Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: M9 Review Discussion  (Read 45275 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7761



WWW
« Reply #80 on: September 30, 2009, 04:10:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: georgl
It's quite noticable, at infinity you might get a 5-10% larger area in the final image. But it's pretty much the same as with the film-Ms, we never realized it, because we had no instant image control ;-)
Just put a 35mm-lens (classic design, internal focusing may change the impact of this) on a SLR and focus between 1m and infinity, you will so how the image area changes.

That's also why focus stacking cannot be accomplished simply by masking.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
KevinA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 898


WWW
« Reply #81 on: September 30, 2009, 05:29:03 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Gary Ferguson
It's pretty much impossible to put the differences into words, in terms of simple resolution the results I get with my P65+ and a tripod mounted 120mm Macro are so far beyond what the M9 can deliver that there's simply no competition. However, versus Canon the results are far less clear cut. My current travel camera is a 5D MkII with the 24-105 IS. It delivers dependably great results out to the edges at f8 and f11, but corner quality is poor at any aperture, and at f4 or f5.6 I'm often a little disappointed right across the frame, consequently getting the results I want from the 24-105 requires taking liberties with the IS and using the ISO setting aggressively!

The M9 just provides more options at lower weight, but with the inconvenience of lens changes on the fly. Overall I prefer the look and feel of an M9 shot, it tends to have less of that "processed" digital feel (ie distant grass turning to uniformly coloured astro-turf!) or a slightly "smeared" look. Then there's the prime versus zoom question, as a huge generality (that's I'm sure more respected in the breach than the observance) zooms deliver outstanding definition in the central part of the frame, and perform well in both the near and far ranges. But the usual downside is poor performance out towards the edges and an intrusively "wirey" look to the out of focus areas. Hey, who's to say what's better, you pay's your money and you takes your choice!

I'm curious how the Canon best primes would compare with the Leica, at last I am happy with my Canon lenses since I bought the 35mm f1;4 and new 24mm f1;4 the 85mm f1;2 is next on my list. Having said that the 17-40mm I have used and loved and hated does not look as bad as I think it should against those primes. A 5DII with those primes would be a better match for the M9 than a 24-105mm zoom.

Kevin.
Logged

Kevin.
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3870



WWW
« Reply #82 on: September 30, 2009, 07:46:12 AM »
ReplyReply

If you really want sharp then you can always stick Zeiss manual lenses on Canon or Nikon; the big advantage is that you then get the Canon or Nikon hi-ISO performance while keeping SLR framing and usability. Or you can go all out like Michael and then you even have Zeiss AF!

The only real thing the Leica has going for it is form factor - which is not to be underestimated.

Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
markhout
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176



WWW
« Reply #83 on: September 30, 2009, 08:12:30 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: TMARK
The Zeiss 21, 28, 35 and 50 1.5 and F2 are great.  The Leica 28 cron is amazing, although I like the Zeiss 28 better.  The Leica lenses have a different look, less contrast while being really sharp.  The 28 cron produces some incredible mids on b&w film.

Curious as to how Zeiss lenses work with leica's 6 bit / lens recognition system...
Logged

Slough
Guest
« Reply #84 on: September 30, 2009, 05:19:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: BernardLanguillier
That's also why focus stacking cannot be accomplished simply by masking.

Cheers,
Bernard

I think there is another reason, assuming that I understood the earlier post, and that by focus stacking you mean achieving infinite DOF by stacking multiple exposures, each focused at a different distance. When you focus on a nearby object, the background is out of focus. When you focus on the background, the nearby object is blurred. The problem is that the blurred image of the nearby object is larger than the size of the focused image of the nearby object. Hence it is not possible to obtain a focused image of the background surrounding the nearby object. Therefore it is not possible to create a focused composite image.

As an aside I feel quite annoyed at having downloaded and tested (but not bought) a new focus stacking programme, only to slowly realise that in general focus stacking is impossible. Odd how these people are prepared to charge you a pretty penny for their software, but they do not explain that it can only work for a restricted range of scenes.
Logged
tetsuo77
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #85 on: October 01, 2009, 03:40:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Not to be a fanboy [never intended to be]; but:
"It's more expensive than a lot of other highly featured cameras. So what?  Do you want a Porche or a Daiwo? It's much easier to fit the kids in the Daiwo. Isn't it? "

Anytime the Daewoo over the Porsche, to be honest.
I don´t have the time, nor the will, nor the energy to have to "serve" a car or a camera. They HAVE to serve me. And I don´t have to get intimidated by ANY aspect of it. I´ll get the Daewoo for the LOL´s and the smile you´ll get upon your face on every single corner on a winding road. Even on the city. Because they are THAT simple, cheap and chearful cars are usually the ones you remember everyday. Not the bloated exotica. Think Panda, Hyundai, Aygo, the first gen KA. They are simple, straightforward, and pretty reliable. Built to serve, not to be served -unless bad sample, that is-.

I´d rather have a piece of equipment I´m not afraid to get stolen, to scratch, to get dirty, to almost break. And Leicas are an eyecandy for burglars: red.dot magnetism.

I too think that any digital camera, due to its nature, is doomed to die in a max of four years. I´m sorry. And that it is not really true that of "it´s on the lenses". Not any more. Make it a trio: lenses, sensors, and builtin software. That´s what will give you the quality.

You could have a camera for forty years before. Just change the film. Unfortunately, now the "digital film" is not replaceable after a single use, or to get a better performance. The sensor stays with the body [but for MFDB].

So get a Oly 4xx, a K7, or a GH1, and have fun with them and the pancakes avaliable to them. There are some true gems for them, as the DA 35 macro [a pitty that it is a retrofocus design. A real miss for rangefinder photography, I have to say. That lens is simply spectacular].

Do not be afraid to scratch the car if you´re having fun with it.
Logged
Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #86 on: October 01, 2009, 05:56:55 AM »
ReplyReply

"Anytime the Daewoo over the Porsche, to be honest. "

I agree with you when it comes to the camera part, but here I don't I prefer a porsche over Daewoo any second. It is just fun to drive.
Logged

tetsuo77
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 92


« Reply #87 on: October 01, 2009, 08:45:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Christopher
"Anytime the Daewoo over the Porsche, to be honest. "

I agree with you when it comes to the camera part, but here I don't I prefer a porsche over Daewoo any second. It is just fun to drive.

You ever tried the Daewoo Matiz or the former Atos on a roundabout?  
Just for the LOL´s. The Porsche, or Fords for that matter, are way too precise.

And that´s it on cars for today.
 
Logged
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12215


« Reply #88 on: October 01, 2009, 02:40:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Em... gimme the Porsche, please, if you are giving them away.

Ever had one of them on a roundabout? Fast. You indicated you yearn excitement, LOL's even...

Rob C
Logged

250swb
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 211


« Reply #89 on: October 01, 2009, 04:28:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Well if we are talking about analogies with cars the basic fault people labour under is that if a car holds the road well it is a good car. But what an enthusiast would say is that if a car handles well it is a good car. They are two separate things. A car with good road holding is great, until the road holding ceases. On the other hand a car that handles well lets you know when the limits are reached in a controlable way, giving you the opportuinity to modify its corning behaviour as you go on your way.

And that surely is the way with a Leica, it is a great handling camera, you know where the limits are and it isn't going to let you down. A big DSLR does everything you could want, until it all of a sudden it becomes unwieldy and you can't carry it anywhere without people staring, you need a massive backpack with all your lenses, and you end up not taking it to the limit because its been left at home.

On the other hand, ex-Formula 1 World Champion James Hunt drove an Austin A35 van after retiring from racing, both to carry his budgerigar's to breeders shows, and with the intent of having as much fun corning at 30 m.p.h. as he once did at 130 m.p.h. So we should all give up and buy a Holga if we want something fun and cheap.

Steve
Logged

JonasYip
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 41


« Reply #90 on: October 01, 2009, 05:11:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Rob C
Em... gimme the Porsche, please, if you are giving them away.

Ever had one of them on a roundabout? Fast. You indicated you yearn excitement, LOL's even...

Rob C

Well, although I actually do have a Porsche, I must say I've had much fun in a rental Ford Fiesta (or somesuch) on roundabouts... you get to feel the car shaking and pushing the limits of grip and structural integrity as you "scream" around the corner, all while never actually approaching the speed limit.

j
Logged

Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 584


WWW
« Reply #91 on: October 01, 2009, 06:28:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tetsuo77
And Leicas are an eyecandy for burglars: red.dot magnetism.

That has not been my experience. Thieves are often fools. A few years ago, some burglars broke into my guest house, and stole a lot of cheap garbage. They took a nearly worthless old Casio keyboard that belonged to my wife. It had been sitting on top of my guitar amplifiers, many of which are worth thousands. The only thing of actual value they took was an air compressor. Thank God they left my vintage amps alone.

When I shoot with practically any film camera (which the M9 certainly resembles from the front), people look at me with pity, as if I haven't yet discovered that digital cameras are available. Recently, I was shooting with a Rollei TLR when a man told me his grandfather also had "an old box camera" at one time. If your local thieves have some idea what a Leica is, well, then your city has a better class of criminal than mine.

My Porsches have been extremely reliable. They aren't cheap to repair, but they don't need repaired very often either. I sold an air-cooled 911 last year for a very large percentage of what it cost in 1987 when it was new, but I don't see many 22 year old economy cars for sale around here. Film Leicas are kind of like that too. Expensive to buy, but still worth maintaining long after other equipment has gone to the scrap heap. I don't know if that will hold true for digital Leicas though.
Logged
Nick Rains
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 700



WWW
« Reply #92 on: October 01, 2009, 08:00:02 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tetsuo77
Not to be a fanboy [never intended to be]; but:
"It's more expensive than a lot of other highly featured cameras. So what?  Do you want a Porche or a Daiwo? It's much easier to fit the kids in the Daiwo. Isn't it? "

I agree with many of your points but they only really hold true if you only want a car to get you from A to B reliably and economically. What if you want to push the limits? High performance stuff takes work to get the most out of it. You get out what you put in.

A GH1 can take the same pictures as my 5D2, much as a Daiwoo can get me to the shops just as well as a Porsche, but the 5D2 is capable of much higher performance if I choose to use it and more importantly, when I need it.

A really high end bit of gear is pleasant and easy to use AND capable of high performance.
Logged

Nick Rains
Australian Landscape Photographer
www.nickrains.com
iPad Publishing
www.photique.com.au
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1258


« Reply #93 on: October 01, 2009, 10:43:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Nick Rains
I agree with many of your points but they only really hold true if you only want a car to get you from A to B reliably and economically. What if you want to push the limits? High performance stuff takes work to get the most out of it. You get out what you put in.

A GH1 can take the same pictures as my 5D2, much as a Daiwoo can get me to the shops just as well as a Porsche, but the 5D2 is capable of much higher performance if I choose to use it and more importantly, when I need it.

A really high end bit of gear is pleasant and easy to use AND capable of high performance.

Bad comparison. A GH1 also has useful qualities and capabilities that the 5DII does not, like size and weight, and the twistable LCD. Better to compare the 5DII to a rebel...not to be a nitpicker.

JC
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7250


WWW
« Reply #94 on: October 01, 2009, 11:53:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I would rather compare a Porsche and a truck. Truck moves more stuff, Porsche moves little but fast. Speed limits apply to both, beware of sergeant Nyquist!

Best regards
Erik


Quote from: Nick Rains
I agree with many of your points but they only really hold true if you only want a car to get you from A to B reliably and economically. What if you want to push the limits? High performance stuff takes work to get the most out of it. You get out what you put in.

A GH1 can take the same pictures as my 5D2, much as a Daiwoo can get me to the shops just as well as a Porsche, but the 5D2 is capable of much higher performance if I choose to use it and more importantly, when I need it.

A really high end bit of gear is pleasant and easy to use AND capable of high performance.
Logged

Christopher
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 944


WWW
« Reply #95 on: October 02, 2009, 08:56:45 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

I would rather compare a Porsche and a truck. Truck moves more stuff, Porsche moves little but fast. Speed limits apply to both, beware of sergeant Nyquist!

Best regards
Erik
Since when are there speed limits ? ;-)
Logged

markowich
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 119


WWW
« Reply #96 on: October 02, 2009, 03:39:31 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Bartie
Thanks For that info Michael, It`s been a toss between the 35mm f1.4 summilux and the 50mm f1.4 lux and I think I`m going for the 35mm as my first lens.

Regards Andy

andy,
careful with the 35mm lux. it does have rather significant focus shift. the 28mm cron does not and the 35mm cron to a much lesser extent.
peter
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7250


WWW
« Reply #97 on: October 02, 2009, 04:27:19 PM »
ReplyReply

Ja, ja, Richtgeschwindigkeit, und die Polizistin heisst die Schöne Müllnerin ;-)

Herzliche Grüsse
Erik


Quote from: Christopher
Since when are there speed limits ? ;-)
Logged

eronald
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 3870



WWW
« Reply #98 on: October 03, 2009, 05:31:19 AM »
ReplyReply

An earlier post didn't work.

I've used my own D3x and M8 a lot in Paris.

I use a $100 50mm/1.8 on the Nikon

The D3x wins strongly over the Leica; However, when you are very very close to people, the M8 with its toy-like aspect is a crowd pleaser, I lend it to people who don't like cameras, and they thaw.

Edmund


Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Charles Wood
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6


« Reply #99 on: October 03, 2009, 10:00:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Looking at the comparison photos today from the M9, the a900 and the Canon, the Canon image appears, at least to me, as if there is a slight ghost image vs the type of image I would expect to see from subpar processing or mediocre optics. Other reviews have noted the Canons tended to have some moire effects which would seem to indicate their AA filters are less aggressive than some other DSLRs.  Anyone?
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad