The GetDPI Photography Forum

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!

Liberated by the M9...

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Joe,

brilliant shots!

I have paused my M - adventure after I sold my M8, but kept all my M glass till now. Tried A900, D700 and currently shoot M43 (EP3 and GH2) and E5. I think the 43 / M43 comes closest to Leica and Leica glass, but still different.

Reading through this thread and your findings I am starting to lust to go back again to an M9 and sell my E system, which is a WONDERFUL system but is very heavy and bulky (pro grade lenses) and I would definitely not carry for long hikes. I even find myself on short hikes to prefer my M43 gear, as I do no longer want to carry such weight. There are for sure situations where a DSLR with tele zoom is hardly beatable, but I guess I can achieve the same (or even better) with M43.

So - what actually makes me stay with DSLR and not switch to an M9 and use all my wonderful lenses? Should say that for high end work I use a Hasselblad H3D39 with 28 and 100 lenses, unbeatable in IQ, but also unbeatable in weight and bulkiness.

So I might give the M9 a try :)

Thanks for sharing your ideas.
 

jonoslack

Active member
HI Joe
Great images - I think lots of us have travelled the same route . . . one just has to learn that digital M is not just a PJ camera but also makes a fine landscape camera.

all the best
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Yes, it is interesting. I have been using the M cameras for travel (and by extension landscape) since I first got one, and they seem to be perfectly suited for the task to me. Even more so now, as you can check your exact framing after the photo if that is of such rigid concern to you. I have always shot landscape with rangefinders -- the Mamiya 7II is another example of a superb landscape camera which is also a rangefinder...
The benefits of rangefinders -- compact body and lens size compared to sensor/film size and easier to design (consequently higher quality) lenses mean that for a lot of landscape photography they are ideal. Perhaps they are not as useful if you rely on lots of external items like polarizing filters, graduated neutral density filters and so on, but for the most part I think they do quite well!
 
I'm glad it is working out. You do sound so happy and in the end isn't that what is all about?
Thanks Terry - ironically it was your decision to take m4/3 exclusively to Africa that prompted me to really re-think my camera choices for this trip and ultimately for all my work moving forwards.

So thanks for the inspiration! :salute:

Cheers,
 
Joe, you have inspired me to go back and re-visit a few of my own, some taken with the very lens that is now yours ;)

Ahhh - must be why the lens felt so at home :D

Nice shot here Ashwin - I took almost the same shot as this but haven't tried it in b&w - I like yours very much.

Thanks for sharing your photos - it's great to see someone else's interpretation of the same place ;-)

Cheers,
 
Joe,

brilliant shots!

I have paused my M - adventure after I sold my M8, but kept all my M glass till now. Tried A900, D700 and currently shoot M43 (EP3 and GH2) and E5. I think the 43 / M43 comes closest to Leica and Leica glass, but still different.

Reading through this thread and your findings I am starting to lust to go back again to an M9 and sell my E system, which is a WONDERFUL system but is very heavy and bulky (pro grade lenses) and I would definitely not carry for long hikes. I even find myself on short hikes to prefer my M43 gear, as I do no longer want to carry such weight. There are for sure situations where a DSLR with tele zoom is hardly beatable, but I guess I can achieve the same (or even better) with M43.

So - what actually makes me stay with DSLR and not switch to an M9 and use all my wonderful lenses? Should say that for high end work I use a Hasselblad H3D39 with 28 and 100 lenses, unbeatable in IQ, but also unbeatable in weight and bulkiness.

So I might give the M9 a try :)

Thanks for sharing your ideas.
Thanks - I tried an M8.2 for a short time and while it was a good camera, it wasn't quite up to par in terms of IQ (and noise) and given the crop factor, it made going wide more difficult. I also found I had a hard time focusing on the M8 - not sure if there's a reason, but I find the M9 easier to focus.

I'm also still debating hanging onto the DSLR and my long lenses for wildlife work but now considering moving to m4/3 for that after seeing Terry's results from Africa :D

Cheers,
 
Lovely images, I know exactly what you mean. I'm a landscape photographer myself who is slowly moving to Leica.
Aravind - thanks! You've got some stunning images on your website - love the wildlife photos.

We're neighbors - I live in the Santa Cruz mountains and work at Apple - would love to hook up with you sometime :)

Cheers,
 
Yes, it is interesting. I have been using the M cameras for travel (and by extension landscape) since I first got one, and they seem to be perfectly suited for the task to me. Even more so now, as you can check your exact framing after the photo if that is of such rigid concern to you. I have always shot landscape with rangefinders -- the Mamiya 7II is another example of a superb landscape camera which is also a rangefinder...
The benefits of rangefinders -- compact body and lens size compared to sensor/film size and easier to design (consequently higher quality) lenses mean that for a lot of landscape photography they are ideal. Perhaps they are not as useful if you rely on lots of external items like polarizing filters, graduated neutral density filters and so on, but for the most part I think they do quite well!
Thanks for the comments Stuart - seems natural to use RF for landscape for the reasons you point out - funny that it took me so long to realize that ;-)

I did run into situations where I wanted to use a polarizer or ND Grad filter but couldn't - will have to get properly equipped for that next time.

How do you deal with filters on an RF camera?

Cheers,
 
HI Joe
Great images - I think lots of us have travelled the same route . . . one just has to learn that digital M is not just a PJ camera but also makes a fine landscape camera.

all the best
Thanks Jono - seems we all have to walk the path on our own to end up in the same place ;-)
 

ptomsu

Workshop Member
Thanks - I tried an M8.2 for a short time and while it was a good camera, it wasn't quite up to par in terms of IQ (and noise) and given the crop factor, it made going wide more difficult. I also found I had a hard time focusing on the M8 - not sure if there's a reason, but I find the M9 easier to focus.

I'm also still debating hanging onto the DSLR and my long lenses for wildlife work but now considering moving to m4/3 for that after seeing Terry's results from Africa :D

Cheers,
Not sure if the IQ is in general better on the M9 compared to the M8, because this is still the same sensor and processing. Difference is FF and so you use the full field of the M lenses, which were always designed for FF and thus the impression could easily come up that IQ is better - nothing scientific, just my thoughts.

WRT finder, this is for sure a better one in the M9 as it is no crop and thus also the mechanical RF is working better. I could see easily the difference when looking and focussing with my MP and M8.

WRT moving to m43 for wildlife - still not completely sure, results are good but you loose the luxury of a great OVF such as the ones in a D700 or E5. Thus I might want to stick to my E5 which actually is the issue as I would would like to use it for funding the E5. But I am kind of hesitating to further invest into the E system, as I have the feeling it is going nowhere, because Olympus is just investing in m43 - similar story to their OM system some 20 years ago - it quietly died. I know that you could use 43 glass on m43 bodies, have these adapters, but they simply suck in terms of AF accuracy and speed between these 2 systems, so this is a no option for me. So finally might be seeing myself moving to m43 for tele, if there is finally a pro grad m43 camera available, which currently is not. And then have the M9 for general work every day which I would really love and m43 for just the few occasions where I need super compact and/or long tele. And the H3D39 for really demanding stuff.
 

JWW

Member
Joe,

Thanks for posting those great pictures. I know that I carry my M9P around everywhere I go. Size and weight are important considerations, so kept my 35mm Cron V4 to make the smallest and lightest walkaround kit. Your pictures with the Zeiss make that lens tempting instead of getting a Leica wide.

Aloha,
Jan
 
Joe,

Thanks for posting those great pictures. I know that I carry my M9P around everywhere I go. Size and weight are important considerations, so kept my 35mm Cron V4 to make the smallest and lightest walkaround kit. Your pictures with the Zeiss make that lens tempting instead of getting a Leica wide.

Aloha,
Jan
Hey Jan! Well it's your M9 that took these photos so thanks for selling it to me ;-)

You won't be disappointed with the Zeiss - it's that good.

Cheers,
 
Top