NYT and M9

Few things I don't understand. From his original review http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html he had a laundry list of dislikes about the M8. I'm having a hard time seeing where the M9 specifically has solved many of them. My comments are in parentheses.

1. Framelines set too loose (the M8.2 tightened them, but M9's are only about half as improved as those.)

2. Rear buttons not recessed (hasn't changed on the M9)

3. Exposure compensation setting (improved, starting on the M8.2)

4. Poor AWB (improved with firmware on the M8)

5. Autoexposure unreliable (same metering on the M9)

6. In Manual mode, shutter speeds not shown in finder (same on M9)

7. Low light capability (improved on M9, but still not quite to the level of the Canons he was comparing to, and the new Canons have improved more)

8. No fast wide lenses (Leica since released the 21 and 24 Summiluxes, at the time he wrote these were "only" f/2.8)

9. Buffer sluggishness/write speed (still a complaint with the M9)

10. Cost of replacing filters. (Improved because now he only needs to replace UV filters every six months, not UV-IR)

9. Lack of DOF (frankly I don't get it, because I just don't see a huge difference in DOF between the same framing of the same subject using a 21mm on my M8 and a 28mm on my 5D which give the same FOV)

I'm glad he's happy with the M9, but it seems to me most of what he found so objectionable about the M8 is still true of the M9.
 
Thanks Ben for outlining his previous gripes or concerns. He had also mentioned the awkwardness of changing SD cards, and I believe that remains the same. And he closed the M8 review with some concerns about Leica's repairs. It may be that he has decided that there are benefits that outweigh his concerns. I look forward to his posting something more detailed about his experiences with the M9 in the field. Bruno Stevens did some excellent reportage in Haiti with his M9, but he was plenty satisfied with the M8, so it would be interesting for me to hear from Michael Kamber why he is so much more impressed with the M9.
And thanks to JAAP for the link.
 
Ben, most of his complains has been valid at the time of writting (well more before it, as he was using 3 M8s over one year and then wrote the review). During and after that time Leica fixed many "beta version" problems. You have to look at his M8 review in context of the time (lack of 3rd party UV/IR filters for example).

While several of the complains are still valid for M9 now, they are definitely no showstoppers.
 
M9 succeeds where M8 fell short

M9 succeeds where M8 fell short

Maybe the battle conditions at the Gare du Nord with long queues weren't quite as stressful as going on patrol while embedded in Iraq. But I agree with an earlier poster. He took 3 M8s to Iraq and they weren't reliable enough. A lot of small stuff has been polished up since then. The actual picture has structure and depth in it which speak well of both Kamber and the M9.

scott
 
His complaints were quite accurate, even if some people didn't want to hear them. The M9 is better, I think, thanks to straight-talking professional reviews like his. The major improvements are that the camera is full-frame and does not have that unbelievable IR problem. Bright light sources at frame edges no longer seem to cause funky green streaks. I hope it is more reliable too; time will tell. There is still room for improvement, such as replacing the clunky baseplate with something more sensible, but we can be happy that it has come this far.
 
Last edited:
ZlatkoBatistich said:
His complaints were quite accurate, even if some people didn't want to hear them. The M9 is better, I think, thanks to straight-talking professional reviews like his. The major improvements are that the camera is full-frame and does not have that unbelievable IR problem. Bright light sources at frame edges no longer seem to cause funky green streaks. I hope it is more reliable too; time will tell. There is still room for improvement, such as replacing the clunky baseplate with something more sensible, but we can be happy that it has come this far.
Click to expand...

Well, not always that accurate. For instance he did not notice that the start-up time was not until the red LED extinguished, but just 0.7 secs, causing him to call the camera sluggish, and a few other errors. Excusable, as he is a d****d good photographer, but not a professional reviewer. Nevertheless, he seems to have returned to Leica.
 
the m9 should have been the first digital leica. but sh*t happens, bad management with the project IMO did not cost leica too much. the purist remained and upgraded to the m9... ah brand preference is so strong. in due time, everyone will have at least the m9 and the m8 will sooner or later fade into history, forgotten, and $7,000 less on the checkbook.
 
I'll stay out of this skirmish. However, I did notice that Jaap has a new skin on his M9. Looks cool. Which hide is it?

As to Mr. Kamber, if he can earn a living making images, who am I to question his opinion (I am stuck with a day job)? Well, actually anyone can question it, as it's only an opinion. I love my M8. If I could afford an M9, I suspect I'd love it, too.
 
Jaap, off topic? Heavens, no. If Kamber had a slick snakeskin cover on that M8, it certainly would have altered his initial review.:D
 
I'm glad to read that! I have three of Tightsqueeze's prints hanging up at work. An amazing person. That M8 went through some harrowing experiences with him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom