Canon 5D MK II vs Leica M9

jaapv said:
Well, there is noise and noise. Nowadays with LR3 or CS5 most M9 users will shoot up to and including 2500 (aka Canon 3200) without much trouble. maybe noise, like sharpness, is a bourgeois concept ;)
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some sample, I'm trying to convince myself that the M9 worths the money...
 
Just a quickie 2500, at default settings

A bit of tweaking would have lopped off more noise, but this is quite good enough for print imo.

2500-2.jpg
 
Last edited:
jaapv said:
Just a quickie 2500, at default settings

A bit of tweaking would have lopped off more noise, but this is quite good enough for print imo.

2500-2.jpg
Click to expand...

Whoa, that's some pretty heavy banding, is this a before/after? The left looks like a D700 pushing 25,600.
 
Yes - I just saw the same. It looks like an imbalance in the red channel.It is the first and last shot it did that out of thousands . I'll wait for a repeat until I start to worry.
Stupid for seing it after posting...:(
 
Last edited:
Update: Subsequent shots at 1250 and 2500 do the same.... send to Solms... Discussed the repair. Spare parts shortage will make it take at least three weeks, I'm off to Africa in two. CS very kindly offered me a loaner
 
Colin Corneau said:
The Canon has, by far, the more advanced sensor.
Click to expand...
No, the M9 sensor is likely at least twice as sensitive as the 5dm2 sensor. Keep in mind that .RAW files are not the output of the sensor but rather the output of the in-camera image post-processing system. That (as well as the Bayer matrix and the readout circuitry) is the difference: Canon does a far better job at producing pleasing high-ISO images in post-processing than Leica.

(there is a reason engineers generally don't design for CMOS in place of CCD when sensitivity matters, unless there is a strong cost constraint)

Within 2-3 years the high end Canon, Nikon and Leica cameras will all use back-illuminated CMOS sensors as the remaining advantages of CCD sensors won't be worth the cost for anyone. The back-illuminated CMOS revolution is already underway in P&S cameras but not quite yet in the high end market (maybe Photokina).

Ted Witcher said:
You mean people actually release digital images right out of the camera?
Click to expand...
A lot of my work is for use in litigation and it is *very* *important* that those images come straight out of the camera, unedited and with no exotic camera settings. I don't even use RAW files for this work since I don't want to use any raw converter.

I bought an M9 & gear because I just don't like any of the Canon lens shorter than 135mm and I do like the Leica lens results. Personal thing. But the systems don't really compete so I kept most Canon glass and a 5D & 1Dm3. I intend Canon for macro, telephoto & sports work and the M9 for street and "up close & personal" work.

I'm not yet as good with the M9 as the 5D but the size & weight alone are a huge difference - I already prefer M9 even though I'm further back on the skill curve. Ergonomics do matter after a few hours of carrying around the heavy SLR gear.
 
I don't understand why anyone would use Lightroom when CaptureOne Pro is on the planet. Lightroom & a $6000 camera is a false savings. The big boys all use C1 Pro.
 
Steve Karr said:
I don't understand why anyone would use Lightroom when CaptureOne Pro is on the planet. Lightroom & a $6000 camera is a false savings. The big boys all use C1 Pro.
Click to expand...

Because C1 is clunky and overpriced? Plenty of pros use LR. This shoot here, for example... http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/2010/08/gq-taiwan-shoot-with-leica-s2-nic.html

And, believe it or not, plenty of pros even use Aperture, like this guy... http://www.chasejarvis.com/#mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=0&p=5&a=0&at=0
Shock!
 
LR3 and my M9 files are fantastic together! While I still do some skin editing once in a while in photoshop, most files get processed quickly and very nicely in LR3. Very happy with this version (versus LR2). And there is a third party camera profile for the M9 (see Thorsten Overgaards site) you can add to give some further processing options.
 
Double Negative said:
I've tried them all. C1. Bibble. LR. Aperture. Heck, even Phocus. In the end, I stick with the simplest solution... Adobe Photoshop/Bridge and ACR. I don't batch anything and instead tweak each photo individually. Time consuming surely, but I'm not a high volume shooter. I also prefer "direct file management" instead of these "library driven" ones like Aperture and Lightroom. Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but it works for me. :p

Leica used to recommend C1, now they're into LR. There were advantages in some cases (anti-moiré and sharpness, etc.) but since LR uses the underlying ACR I'm not "missing anything" so to say by going with Photoshop instead.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

P.S.
You have ridiculous gear list for each forum. This plus your Canon is just "wow" to me. Seriously.
 
Ted Witcher said:
Because C1 is clunky and overpriced? Plenty of pros use LR. This shoot here, for example... http://dfarkas.blogspot.com/2010/08/gq-taiwan-shoot-with-leica-s2-nic.html

And, believe it or not, plenty of pros even use Aperture, like this guy... http://www.chasejarvis.com/#mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=0&p=5&a=0&at=0
Shock!
Click to expand...

I've never used CaptureOne.

For about a year I used Aperture 2 and I liked it alot. And then Aperture 3 came out and I reinstalled everything on my computer and didn't like it at all. It was like using iPhoto with amateur features I'd never need. So i tried out Lightroom 3 and quickly became a fan of the app.

When I first started out I scanned my film and then used Photoshop with each image. But my deadlines have turned from 3 weeks to 10 minutes. and there's no time to put love into an image. More often than I'd like I've sent photos straight out of camera.
 
I admit I was curious so I looked what a replacement for my 5DII costs. We all discussed the price tag of the M9. But I also had a problem with the lenses. I only use the non-L lenses and have the 2.8/24mm (400 EUR). Love this lens. It's tiny and the quality is good even wide open, so I use it quite often at 2.8. The only replacement in the Leica/CV/Zeiss lens lineup is the 2.8/24mm from Leica for 3100 EUR :(

EDIT: Just found out that the Zeiss 25mm is a 2.8 lens. That's close enough but still 950 EUR.

Perhaps if I win the lottery next week....
 
Last edited:
ruslan said:
Pretty cleat that this sensor build from two parts, two smaller sensors:mad:
Click to expand...
No, the sensor is one part. The tolerances are much too small to use several parts.

What is different about in some areas of the sensor is the readout logic, the circuitry that converts the image data the sensor captured into digital bits. The sensor data is converted in different areas at the same time, each area by its own readout circuit.

If the readout circuit in one area doesn't convert captured image data exactly the same way the readout circuit for another converts then you get banding.

I would expect *at least* 4 and probably not less than 16 readout areas on a CCD, and I think CMOS often has even more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom