DPreview's in-depth review of the M9?

[Dante_Stella]

Are we going to see one of these? Or is this going to be a repeat of the M8 situation with some other reviewers (waiting for a fix to the IR issue with that camera, maybe some other issue here)? Three months is an uncharacteristically long time for DPreview to wait, and this was a big enough launch for the site to change its logo to a Leica-looking one.

Dante

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I've been waiting for it myself. One senses that they are intimidated by the prospect.

 

[dcsang]

I would assume (yes yes.. I know all about "that" word.. 😉 ) that Phil is probably trying to tackle that review himself (if at all). Lately DPReview has had a number of secondary (but probably just as good) reviewers doing their reviews for many of the cameras. He's probably backed up with a bunch of other administrative details - that's just a guess mind you.

I guess the M9 requires a "special" review? (and reviewer)

Cheers,
Dave

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Phil ended up actually buying an M8, didn't he? If I remember right, he'd never used a rangefinder before that. Indeed, it was his M8 review that got me interested in the RF world.

 

[photogdave]

I won't care if they review it or not. If they do I probably won't read the whole thing anyway. I find their tests too clinical and the photographic examples often contradict what they are writing. The real world test photos are usually pretty weak too, and the often fill the gallery with low ISO shots and only give us a smattering of high ISO shots to look at. Lately the seem to have recognized this and made an effort to provide more high ISO examples though.
Too often I hear people taking DPreview's tests as gospel and parroting some of their results so they can claim a certain camera is bad at something or other. Some of the technical aspects of these tests are beyond their comprehension - I know they are beyond mine! Same with Photodo lens reviews.
I tested the M9 with my own hands and my own eyes. If I could afford it I would buy one. I know many people no longer have camera stores close by to do this themselves - blame the internet!, but I feel there are better resources than DPreview for gear tests and reviews.

 

[pevelg]

I like Sean Reids reviews. You have pay $$ though, but the reviews are top notch in my opinion. I do use dpreviews as well though, but mainly for simple p&s the I may buy as a gift.

 

[ZeissFan]

I won't care if they review it or not. If they do I probably won't read the whole thing anyway. I find their tests too clinical and the photographic examples often contradict what they are writing. The real world test photos are usually pretty weak too, and the often fill the gallery with low ISO shots and only give us a smattering of high ISO shots to look at.

I agree. There's simply too much. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: More isn't always better. Sometimes, it's just more.

And the site is built to make you click and click and click.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

M9 review

M9 review

How about a Pop Photo review?
http://www.popphoto.com/Reviews/Cameras/Camera-Test-Leica-M9

 

[Viktor Sebastian]

Leica M9 Canon Rumors Review

 

[mervynyan]

This kind of specialty camera review is irrelevant. Many in this forum own a M9, their hands-on is perhaps more practical than a general review

 

[Roger Hicks]

This kind of specialty camera review is irrelevant. Many in this forum own a M9, their hands-on is perhaps more practical than a general review

Possibly. But a formal review by a Leica enthusiast may not be entirely worthless: http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/m9 review.html

Cheers,

R.

 

[Paul T.]

Leica M9 Canon Rumors Review

For a reviewer.... he took some damn good photos.

 

[JayGannon]

For a reviewer.... he took some damn good photos.

I wouldnt class Craig as a reviewer, hes quote a good photographer in his own right and does CR as an aside to other work.

 

[Paul T.]

I wouldnt class Craig as a reviewer, hes quote a good photographer in his own right and does CR as an aside to other work.

You're probably right. He certainly seems to occupy a different profession from the popphoto guy, who spent two thirds of the review talking about the concept of rangefinders, and says little if anything on how the camera actually performs.

Craig's the real reviewer, I reckon.

.

 

[kalex]

Wow - finally very good quality pictures from some one who actually used the camera to take pictures and not for reasons of theoretical masturbation. Very nice job on canon rumors review.

 

[Keith]

Leica M9 Canon Rumors Review

I think that's the most sensible down to earth review I've ever read!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Indeed, a superb review.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ZeissFan]

I won't care if they review it or not. If they do I probably won't read the whole thing anyway. I find their tests too clinical and the photographic examples often contradict what they are writing. ...

I agree. And I'm not paying anyone on the Internet to read their review. That's almost as useless as Times Select -- paying money for Frank Rich's most recent anti-Bush rant and a crossword puzzle. There's a guy who needs a life. Week after week after week -- for four years. Had to mention Bush in every column on the arts. Finally, they moved him out of arts and into opinion, where he should have been.

 

[ChrisC]

Indeed, a superb review.

That's a wonderful picture at the head of the review Roger. I've bookmarked the site and will enjoy exploring it later.

............. Chris

 

[Viktor Sebastian]

For a reviewer.... he took some damn good photos.

That’s what I thought as well. 😀