's 9.5 out of 10 with a Summicron 50mm f/2, all in near perfect condition for $900. I probably should wait for the M9, but this is tempting!

  16. #16
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by johnnygoesdigital View Post
    I am close to purchasing an M9, I absolutely love rangefinders! However, I just found an M6 (analog) in a local camera store. It's 9.5 out of 10 with a Summicron 50mm f/2, all in near perfect condition for $900. I probably should wait for the M9, but this is tempting!
    I would say thats a very good price and I would assume if you sell the M6 later than you would have a Summicron for a good price.

  17. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    422
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    t_streng

    Do you feel strongly enough about the M9 that you'd consider a dSLR like a Pentax K5 unnecessary?

    Mike

  18. #18
    Senior Member Jason Muelver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    653
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I shoot with both my M8 and Nikon fx gear professionally. Each has its place, and I actually find them complimentary when accepting the limitations and taking advantage of the strengths inherent in each system.
    http://jasonedwardphoto.com http://jasonmuelver.tumblr.com
    Nikon FX, Leica M8, Mamiya 645, Canon F-1

  19. #19
    Subscriber Member Chuck Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Studio City, CA
    Posts
    700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I guess I've had my M9 long enough now to also comment.

    To put it simply, I must agree. This is just about all the camera and lens outfit I need for about 90% of the professional work I do. For the rest, I intend to just rent when more is necessary. I feel so strongly about this, I am going to the Buy & Sell after writing this to list my D700 & the one remaining lens I still have. I haven't used this body since buying the M9, though I will admit I did feel the need to keep it before upgrading from an M8. That crop factor was just a killer for anything wide with the M8 for me, even with a 21mm.

    The Nikon D700 is an awesome high ISO beast, and is full frame, which the M8 was not. But the files from Nikon, Canon, and all the rest just leave me wanting more. Probably spoiled after shooting MF for so many years, and four digital backs later. But with careful post processing, I am realizing image quality that is so far superior (yea, at a much higher cost!) that I simply can not deal with having to mix the post processing from multiple cameras anymore. The look from the M9 and the Leica glass says it all. I'm in photographic heaven

  20. #20
    Senior Subscriber Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    San Francisco, CA
    Posts
    1,306
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I agree Chuck, the results are excellent. However, as opposed to you I did just add a DSLR again, but mainly for reach... an A850 with a 70-300 G lens. Also a Zeiss 24-70/2.8 to make it useful on its own and as a backup. I don't expect that much from it, and don't know how much I'll use it, but occasionally there's just no alternative to reach.

    The M9 is to me what the Mamiya 7 used to be - the tool of choice for almost anything I do. The wide angle lens selection is fantastic. I plan to sell off the Mammy (didn't think I'd ever say that) to see if I can help fund a second M9 body.

    The only drawback with the M9 I think is the RF is a little fragile and easily knocked out of calibration (mine is waiting for a vertical adjustment trip to Steve Zhou in LA). I knocked mine out of vertical alignment after about a week on the road. Also, not sure about the frankenfinder; mine's really loose in the foot and needs to go to Leica. Might be too fragile for real-world use. (But a CV 21 finder is just fine and is what I switched to.)

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by MCTuomey View Post
    t_streng

    Do you feel strongly enough about the M9 that you'd consider a dSLR like a Pentax K5 unnecessary?

    Mike
    To be honest - for me personally: no

    I have a small daughter, and I do like sports. So sometimes I feel the need to be able to use a 70-200/2.8 ish lens and AF.
    Also sometimes when I need to just get fast and reliable images I prefer a Nikon and a zoom and a flash.

    Now on the other side on my 2,5 weeks summer vacation I just brought the M9 with some lenses and the x1 and didntmiss anything.
    So I would say it depends what you plan to "shoot".

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    2,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    52

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    I am a tad forensic in my self analysis. I do a yearly review of how many shots I have bothered to make and keep and print. I have been silly enough to collect far too many cameras and lenses I care to talk about - because quite seriously I am embarrassed. I bought an M9 in February last year - when one became available.

    Since that time I have made over 80% of my shots with the camera using 7 different lenses - but the great majority with the 50 lux I picked up at the same time to add to my 50mm collection - it seems to be the focal length that suits me the best. So useage means it is the best camera for me - and a lot of other stuff is gathering dust.

    I note the following minor issues.

    Accessories: I do need a thumbs up and it a most perfect device, I also believe that one should invest in one of those screw in buttons that go on top of the shutter release and I think a Luigi case is mandatory - especially the type that has access for card and battery

    Post Processing: The M9 delivers files which require the least amount of post processing - compared to my Nikon D3 which requires extensive work - too much actually. I use Aperture/Lightroom/C1 and Adobe - and cant see much difference between any of them.

    Lenses: It all depends on what type of shooting one does- but I rarely go longer than a 50mm or wider than 21mm. The 75 Elmarit is a very under rated lens.

    So I guess my own usage and experience suggests to me that the M9 is my favourite camera too. It will be interesting to see if this remains the case when I get an S2.

  23. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    422
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by t_streng View Post
    To be honest - for me personally: no

    I have a small daughter, and I do like sports. So sometimes I feel the need to be able to use a 70-200/2.8 ish lens and AF.
    Also sometimes when I need to just get fast and reliable images I prefer a Nikon and a zoom and a flash.

    Now on the other side on my 2,5 weeks summer vacation I just brought the M9 with some lenses and the x1 and didntmiss anything.
    So I would say it depends what you plan to "shoot".
    Thanks for responding, t_streng. I appreciate your point of view, not owning an M9 myself. What seems interesting is that some M9 users report that they feel comfortable selling their medium format film equipment after spending time with the Leica. On the other hand, like you, I shoot sports and, as long as I do so, will need a fast dSLR and a long tele lens, no question. But otherwise, it could just be an M9 and a couple lenses ...

  24. #24
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by jaapv View Post
    You have to rethink the statement about noise. We ( the users on various forums, in long threads) have figured out the technique for clean ISO 2500..
    Do share those conclusions please!

    -Marc

  25. #25
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    3,623
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterA View Post
    I am a tad forensic in my self analysis. I do a yearly review of how many shots I have bothered to make and keep and print. I have been silly enough to collect far too many cameras and lenses I care to talk about - because quite seriously I am embarrassed. I bought an M9 in February last year - when one became available.

    Since that time I have made over 80% of my shots with the camera using 7 different lenses - but the great majority with the 50 lux I picked up at the same time to add to my 50mm collection - it seems to be the focal length that suits me the best. So useage means it is the best camera for me - and a lot of other stuff is gathering dust.

    I note the following minor issues.

    Accessories: I do need a thumbs up and it a most perfect device, I also believe that one should invest in one of those screw in buttons that go on top of the shutter release and I think a Luigi case is mandatory - especially the type that has access for card and battery

    Post Processing: The M9 delivers files which require the least amount of post processing - compared to my Nikon D3 which requires extensive work - too much actually. I use Aperture/Lightroom/C1 and Adobe - and cant see much difference between any of them.

    Lenses: It all depends on what type of shooting one does- but I rarely go longer than a 50mm or wider than 21mm. The 75 Elmarit is a very under rated lens.

    So I guess my own usage and experience suggests to me that the M9 is my favourite camera too. It will be interesting to see if this remains the case when I get an S2.
    I also did such an analyse some time ago.
    Focal length I use most are 50 and then 24 and 35 (FOV).
    I also like 75 here and then - I prefer it over 90 today.
    21 sometimes but not very often-the WATE, which I used much on the M8 is not used any more at all.

    When using a 70-200 on the Nikon I mostly shoot at the 70mm end or the 200m long end.

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Royal Oak, MI and Palm Harbor, FL
    Posts
    8,498
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    44

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    For me, camera types and brands come and go ... the one constant has been a M rangefinder ... for 40+ years.

    It doesn't matter what quantity of images were shot with what format, type or brand ... what matters is ... which are the best? Which ones make the portfolio, website and into print ... Year after year?

    The combination of the rangefinder way of seeing with its skew toward content as opposed to "lens look", my personal vision or approach, and IQ makes any analyst of minor inconveniences irrelevant IMO ... unless they become a dominate factor in preventing you from shooting.

    I don't want or need clutter in the viewfinder ... nor a camera like this to do much of the thinking. Use the camera enough and most of it becomes second nature.

    Don't like CMOS sensors that need AA filtration degrading the IQ either.

    Is the M9 perfect? Not quite. A short cut to setting manual WB with a one button exposure of an Xrite pocket WB card like my H4D does would be great. That's about it for me.

    I periodically do a check of Exif data of my most prized images ... it always surprises me. Some of my most used gear produces the least kept for samples. Mostly long lenses (beyond 85mm) and zooms on a DSLR ... be it Canon, Nikon, or Sony. A majority of shots from a wedding are from a 24-70 ... and the least "prized shots" are from a ... 24-70 Basically I do all the manditory "donkey" work with the easiest solution ... which includes use of a speed-light. Lately less of that, which I assign to my second shooter, so I'm freed up to just shoot more available light with the M9.

    This data also reveals ISO considerations. A vast majority are ISO 800 or below ... making high ISO yet another big expense for very little return. Dumped my D700 and never missed it for a second.

    I do need AF for some work ... mostly the Donkey shots because I'm lazy ... I could easily set up the M9 to do them too ... but why?

    Too bad Leica didn't make the R-10 with the same type sensor performance and some AF lenses ... then those requiring long lenses and zooms for their work could enjoy a similar IQ.

    -Marc

  27. #27
    Subscriber Member Chuck Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Studio City, CA
    Posts
    700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    "Don't like CMOS sensors that need AA filtration degrading the IQ either."

    Marc, this is a Hall Of Fame Quote. I've fought that fight for way too long myself, and not going to be sad seeing it go. For me, nothing looks as close to film as a CCD sensor without an AA filter. Only Leica seems to agree with us.

    Low ISO = Low Noise. I shoot as low as I can possibly get by with. Even using noise reduction processing techniques or noise removal plugins the color always goes to smush, so why bother?

    Ditto on the ambient shooting and leaving the flash home. If I want blown out highlights or faces with big white circles on them, screaming white circles of light on background walls complete with hard edge black shadows, or crazy catch-lites in the eyes I will put 'em in myself in post. Or set them up deliberately if they are to be used as a creative technique. I don't need the surprises at the computer doing the post workup either that using a shoe flash always provides....

    Get decent with practice at shooting hand-held down to 1/8th, and with a fast lens it won't matter a whit anyway. You may not nail many at 1/8th to start off with, and yes it does take time to learn and master the tricks to do it consistently, but the ones you do nail are pure magic. Also just think, once you get decent at 1/8 then at 1/25th you will nail most all of them, and that is where you end up the majority of the time in my experience anyway. One of those "tricks" I spoke of above. Learning how to breathe properly is another.

    I've never gotten that many keeper shots running around advertising by shooting flash. Those posed flash shots never seem to rank above the atmospheric and emotional moments ambient light provides either, in my selection, or my clients.

    I also hate even the words "good enough." WTF is "Good Enough" anyway? Autofocus that lands ears half the time when you shot eyes? f/1.4 sharp forehead wrinkles and soft lashes? Got plenty of those in my rejected selections when I shot Canon. Of course, always the best ones too.... <Grin>. Give me manual everything and easy to change up when I need to. I'm smart enough for both myself and my camera, I don't need it competing with my own ego trying to show off it's intelligence (stupidity) at my image's expense!

  28. #28
    Senior Member doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Jones View Post
    ... the files from Nikon, Canon, and all the rest just leave me wanting more...
    This is NOT good news for those of us who realize our DMR equipment won't last forever.

  29. #29
    Senior Member JimCollum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    santa cruz, ca
    Posts
    936
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    155

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    have been playing with my M9 now for only a few weeks.. and have to agree with the majority of owners on this thread.. If i had to give up all cameras but one.. I'd be hanging onto the M9.

  30. #30
    Subscriber Member Chuck Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Studio City, CA
    Posts
    700
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    18

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Doug, I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this brother, but don't go and drop that DMR in one of those swamps your always crawling around in. You'll not find anything from anyone else that really replaces it. Not with the same clarity, color, depth, or lens quality. I've used the lot of 'em, and as you know owned two DMR's myself. I'd take a DMR today over any of the others probably given the choice. Pretty sad commentary? No. I just love the CCD and Leica glass look, and find everything else thin in post. But given your own excellent images, I'm sure you already know that.

    The M9, in my opinion, will pretty well replace the DMR body, but you'd have to go to a VisoFlex to get the kind of lens reach you need for your type of work. And that R glass simply can not be beat. I'm still using a couple of them on my 7D for video, and loving it. If you want to have an interesting day, next time it rains go through an old Leica catalog showing the Visoflex system. Take a look at the myriad assortment of gizmo's, attachments, adapters and do-dads they Rube Goldberged together over the years to get all of the parts to work together. They made that thing for almost fifty years! Imagine Leica quality designed by Salvador Dali while smoking some great weed, and you'd be close.

    That said, I can't see myself ever giving up my M9 as long as I can afford to keep a camera. It does everything very nicely that I want to do, while also providing me the enjoyment and the pleasure of working up it's files in post.... not working around their short comings. The M9 also has enough pixels I can crop whatever way I want, and still have plenty to print. Hard to argue with near perfection. Every camera has some warts, the M9 no exception. It's particular warts don't really bother me. The SLR's do.

  31. #31
    Senior Member doug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    708
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Jones View Post
    Doug, I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this brother, but don't go and drop that DMR in one of those swamps your always crawling around in. You'll not find anything from anyone else that really replaces it.
    Yup that's why I have two.

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuck Jones View Post
    If you want to have an interesting day, next time it rains go through an old Leica catalog showing the Visoflex system. Take a look at the myriad assortment of gizmo's, attachments, adapters and do-dads they Rube Goldberged together over the years to get all of the parts to work together. They made that thing for almost fifty years! Imagine Leica quality designed by Salvador Dali while smoking some great weed, and you'd be close.
    Amazing how much could be done with the Viso system. I experimented using myself as the test dummy to see how much automation I can do without, stepping back in time one feature at a time to see where I started to suffer. I found that AF I can do without, likewise auto exposure, but I drew the line at the auto diaphragm. I'd suffer with the Visoflex system, but not because of the M9 I'd attach to it. Going without the auto-diaphragm would cramp my style. Also there are no APO lenses for the Visoflex

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •