| Digital Leica M8 / M8.2 / M9 / M-E /Mono / M10 aka "M" Discussions about the Leica M8 /M 8.2 / M9 / M9-P/ M-E / M Monochrom / M10 aka "M": Leica digital M mount rangefinder cameras. Naming the new digital M the "Leica M" is VERY unfortunate as it will only confuse newbies with other Leica M cameras of the the past. Happily there is room for confusion with only the past 59 years of Leica M production ... since Leica introduced the Leica M system in 1953. All Hail for the Leica Marketing Department learning Leica M history! |
|
View Poll Results: How many M9 owners are planning a move to the M10
|
|
Yes I am planning to upgrade
|
  
|
25 |
20.66% |
|
Nope, not worth it for me
|
  
|
96 |
79.34% |
08-09-2012
|
#51
|
|
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,199
|
All of that except better image quality per pixel - those are identical, and the M9 has more of them...  |
|
|
|
|
08-09-2012
|
#52
|
|
My Red Dot Glows For You
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,933
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent.G
My view is that if one chooses to go digital, the only direction to move is forward, not backwards from where you started.
|
Going forward can also mean being open to possibilities that were self-denied before.
__________________
Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).
My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
|
|
|
|
|
08-09-2012
|
#53
|
|
My Red Dot Glows For You
Gabriel M.A. is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Paris, Frons
Posts: 9,933
|
BTW, I'm sure lots of people are already waiting for the M11, and have planned to skip the M10, what with the M10 already being obsolete and causing issues. 
__________________
Fellow RFF member: I respect your bandwidth by not posting images larger than 800px on the longest side, and by removing image in a quote.
Together we can combat bandwidth waste (and image scrolling).
My Flickr | (one of) My Portfolio
|
|
|
|
|
08-09-2012
|
#54
|
|
Registered User
icebear is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: just west of the big apple
Posts: 1,772
|
Folks, please look back into Leica history of model numbers:
M3 , M6, M9 great cameras.
M5 the unloved step child, I hope the M10 is not in the M5 heritage...
|
|
|
|
|
08-10-2012
|
#55
|
|
Registered User
Nemo is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Z
I too can only imagine video with full-frame and the DOF of a 50mm @ f/0.95 and manual focus. Not a particularly pretty image I'm sad to say.
|
VistaVision. |
|
|
|
|
08-10-2012
|
#56
|
|
Registered User
Nemo is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 197
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by icebear
I'm not sure what the expectation are in regards to HIGH ISO and the IQ but this example is pretty darn ok in my book :
M9 ISO 1000, Planar 2/50, 1/60s f 2.8, no noise reduction, crop approx 1600 x 1400 from orig. and ridiculous 138kB jpg for posting:
And if there is any moiree showing, that is a jpg artefact on your screen, the orig. DNG is clean  . |
The problem with high ISO noise is not the grainy look. The problem is in the loss of detail and dynamic range. So your picture is useless for the purpose of demonstrating high ISO quality in M9's pictures. We all know the image quality of the M9 at high ISO values is horrible. |
|
|
|
|
08-10-2012
|
#57
|
|
Moderator
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 39
Posts: 11,722
|
icebear... if they redesign the M10 (which I'm not saying is going to happen), it could be a repeat of history.
|
|
|
|
|
08-15-2012
|
#58
|
|
-
fstops is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 232
|
I think M10 could benefit from an add-on EVF that one could use on the hot shoe.
Other than that, high ISO capability and video does not justify an upgrade from M9.
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#59
|
|
Registered User
dreamsandart is online now
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 442
|
I think the M10 will be a great camera. Just not for me. The only improvements I've heard of that would be of interest; higher ISO use, better LCD screen, faster buffer, I can get along without.
Hay, I'm still getting used to the idea I'm not shooting film
 400ASA is still fast for me, used to be a few hours or days to 'see' the photo I just took, the M9's LCD does fine for what it does, and the 'decisive moment' does not mean a burst of shutter action.
Now a EVF finder would be interesting, but its not why I have rangefinder cameras. And more pixels
just what I [don't] need, the need for more higher capacity storage as the M9 files are enough.
It will be fun reading the reviews |
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#60
|
|
Moderator
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 39
Posts: 11,722
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamsandart
Now a EVF finder would be interesting, but its not why I have rangefinder cameras.
|
I wonder if this will work out for Leica or if there will be a backlash. |
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#61
|
|
Registered User
Paul Luscher is offline
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 682
|
Not right now.--particularly if M10 is priced a $10K or higher. Just don't have that kind of cash on hand. Also--hate to say it--Olympus EM-5 has pretty much all the qualities of an M--small size, quiet operation,etc--and with more and better features--for about 1/6 the price of the current M9.
So if the M10 does come in at $10k, I'll just stick with the M9,and maybe buy the M10 ( or M11, if I have to wait tht long) down the line when I can afford to. Or I might just bid adieu to Leica and stick with the Olympus MFTs.....
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#62
|
|
Moderator
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 39
Posts: 11,722
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Luscher
Also--hate to say it--Olympus EM-5 has pretty much all the qualities of an M--small size, quiet operation,etc--and with more and better features--for about 1/6 the price of the current M9...
|
But one feels like a camera and the other like a TV remote... |
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#63
|
|
Registered User
LCT is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,306
|
I like much my Zuiko lenses but Oly will make a rangefinder when pigs can fly.
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#64
|
|
Registered User
porktaco is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,723
|
1600, summicron-c 40. very noisy, and required a lot of NR in PP. lots of detail went away. i like the way the photo looks, but i'd like it even more if there were more details. |
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#65
|
|
Registered User
ramosa is offline
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 906
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viktor Sebastian
I still use an M8 So the question for me is M9 or M10 for crazy money no doubt. |
same situation here. the expected M10 specs and exorbitant cost are making the M9 (or, heck, even the M6 TTL) look better and better ...
__________________
Ramosa/Christopher
Leica M9 + 35/50/90
|
|
|
|
|
08-16-2012
|
#66
|
|
Registered User
anerjee is offline
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Singapore
Posts: 112
|
1600, summicron-c 40. very noisy, and required a lot of NR in PP. lots of detail went away. i like the way the photo looks, but i'd like it even more if there were more details.
Is this the M9?
You will get far better results with Portra400@1600. Sample -
I've heard that the M9 is usable till 2500 with noise reduction, so I am a bit surprised.
|
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#67
|
|
Registered User
porktaco is offline
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,723
|
well, is was very dark. i think in a reasonably well lit situation, 1600 could have been ok
|
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#68
|
|
Registered User
ajramirez is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 95
|
Not a great photograph by any means, but an example of the M9P at ISO 2500. Processed from DNG through ACR with the Luminance and Chroma sliders set at 50.
And the original color version.
Cheers,
Antonio |
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#69
|
|
Registered User
astro8 is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 50
Posts: 801
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by porktaco
1600, summicron-c 40. very noisy, and required a lot of NR in PP. lots of detail went away. i like the way the photo looks, but i'd like it even more if there were more details.
|
Wow, Adam that is noisy as all hell!
I was toying with the idea of an M9 but since 95% of my shots are taken at night or in dark interiors i think I'll stick with my R-D1. It does pretty well @1600.
What's your take on this? |
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#70
|
|
Registered User
ajramirez is offline
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 95
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro8
Wow, Adam that is noisy as all hell!
I was toying with the idea of an M9 but since 95% of my shots are taken at night or in dark interiors i think I'll stick with my R-D1. It does pretty well @1600.
What's your take on this?
|
I know the question is not directed at me, but please see my post above. I think Adamīs result may be due to really challenging lighting and underexposure in the dark areas. Not representative of the M9's low light performance in my opinion.
Regards,
Antonio |
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#71
|
|
Registered User
Fraser is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Scotland
Posts: 601
|
There is nothing wrong with the M9 at 1600iso, porktaco that pic must have been about 5 stops underexposed.
1600iso
12fbpic1600room by f4saregreat!, on Flickr |
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#72
|
|
Registered User
astro8 is offline
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Age: 50
Posts: 801
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ajramirez
I know the question is not directed at me, but please see my post above. I think Adamīs result may be due to really challenging lighting and underexposure in the dark areas. Not representative of the M9's low light performance in my opinion.
Regards,
Antonio
|
Yes, Antonio. Your example is quite good. |
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#73
|
|
[Pithy phrase]
dogberryjr is offline
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: WV, USA
Posts: 957
|
Not upgrading, and in fact I've sold my M9. It wasn't an easy decision, but I just didn't love it $5000 to 7000 worth.
__________________
M, LTM, FD, F, Film, Digital, MF . . . Jack of all, master of none.
|
|
|
|
|
08-25-2012
|
#74
|
|
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis,Netherlands
Posts: 7,199
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fraser
porktaco that pic must have been about 5 stops underexposed.
|
You are spot-on. The only part of it that is more or less exposed correctly, the side of the toilet, looks ok.
NR after the raw conversion always looks worse than for instance the latest version of ACR btw. |
|
|
|
|
08-26-2012
|
#75
|
|
Registered User
leicashot is offline
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,530
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by jaapv
You are spot-on. The only part of it that is more or less exposed correctly, the side of the toilet, looks ok.
NR after the raw conversion always looks worse than for instance the latest version of ACR btw.
|
The focus is also on the toilet, making the picture look even worse |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:10. |
|
|
