M9 AND the Sony Nex ..make any sense?

[cam]

CAM

Agree completely on the x100 a superb product all around. But its usefulness when added to an existing M9 kit is limited to slightly better high ISO performance . About 1-1 1/2 Ev. I have one and I rarely use it because it duplicates the strengths of the M9 . And you are right the images are rendered similar to the Leica m (Not a coincidence would be my guess). Handling is a totally different matter and I could not work with a x100 and a M9 at the same time ...the whole process of viewing focusing etc is too different. But there are situations where the X100 is a great tool and cafe/bar shooting comes to mind.

<snip>

How great would it be if Leica s EVIL body provided those capabilities ?

Roger, lol! i wasn't trying to talk to you (or anyone) into an X100... and, obviously, i didn't know you had one either i got mine for it's strengths, not as a replacement or an adjunct to my M's -- but was just learning the camera so i decided to use both (and, yes, it was a little disconcerting switching back and forth between viewfinders). i was really pleasantly surprised, something i never expected, that's all.

if the Sony doesn't ring your bells, don't get it just because people you respect are raving about it. i still think it's worth a try, but not a buy... and then there are rumours about a new GXR body that are starting to percolate for you to consider... but, yes, it *would* be lovely if Leica solved that problem for us

good luck!

 

[m_driscoll]

Posted by glenerrolrd
The Nex products just seem to offer some great potential as an “addition” to the M9 s and this dialogue is helpful . Thanks

H Roger
That's what I think - a useful addition - especially for longer focal lengths (and for times when the focus peaking provides useful information for the whole frame - a party/gallery opening etc. etc).

Interesting discussion. The above, also, sums up my conclusions. Additionally, there's the quite good Sony E and A mount zooms and primes when you tire of 'focus peaking'. I'd add a Nex 5N to the Nex 7/M9 kit for the ISO performance...and, an A77 for the 'H' of it.

Cheers, Matt

http://mdriscoll.zenfolio.com

 

[Chuck Jones]

Roger, I'm using a Nex-5N with Leica M lenses, and haven't had much of a problem combining images for stories from the 5N, my M9, and even my A77 with the Zeiss glass, though admittedly the Zeiss drawing signature is different from Leica's. Quite complementary though, in my opinion.

You mite want to just look at a 5N, as I believe the high ISO difference between it and the A77 is better than a stop, possibly two. The more I use my 5N, the more I like it. It's one sweet little pocket camera - with real punch.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Roger, lol! i wasn't trying to talk to you (or anyone) into an X100... and, obviously, i didn't know you had one either i got mine for it's strengths, not as a replacement or an adjunct to my M's -- but was just learning the camera so i decided to use both (and, yes, it was a little disconcerting switching back and forth between viewfinders). i was really pleasantly surprised, something i never expected, that's all.

if the Sony doesn't ring your bells, don't get it just because people you respect are raving about it. i still think it's worth a try, but not a buy... and then there are rumours about a new GXR body that are starting to percolate for you to consider... but, yes, it *would* be lovely if Leica solved that problem for us

good luck!

Actually I assumed that the purpose of the X100 was to justify hanging out in Paris Cafes until all hours (when of course you would benefit by the better high ISO performance and maybe the AF) . LOL But remember its not weather sealed . :ROTFL:

 

[Paratom]

I find the M9 at ISO 1250 at least as good as the Nex5n at ISO 1600.
I think the M9 is rated much worse regarding high ISO than what I see in images.

 

[glenerrolrd]

I find the M9 at ISO 1250 at least as good as the Nex5n at ISO 1600.
I think the M9 is rated much worse regarding high ISO than what I see in images.

Have no basis to dispute this . Most of the tests show the NEX bests the M9 but they are in the same class ....1600 is the end of the rope ...go farther and you will generally not produce images that will show with your best . Thats my standard.... Would agree that I have seen no basis to indicate the NEX files are better at high ISO than the M9 .

The NEX does not appear to offer a material advantage over the M9 in high ISO performance .

 

[jonoslack]

Sorry, in what why am I trashing the Nex 7? I said it was a fine camera. I am putting in this in context of the OPs interest in using this in low light to replace the M9.

.[/QUOTE]

Well - I wasn't really thinking about these tests with respect to the M9 - or your comments - I was only bridling at the concept that the NEX7 would be worse at high ISO than the E-P1 (which you did say).

Let's leave it at that - I don't have a problem with the M9 high iso - and as I've said elsewhere, the idea of the NEX7 is attractive for those moments when the M9 doesn't cut it - i.e. longer focal lengths, closer focusing etc.

What really DOES excite me about the NEX cameras is the focus peaking, Personally I think it's the most significant addition to digital still technology in 2011.

I'm with cam really- I feel that all these cameras work pretty well . . . and that none of them is Magic.

 

[jonoslack]

I find the M9 at ISO 1250 at least as good as the Nex5n at ISO 1600.
I think the M9 is rated much worse regarding high ISO than what I see in images.

I quite agree Tom - although sometimes I find the colour a little difficult at high ISO.

all the best

 

[fotografz]

I wonder about certain performance characteristics when applied in the real world in various conditions. Not just the subject cameras of this thread, but others as well.

Like others, I thought focus peaking was an absolutely amazing application of video camera technology ... yet in low light with low contrast, shooting wide open, very little "peaked" and usually not where I needed it. IMO, this type condition is where one needs a focus aid and I didn't think it helped all that much here. I also found it wasn't as accurate as many seemed to think it was ... and forget about it if the subject in lower light was moving. IMO, I actually thought the mag feature was more useful and accurate if you mastered the technique of quickly pressing the right buttons, in the right sequence, at the right time ... sort of like texting, LOL!

ISO performance is another odd one when looking at pushing the limits of any given camera. The places where we need to push those limits never seems to correspond to ISO test subjects ... at least not the low light situations I seem to find myself in. Some cameras clinically produce better high ISO results, only to reveal ugly noise characteristics ... just like pixel quality, there seems to be noise quality to contend with in real world. Many have commented on a certain camera as producing high ISO noise, but it was nice looking noise.

Personally, I'm questioning my own habit of pi$$ing away money on some of these smaller cameras in the hopes they'll be a significant addition because of technology. $1,000 here, $2,000 there ... and it starts adding up. Here today, gone today.

That said, I think the NEX5N can deliver a bit better ISO performance, and I keep thinking about a strategy of getting a M9P for long term use, sell my other M9 and get a NEX5N with EVF as a stop-gap back-up ... then wait until we see what Leica does with CMOS technology in the M10. I be seriously surprised if the M10 didn't do at least an excellent ISO 1600, a decent ISO 2500, and a relatively usable ISO 5000 or so.

Not an easy thing to sort out.

-Marc

 

[Paratom]

I quite agree Tom - although sometimes I find the colour a little difficult at high ISO.

all the best

I agree with the color. One thing which looks strange sometimes is the color of lips in faces-way too pinkish IMO.

 

[Vivek]

Personally, I'm questioning my own habit of pi$$ing away money on some of these smaller cameras in the hopes they'll be a significant addition because of technology. $1,000 here, $2,000 there ... and it starts adding up. Here today, gone today.



-Marc

I like that formulation.

WRT Nex and such, the prices come down within few months of their availability and really come crashing down once a "superior" model replaces the earlier one. The Nex-5 are a real bargain at the moment to get a measure of how these handle or do not.

AFAIC,"focus peaking" in a NEX isn't all that useful.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Marc

You are absolutely right about not jumping on the “band wagon” every time a new consumer wiz bang is released . I did try the Fuji X100 and find the quality at a professional level ....but it adds little (maybe a little better ISO performance) and its a nice camera to do night shooting . For this small improvement I get to semi master a really crappy user interface and learn new post processing settings. (But if I was street shooting in Paris ..it would be my favorite as ISO1600 is perfect at night with a 35/2 and the Fuji color is pretty great ). Plus it takes 000 s of captures to learn the camera well enough to get the best out of it . I know I am only at the beginning with the X100 and it will be outdated before I accomplish much.

Agree 100% High ISO performance is about a lot more than noise ..having compressed DR and desaturated color puts some stress on your technique to get good captures . A face in the shadows can t be pulled back at ISO 1600 for example.

If focus peaking doesn t beat a RF in low light ...whats the point ? I can focus a 135apo pretty well in decent light and even shoot tennis with one ..but I generally don t try to shoot wide open . I am impatiently waiting for the NEX 7 to get on with it . As Jono has done add a 180APO and you have a 270mm FOV enough for most anything short of sports or wildlife.

This thread has been helpful in focusing my expectations .

Especially in Florida where I am around water and can t get closer ...I would like some reach up to about 180 ..so I will get a NEX 7 (with tempered expectations ) and give it a shot .

 

[jonoslack]

AFAIC,"focus peaking" in a NEX isn't all that useful.

Like others, I thought focus peaking was an absolutely amazing application of video camera technology ... yet in low light with low contrast, shooting wide open, very little "peaked" and usually not where I needed it. IMO, this type condition is where one needs a focus aid and I didn't think it helped all that much here.

I really disagree - of course, it could be improved - it certainly is better in some high end video cameras. . . . . but did you use it with the viewfinder? Because that's the whole point - the LCD is okay in decent light - but you need the higher resolution and closer contact of the EVF for it to work properly

I've now done a lot of shooting in low light where there is (as you say) very little peaking. But after some practice I've found that there's invariably a sparkle in the subject's eye or eyelashes. The proof of the pudding is to have got a very (really stupidly) high proportion of in focus shots using the 28-90 R zoom on the 5n - I've even found the Noctilux okay to use in low light.

The zoom in focus aid is the pits (IMHO of course) - I can work the buttons, but by the time you've zoomed out again and got the composition right the focus points changed anyway - or the subject's moved.Fine on a tripod with a static subject - in addition (for me) it's a total composition killer.

I'm still better focusing with a leica rangefinder (well, I have practiced a bit ) but I'm not sure that it'll stay that way. certainly I'm doing better with focus peaking in low light than with AF.

Maybe it wasn't as good on the 5? (I got rid of mine long before focus peaking arrived). . . . and of course, you must use the EVF.

As for small cameras Marc - I'm with you - they've all gone:
d-lux4
xz1
x100
. . . and more

But I don't consider the NEX in that light - (of course, I don't do MF). I don't have a NEX7, so I can't comment, but the NEX5n with the viewfinder is wonderful . . . and I'm getting increasingly encouraged by the file quality from the A77 . . where pressing the MF button taking you straight to focus peaking mf I use more and more for fine tuning AF.

I would rather the images from the M9 - but the ones I'm getting from Sony have good colour and DR, make attractive prints, and the combined systems with so many lenses which can be used on both is a real bonus.

For me the M9 and the sony NEX makes perfect sense.

 

[jonoslack]

Especially in Florida where I am around water and can t get closer ...I would like some reach up to about 180 ..so I will get a NEX 7 (with tempered expectations ) and give it a shot .

Hi Roger
Nothing's perfect, and NEX certainly isn't a substitute for an M9 - but I think you'll really enjoy it - the handling and the eve and the IQ.

. . . .but of course, there's never a perfect answer and this isn't it either.

 

[Vivek]

I really disagree - of course, it could be improved - it certainly is better in some high end video cameras. . . . . but did you use it with the viewfinder? Because that's the whole point - the LCD is okay in decent light - but you need the higher resolution and closer contact of the EVF for it to work properly

Hi Jono,

I discovered that the new firmware upgrade also does not allow the unobtainable (and over priced) EVF to be used with the 5.
The NEX and such are really not a system cameras. But for the interchangeable lens mount they are just P/S cameras.
I really do not get the idea of EVF or the peanut flash either.

I am still working on hacking the 5 to bits to see if would be useful for me in some way to make images.

Also, I am trying to figure out if the (one and only) 3rd party battery "mini grip" (see: http://www.ownuser.com.tw/e_mig_snx5.html) would make the Nex' hand holdable for me. As such they are not. I own these for > a year now and did try using them.

The good thing about the grip stuff as far as Sony goes (unlike Pansonic with new batteries with every model) is that they are compatible for several of the NEX'.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Hi Roger
Nothing's perfect, and NEX certainly isn't a substitute for an M9 - but I think you'll really enjoy it - the handling and the eve and the IQ.

. . . .but of course, there's never a perfect answer and this isn't it either.

This one has a slightly better fit for a dedicated (resistant to change ) M RF shooter .. Only because it has some potential to extend the range of really usable Leica M glass.

I am not the reluctant buyer (as anyone that knows me can confirm) thats looking for a guarantee. Rather I was just curious about some apparent capabilities of the NEX 7 . Most of the tests keep assuming the camera is a choice between it and an M9 or other EVF alternatives..

When traveling for the sole purpose of street shooting ....size and weight are huge considerations ..so having the ability to gain telephoto reach simply by adding a small light body is attractive . But I am now convinced that the High ISO capabilities will be essentially the same as the M9.

But I know its going to take some time to calibrate the NEX 7 to create files that work with the M9. If I think I should have used the M9 every time I try to put a NEX file into a collection ...then as I said before ..whats the point.

As a point of clarification ..I shoot sports like kite boarding,polo,baseball,tennis etc with Nikon and long lenses ...but I shoot the crowds with the M9 s ..the files don t play well together and I have been advised more than a few times to stick with one system for a type of work .

 

[PeterA]

Roger - a Nex is a no brainer for a Leica M glass user. I don't usually muck around with new 35mm cameras being a Leica nut - but the Nex5N with Leica glass on it is a very nice small form street shooting machine.




not a 'crazy' idea.

Pete

 

[250swb]

Why not carry a Nex body as a back up that extends the capabilities of your M kit ? I am interested in any insights from the Nex users .

I like the idea of a backup camera extending the capabilities of your Leica.

But alas I am one of those people who finds using two different cameras at the same time means I don't get the best from either of them. To many seconds spent thinking about which to use for a picture, or to many times getting lazy and using the easiest to use, and not necessarily the best. I admire the guys who can dangle two around their necks and operate like that and at 100% concentration. But I lose the will to live when I can't remember what menu such and such a feature is in because I don't use the backup camera often enough to be fully familiar with it.

Gone are the days when having two Nikon's meant a wide angle on one, and a telephoto on the other. To get the most out of today's electronic camera's even in basic operation modes like Aperture Priority etc needs familiarity, for me at least. So I don't kid myself I can do it, despite the heroic efforts of photographers that can memorise multiple menu's and instantly recall what that button does never mind where that button is. My 'backup' cameras are now all 'other' cameras, and I either go out with my Leica M9, or I go out with my other camera, and never the twain shall meet.

Steve

 

[iiiNelson]

I've withheld some of my responses over the last couple days but I will say the NEX might work for you as long as you keep tempered expectations. The reality is I think Photokina might bring something that you're truly looking for in the Leica mirrorless camera or the new M10. I own the original NEX 5 (not the N) and it's a great "digital back" for adapted lenses. The high ISO works well. ISO 1600 is very usable for color prints to a reasonable size and I'm sure you could get away with ISO 3200 in SOME B&W photos. The NEX 7 seems to be an huge improvement as a back up since it has a built EVF, hotshoe, and flash. I would try it out at least but I think the "no serious compromise solution" you're truly after doesn't exist yet.

 

[Paratom]

Here I say it. So far all the mirrorless I tried were fun in the beginning and then seeing less and less use over the time.
The IQ being nearly as good as from a FF DSLR or M9 (now with the Nex7 maybe being better...as long as the next generation ff cameras is coming), the AF being "closer" to that of a phase detect, the focus peaking being nearly as good as a rangefinder.
IMO these cameras are still a (very good) compromise if you either do not want to spend the money for a full frame DSLR or a M9 OR if you want a smaller camera OR if you do like movie.
In my case each time when I come back to the M9 I ask myself why I mess around so much time with the smaller mirrorless cameras.
I like it for bycicle tours or on the Christmas market or for video (and yes I admit the Nex5n is fun to shoot-specially because it feels very fast to use) - but for the real thing I just get better results with M9.