| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
full frame Leica M9 anyone?
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
 |
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 5:08 PM on 09.09.09 |
| ->> yup. the live web conference this morning was impressive. Looks like history has been made again :) |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 2:00 AM on 09.10.09 |
| ->> I a buying one no it will not autoficus no 11 fps but it will make a nice image. |
|
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 3:49 AM on 09.10.09 |
->> I guess the question is, will the M9 be embraced as a professional tool by journalists? The M8 got a bad rap due to various issues. But it seems Leica has addressed most of them with the M9.
Was it enough?
I'm happy they finally made it. I just need my bank account to allow me to obtain one! |
|
Neil Turner, Photographer
|
Bournemouth | UK | United Kingdom | Posted: 5:36 AM on 09.10.09 |
->> I just looked up in my records to see when the last time I shot a proper assignment with a Leica - it was in 1994! I still have M6s and a couple of lenses and I would love to think that I could get used to using a rangefinder again. I have my doubts about going back... I only used Leicas part-time for 7 or 8 years anyway and over 15 years later it would be interesting to re-learn the skills. The cost is very high so I expect that I will rent one for a few days to see if I get on with it!
Neil |
|
Steven E. Frischling, Photographer
 |
102 Yards From The Beach | CT | | Posted: 10:01 AM on 09.10.09 |
->> Neil,
How many improper gig have you shot with a Leica :0) Seriously I'm impressed you can access your records so quickly to know when you last shot a job with a specific kit!
I miss my M4-P...so I need to win the lottery so I can jump into a set of M9 bodies. |
|
Chuck Liddy, Photographer
|
Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 11:39 AM on 09.10.09 |
| ->> wow. $8000 for the body. that WON'T be on the Christmas list this year...... |
|
George Bridges, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Washington | DC | USA | Posted: 11:48 AM on 09.10.09 |
->> Chuck,
It's not on your Christmas list? Now I'm out of ideas of what to get you. |
|
Kirby Yau, Photographer, Assistant
|
San Diego | CA | USA | Posted: 12:13 PM on 09.10.09 |
->> George, I though Chuck might appreciate a membership to the Kelby Fan Club... J/k
Back on Subject... I'm interested in seeing some REAL World samples from this camera. But did any of you Leica shooters see a REAL advantage in IQ when a rangefinder system is compared to a SLR system? |
|
David Seelig, Photographer
|
Hailey | ID | USA | Posted: 2:19 PM on 09.10.09 |
| ->> Actually the price is $6995. For what it does small unobtrusive great fast lenses nothing can touch it. Depends on what you shoot if you should own it. If you do nothing but events well no I probably would not buy. If you are a street photographer yes. If you are traveling and want a nice lightweight system with fast wides yes. If you shoot nothing but pro sports then no. Me I have to have it. |
|
Chris Peterson, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbia Falls | MT | USA | Posted: 3:28 PM on 09.10.09 |
->> I've drooled so much I've had to change my shirt. But I'd have to sell my truck and still borrow 4 grand to pay for one.
And Kirby, a Leica lens wide open makes some of the sweetest photos you'll ever see. They just pop like you wouldn't believe. I have an M6 and it's sooo much fun and so unobtrusive — a true fly-on-the-wall camera.
But having said that, I need real world samples, too. The M8 was a disaster. |
|
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 7:02 PM on 09.10.09 |
->> "The M8 was a disaster."
I think that's a bit harsh. How about "not exactly what the purists were looking for"?
For real world examples, there's a stream from Chris Weeks who appears to have shot the M9 for a bit now: http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrisweeks/ |
|
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 7:21 PM on 09.10.09 |
->> "But did any of you Leica shooters see a REAL advantage in IQ when a rangefinder system is compared to a SLR system?"
My take is some feel the rangefinder is more discreet than an SLR. Maybe this is a perceived advantage between one vs. the other.
Regarding IQ, I did some tests with an M8 and 50mm Summicron wide open at F/2 against a 1Dmk2 with Canon 50mm 1.2L at F2, as well as an EF 50mm 1.4 at F/2. Shot some newsprint with the cameras on tripod and print taped flat to wall.
Peeped in photoshop at 100%, the summicron was sharper by quite a bit. It was nice to know as far as IQ, you don't lose anything with the digital M and good glass.
A tangible difference is size. You can carry quite a lot of lenses in a much smaller bag, and the system itself is more compact than most DSLRs. This is desirable in some situations.
Don't want this to sound as though one is better than another. Just saying the M9 is an exciting camera if you want to shoot a digital full frame rangefinder. It's now reality. |
|
Ian L. Sitren, Photographer
|
Palm Springs | CA | USA | Posted: 8:56 PM on 09.10.09 |
| ->> The Chris Weeks photos are great but equally great are the his photos with the Leica MP and M6 on his flickr pages. |
|
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 8:39 AM on 09.11.09 |
->> "The M8 was a disaster."
I think that's a bit harsh. How about "not exactly what the purists were looking for"?
Chris, Christian--
I somewhat agree with both of you. But if the M8 was a disaster, and I'm not disagreeing, then the M8.2 is a credible solution to the M8.
Some purists weren't be satisfied with the 1.33x crop factor, it remains to be seen how many of them will be won over by the M9.
I think the M9 is perhaps a technical masterpiece. It wasn't all that long ago that Leica said a digital M couldn't be done. I feel Epson provided the stimulus to get the M8 ball rolling. Now after the success of the M8.2 (it won me over) there is the M9. Time will tell how successful it is, but Leica AG has come a long way from a position of saying it couldn't be done to bringing the M9 to market.
I am a rangefinder shooter from way back. It was a major disappointment for me in July 2003 when I was issued digital cameras (was I the last in this country to get them?) and I had to set my M6's on a shelf. For 4 months now I have been using the M8.2 and it is a very credible camera. For 8 months I have been retired from a job as a shooter for a daily paper. So it goes, so I go. If I could have had the M8.2 in 2003, I would have used it, same for 2008. I am using it in 2009 and will continue using it.
I'm already checking my finances for a M9, it isn't a matter of it, only when.
Rangefinders aren't for everyone nor are they for everything photographic. If one is tied to autofocus, the Leica or Epson certainly won't be right. If one needs 9 frames a second, they aren't right either. If one needs a fisheye, anything longer than 135mm or a lensbaby, they aren't a viable solution.
If one understands what a rangefinder does well a SLR won't be satisfactory. |
|
Christian del Rosario, Photographer
|
San Jose | CA | USA | Posted: 2:56 PM on 09.11.09 |
->> Steve,
I have no problems with the M8. I also enjoy it very much. I know he M8 wasn't warmly embraced by the working journalists coming from a film M though.
I agree with the M9 being a technical achievement. Much like full frame was once the holy grail for DSLR shooters, the same was true for digital rangefinder shooters, so i'm also very much excited by it :)
The sample shots from that last link I posted look extremely promising IMHO. |
|
Michael Myers, Photographer
 |
Miami Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 11:55 PM on 09.15.09 |
->> When the M8 first came out, it was in some ways similar to when the Nikon D2h came out. There were "bugs" that needed to be taken care of. Nikon took care of the D2h buyers (me included) and from what I've read, Leica took care of the M8 buyers. Eventually the M8 got the bugs worked out, and without them it became a pretty good camera! (Ditto for Nikon.)
Leica listened to the users, and introduced the M8.2 which fixed almost all the remaining complaints. Plus, they added some extra features including the hardened lcd screen, (similar to the D3?). I recently bought an M8.2 which I think is an excellent camera. In some ways I wish it were full frame, but I can live with the 1.3 crop factor.
The M9 seems to be an excellent choice for photographers who can deal with a rangefinder camera. Rangefinders are no substitute for a DSLR, but neither are DSLR's a substitute for an RF camera. They're just too different.
For high speed sports, long lenses, and close-ups, the DSLR has a huge advantage, but for general shooting, especially candids of people, the DSLR is too big, bulky, and noticeable. I think the Leica cameras have a great future ahead of them. |
|
Samuel Lewis, Photographer
|
Miami | FL | USA | Posted: 7:46 AM on 09.16.09 |
| ->> Once I see the reviews, I'll consider having my Leica lenses coded. However, the M9 looks very promising, particularly for any travel-related work. |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 7:52 AM on 09.16.09 |
| ->> While coded lenses will automatically signal the M9 as to what lens is in use and thus be included in exif data, the M9 has a menu item that allows the manual input of which lens is in use, thus with the M9 the 6 Bit Coding is no longer essential. |
|
Sheen Yen, Photographer
|
West Lafayette | IN | USA | Posted: 6:16 PM on 09.16.09 |
| ->> I wish either Canon or Nikon would make a similar rangefinder type body- much like the Olympus E Pen... the M9 seems amazing but man, at that price it's hard to justify the cost. |
|
Jack Kurtz, Photographer
|
Phoenix | AZ | United States | Posted: 6:51 PM on 09.16.09 |
->> I second Sheen's idea. I Canon or Nikon camera like the Oly Pen. A good APS-C sensor (like the 50D or D300) with a nice set of small primes would be great.
jack |
|
Erik Markov, Photographer
|
Kokomo | IN | | Posted: 8:26 PM on 09.16.09 |
->> I third the Nikon rangefinder idea. My dad's got a pentax "pancake" lens that is really nice from the 70's, I think if Nikon came out with something equivalent it would sell well. Probably be a niche product, $1500-2000 I would think, but still less than the Leica. They have the sensors and other guts developed already, a body would take a little effort and some lenses (maybe a 35, 50, 85mm?) would need to be developed.
It kind of reminds me of concept cars at the auto show tho. Nikon would develop the concept, by the time it goes thru engineering, marketing and corporate, the idea is so mashed and flattened out its boring. |
|
Steve Ueckert, Photographer
|
Houston | TX | | Posted: 11:57 PM on 09.16.09 |
->> An Epson R-D1 or R-D1S body can be had used for about $1500 and a Cosina Voigtlander (CV) 28mm F-2.0 (or the earlier F-1.9) can be had used for $400 or less. For less than $2000 one can have a digital rangefinder with the equivalent of a 43mm lens (the Epson has an APS-C sized sensor with a 1.55X crop factor.)
While not a Leica M9 with a 35mm Summilux-Asph, the Epson is a credible entry level camera capable of making quality images. And if you happen to have a 35mm Summilux-Asph or any other Leica M lens, the Epson shares the Leica M lens mount.
The Epson is becoming a cult camera with a devoted following not unlike that enjoyed by the Holga. The Epson is a quality digital camera, even if it has some interesting analog controls. |
|
Michael Myers, Photographer
|
Miami Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 12:48 PM on 09.17.09 |
->> One "solution" were Nikon interested in this concept, would be to make an upgraded Nikon SP, using the D3 full frame sensor, and with a M-mount so all the existing Leica lenses would fit on it. I don't expect to ever see this, but Nikon does have a pretty good head start.
In the meantime, the M9 is quite expensive, but a used or demo M8 would save a good bit of money and still get most of the benefits of having a Leica.
I've got to do a good bit of thinking about all this. I've got my new M8.2, with several lenses from around 40 to 50 years ago when I bought them (used). I then bought two wide-angle lenses from CameraQuest at around $600 or so each, new. I've also got a D3 with a reasonable assortment of lenses.
I've found two things. First, the Leica is no substitute for the Nikon when it comes to high-speed sports, usually with a long lens. I expected that. However, I'm also amazed that the Leica is getting me images that are quite noticeably better than the Nikon for most of the other photos I take. I didn't expect that, so I set up both cameras on a tripod on my balcony, and shot comparison photos. I'm going to have to re-do this, as the Leica images were far better than those from my D3.
There's also size and weight - right now I'm on a trip off to visit my brother in mid-Florida. I was packing my bag with the D3 and several assorted lenses, which I was going to take along with my Leica with three lenses. The bag was getting full, and quite heavy, when I figured what the heck, I'd just take the Leica and spend time in learning how to get more out of it. The Leica stuff weighed next to nothing, and hardly took up any space whatever. Heck, the lenses can just fit in my pocket, if I wanted. I'm finding that I can have a good camera with me all the time, rather than a choice between the huge/heavy D3 or my P&S. |
|
Patrick Murphy-Racey, Photographer
|
Powell | TN | USA | Posted: 8:20 AM on 09.18.09 |
->> I bought a used M8 off of another SS member a couple years ago and while everything I shot for b&w consumption was really good, I was never happy with the color. The chip and its weirdness drove me crazy, and buying $200 IR filters for every lens was a real drag. When I decided to get out of the M8 about 6 months after buying a used one, I decided to keep all my glass. It's mostly Voigtlander stuff (35mm f/1.4, 21mm f/4, and an old 50 Summicron). I'm very happy that the M9 is now a reality but $7K for a FF version is just too rich for my blood. I keep hoping for a new Zeiss Ikon full frame of even a Contax G/M body. My dream would be Canon making a FF digital RF for M mount.
As my M glass sits on a shelf gathering dust, I'm thinking about how long I should keep it for as I will never shoot film again... The real question that I have about the M9 is how long it will take to replace it. This will allow me to buy a used one a generation old and finally get bak into a FF Leica M body. But I'm betting and hoping that another competitor will make one for less before then. |
|
Michael Myers, Photographer
|
Miami Beach | FL | USA | Posted: 2:42 PM on 09.18.09 |
->> If you could find a used M8.2 (or a demo) for a good price, it would take care of all the M8 problems. You'd still need the IR filters, but that's a two-sided issue. Yes, you need the filters, but with the camera not having a filter in front of the sensor, you get sharper images. If you ever want to take IR photos, the M9 has the same problem as all the current DSLR cameras - the built in anti-IR filter makes this very difficult. Given the choice, I'd personally prefer to get the camera without the built-in filter. As to full frame, I think the biggest problem in not having FF is the lack of wide angle lenses, but CameraQuest with the full range of Voigtlander lenses seems to have cured that problem.
If financial considerations are most important, maybe you could try to find a used Epson RD-1, which does have the built in anti-IR filter too. I've heard that you can get one in for around $1500, and a bit more for the updated model. A good friend of mine has one, and when I got to try it out for a while, I loved it. At the time he wanted to sell it to me, and now I can kick myself for not having taken him up on the offer.
If you're waiting for an M10 to come out (maybe with the features that Leica left off the M9?), you're probably in for a very long wait. |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|