Erwin Puts on Leica M9 Part 7

[Gary Sandhu]

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/page161/page161.html

pretty graphs

quote:"The current tendency to profile the M8 as a flawed toy and to profile the M9 as one of the best digital cameras in the world is a bit myopic and disregards the many qualities of the M8 as a photographic tool. "

Hear. Hear.

 

[Gary E]

When the M8 came out, people bought them even though an additional IR filter was required (after the fact). Even with all the initial quirks, they evidently bought enough for Leica to make the M8.2 (both at a 1.33x crop factor). And even after that, people must have bought enough M8.2's for them to make the now current M9, and people are still buying them (at a higher price to boot, but alas at FF which people cried for).

So Leica will be Leica, and people will still buy into them for their own reasons, but the simple fact there is really no competition around (except for used RD-1(s) and the Japan market only RD-1x) leaves RF shooters who want a digital solution for their slew of M lenses (could be CV or Zeiss as well).

So for those who want a digital M, any of the Leica offerings can do the job within their own limitations or if it suits your needs (though this is irrelevant for those with GAS 🙄).

 

[jaapv]

The only part of the conclusion I object to is the following, and in the wake thereof the value E.P attaches to the more "difficult" use of the M8:

But even the M9 is not a fully mature product and needs some expertise to take great pictures.

Since when is the expertise needed to use a tool to full extent a measure of the quality of the tool?

 

[Richard Marks]

The only part of the conclusion I object to is the following, and in the wake thereof the value E.P attaches to the more "difficult" use of the M8:

Since when is the expertise needed to use a tool to full extent a measure of the quality of the tool?

I think one can safely say that EP is a fully mature product but I am not always convinced by his pictures 🙂.
Richard

 

[Ben Z]

I think Erwin meant "experience", when he said "expertise". What I took him to be saying is that the M9 still has a learning curve (which I've found true of any new-to-me camera) but less than the M8. Whether he's right about the last part or not, I can't say, having never even seen an M9 in person.

 

[jaapv]

Still, an interesting read, I suppose. Now, if I could understand these diagrams...🙄

 

[Ben Z]

😀. I'm always impressed by Erwin's autodedactic prowess. He's a business consultant by profession, without any formal degree in optics. I have to confess though, that I'm doomed to never be more than dazzled by his science. For me, photography is a hobby, and to my mind is supposed to be a release from the stats and formulae and often, pedantics, of my profession. When it gets this complicated, it stops being fun. That's why I'm such a total ignoramus when it comes to Photoshop.

 

[scottwallick]

pretty graphs

Graphs, I'm afraid, are good but not enough.

Perhaps I'm slow or dull (or both), but I have a hard time following Mr. Puts' writing—let along drawing conclusions. Often I get about three, four pronouns deep in a statement before I'm totally lost as to what the 'it' or 'that' is referencing. I appreciate his obvious enthusiasm, though.

 

[sirius]

When I saw those diagrams I could not help but hear in my head that bleep-doodle sound from the original star trek series that you would hear whenever the camera focused on the control panels. Whoops, there goes the sound of the transporter!

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Since when is the expertise needed to use a tool to full extent a measure of the quality of the tool?

That's why people prefer their prosumer dSLRs. Set it to "P" and go!

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

M9 a better camera?

M9 a better camera?

After all of the studies are done the conclusion is, the M9 is a slightly better camera than the M8. What a revelation that is. Isn’t that what Leica’s intentions were?

 

[MikeL]

I'm usually unclear what it means in a print. I've read his stuff on lenses, but what does it mean on a normal sized print? Are the differences relevant other than in very controlled conditions?

It's like focus shift. When has a slight shift in optimal focus ruined what would otherwise be a photo worth printing? If the focus makes the photo I guess it could matter......