M9 Alive and ....well- Post Your Pics Here!

This '51 is clean and sharp. I like the color. I just tested it against five other lenses from 35 - 50mm and it did well. (https://cameraderie.org/threads/lens-test-quick-and-dirty.53628/#post-470446) I have three J8's. One is a real honey. One I damaged and the third is in the shop for a CLA.

The only problem with the Soviet lenses is that QC is spotty. You know the old adage, "We pretend to work, they pretend to pay us." As I said above, I do not buy the cheapest nor from the less than stellar sellers. It is cheaper in the long run. Jupiter made/makes good lenses.

All old lenses brands have damages by morons.
I never had FSU RF lens which I wasn’t able to CLA.
And none of those gave me trouble.
In fact, FSU optics are much more stable than Canon and Leitz RF lenses of same vintage.
 
All old lenses brands have damages by morons.
I never had FSU RF lens which I wasn’t able to CLA.
And none of those gave me trouble.
In fact, FSU optics are much more stable than Canon and Leitz RF lenses of same vintage.

That "damage by morons" could be the problem. As to how they stack up against Canon I cannot say. I do not know enough about lenses. Sonnar Brian may, but not I. I am happy with the Jupiters I have. They are especially flattering on skin, at least the J8. That J8 works very well on an M9.
 
I surrendered to the M9 CCD with the Cooke Amotal for a run through the West Mooring Basin here in town. The light was good, the sensor faithful and the lens giving. Here is my old fave, the Oregon Responder, redux. This lens is sharp enough that the maker's phone number is readable on the dock lines. And the color and hues are just great.


And Steve, IIRC, who worked on the boat that dragged this net for PNW pink shrimp, He suspected I was there from the parole office looking for miscreants. Sorry, just an old fool with a camera catching photos of the harbor.


A visitor from Stockholm. A beautiful sailboat a long way from home.


And a couple of fishing boats "up on the hard"


 
Sorry, after looking and posting in some other show off your camera threads, I couldn't help it.

52341807112_cd6463fa91_o.jpg
IMG_9359
 
I don’t have an M9 but an M8. It’s the same camera but with a cropped sensor, right?
Not quite. It was the M8, the 8.2 and then the M9. The M8 and M8.2 both have thin IR cut filters on their sensors so require an IR filter on the lens unless you can live with bilious greens and blacks. IIRC the M9 has a greater IR cut filter but some say it still needs an IR filter. I do not use one.

I like my M8.2 for great B&W which it will do in a JPG while producing a regular color RAW file.

These will help better than I:



I very much like the M9 colors. The sensors suffered from sensor cover corrosion. Mine was fixed by the factory with a circuit board upgrade. After-market techs can upgrade the sensor cover and Jadon Rosado is reputed as excellent at this. He may still be on this board. https://www.instagram.com/reddotrepair/

So it is the same as the M9 is like saying "the same as my brother-in-law's but double-breasted and blue." They are both good cameras.
 
I don’t have an M9 but an M8. It’s the same camera but with a cropped sensor, right?
I kept my M8 after buying the M9 and M Monochrom. The CCD in the M8 has higher saturation count by ~50%. The M9 sensor required more "thinning" for the off-angle light of the full-frame format. The M8 also has 1/8000th shutter speed. I have a lot of "Hot Mirror" filters from the first-gen digital cameras. The M8.2 has the same shutter as the M9.
 
I don’t have an M9 but an M8. It’s the same camera but with a cropped sensor, right?
Regular sensitivity wise they are same. I got M8 for curiosity after getting M-E 220 and was shooting both for some time. The only test I did was for ISO sensitivity. The rest was not nose picking, but real life photography. I noticed dynamic range (real one, not ISO pushing) was slightly narrower on M8, but it still produced fine pictures. Also, I noticed what M8 files were feeling slightly sharper after downsize.

M8 is not the same camera. It feels more closer to analog M by its build. It has funky charge indicator. And it locks if two shots are taken with continuous press of shutter button on third party batteries.

But I sold M8 within few months, because differences were not significant and I'm not a hoarder. I like to have less to shoot more.

L1010001.jpg
 
An M8 costs half as much was a sensor replaced M9. The 1.3 crop doesn’t bother me. I prefer an optical finder else the CL with an M adapter probably makes more sense these days. I do see the CCD sensor having more natural colors but lighting plays a larger hand in that.

21mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton. Indirect and overcast lighting.AAD162FC-A18C-47B5-998A-0E8ED8F19D51.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Regular sensitivity wise they are same. I got M8 for curiosity after getting M-E 220 and was shooting both for some time. The only test I did was for ISO sensitivity. The rest was not nose picking, but real life photography. I noticed dynamic range (real one, not ISO pushing) was slightly narrower on M8, but it still produced fine pictures. Also, I noticed what M8 files were feeling slightly sharper after downsize.

M8 is not the same camera. It feels more closer to analog M by its build. It has funky charge indicator. And it locks if two shots are taken with continuous press of shutter button on third party batteries.

But I sold M8 within few months, because differences were not significant and I'm not a hoarder. I like to have less to shoot more.

View attachment 4818276

Regular sensitivity wise they are same. I got M8 for curiosity after getting M-E 220 and was shooting both for some time. The only test I did was for ISO sensitivity. The rest was not nose picking, but real life photography. I noticed dynamic range (real one, not ISO pushing) was slightly narrower on M8, but it still produced fine pictures. Also, I noticed what M8 files were feeling slightly sharper after downsize.

M8 is not the same camera. It feels more closer to analog M by its build. It has funky charge indicator. And it locks if two shots are taken with continuous press of shutter button on third party batteries.

But I sold M8 within few months, because differences were not significant and I'm not a hoarder. I like to have less to shoot more.

View attachment 4818276
I just tested this "locks up if two shots are taken with third party batteries" as that is what I have, cheap guy that I am. On my M8.2 with a freshly fully charged battery in each case - two were tested - the M8.2 ripped off ten shots before it stopped. In a similar test on the M9 with a not fully charged battery I got seven shots. Both cases the selector switch was set to "C" for continuous shooting. So while some third party batteries may not allow real continuous shooting the two I tested do. Conclusion? Third part batteries for the M8/8.2 and M9 are spotty.
 
I just tested this "locks up if two shots are taken with third party batteries" as that is what I have, cheap guy that I am. On my M8.2 with a freshly fully charged battery in each case - two were tested - the M8.2 ripped off ten shots before it stopped. In a similar test on the M9 with a not fully charged battery I got seven shots. Both cases the selector switch was set to "C" for continuous shooting. So while some third party batteries may not allow real continuous shooting the two I tested do. Conclusion? Third part batteries for the M8/8.2 and M9 are spotty.

So, 8.2 is close to M9 in this regard. It is getting harder not to hoard again :)
 
Back
Top