Erwin Puts part 5 of M9 review

[Gary Sandhu]

http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/page159/page159.html

Keep your M8!
I imagine that a print at larger sizes will have less noise; but really no surprise given the sensor pixel pitch/density is the same.

 

[Eric T]

Yes, I have decided to just keep my M8. I actually like the smaller sensor as it makes my 135mm lens a 175mm-equivalent lens. Noise reduction at high ISO does not seem to be dramatically better in the M9 (and perhaps even a little worse).
And I am happy with my M8 images. I don't need to print anything larger than 20" x 30".
I hope the M9 is a successful product, but I don't need to replace my M8.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Puts seems to be working hard there in part five to argue that the M9 is "good enough" for its intended purpose even if the Nikon beats it and soundly over ISO 400. Somehow "good enough" and $7,000 don't seem to go together for me.

 

[ZeissFan]

Part 5? How much can one person say?

 

[splitimageview]

It's Puts! Why just do one when you can do five? More words, more value, right?

 

[gavinlg]

I don't want to come off as a douchebag, but I hate tests like that. Who the hell wants to look at a little graph to tell you how noisy a camera is? Or a 100% crop of a out of focus shadow?


eh..

 

[Keith]

Part 5? How much can one person say?

I used to read some of his stuff ... then I discovered something more interesting:

Watching paint dry! 😀

 

[fefe]

I used to read some of his stuff ... then I discovered something more interesting:

Watching paint dry! 😀

http://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=1489 🙂

Something looks wrong in his study, I don't know why, but it does 🙂.

 

[Keith]

It'll be interesting to find out, as time goes by and more people actually have M9's and start posting photos and giving day to day feed back, how succesful the successor will be.

The move from a crop of 1.33 to full frame has obviously been a good thing but it doesn't seem that there are a lot of other major improvements. I've read a lot of comments lately from M8 users saying they will stick with what they have and give the M9 a miss.

 

[photogdave]

I shot with the M8 and M8.2 enough to decide it didn't wow me and I didn't want one.
I shot with the M9 for one weekend and I fell in love with it. I honestly can't stop thinking about it and I'm trying to trick my brain into telling me I can afford one, but I know I can't. It's crazy because I don't even really like digital in general.
This is about as far away from a scientific comparison as you can get!

 

[Ronald_H]

How often does a person really need anything more than 400ISO?

Well, considering that the Nikon D3S goes to ISO 102,400, a mere 8 stops (!) more, you should think there is a market for that sort of thing...

 

[Spider67]

"How often does a person really need anything more than 400ISO?"

Actually 1600 is a great standard film for available light shots in the night.
Unfortunately there isn't something like an XP3 (easily processed without too much alchemy in every quicklab) for that range.
I am also very curious about the User Reviews after the hype has ebbed.
Would also be very interesting to see what photojournalists will say.
After all some people are said (weblore?) to have replaced their ff Canons with M9's.

 

[Ronald_H]

The M9's smallish size and manual simplicity are very appealing. It would suit my style a lot better than my bulky and complex D200. But for the amount of money the M9 costs I would expect superior hi-ISO performance. Because I am one of those people who really needs hi-ISO.

 

[BillBingham2]

It'll be interesting to find out, as time goes by and more people actually have M9's and start posting photos and giving day to day feed back, how succesful the successor will be.

The move from a crop of 1.33 to full frame has obviously been a good thing but it doesn't seem that there are a lot of other major improvements. I've read a lot of comments lately from M8 users saying they will stick with what they have and give the M9 a miss.

In computers, unless they need every cycle of power there I always tell people to skip a generation. If you plunked down cash for the M8, wait for the M10, it will be here.

If you need the best rendering of skin tones go look at the new Nikon D3s. Wonder how the M9 stacks up against her? Way too big and ugly a camera IMHO, but how does it stack up to the Leica S2 I wonder?

B2 (;->

 

[ZeissFan]

It's just too much to try to digest. Just way too much. There's too much scientific theory and charts and super-enlarged portions.

It's like being at the family picnic, listening to your boring uncle drone on and on about business theory.

 

[aizan]

early rumors suggest that the x1 has much less noise than the m9.

 

[dougi]

It's strange he never made any comments on the different shapes of the noise spectrum between Nikon/Leica. Surely that has an impact on the loss of detail? Likely the large difference would be due to the fact he used camera jpegs, and the Nikon sharpening is higher. I would like to see processed RAW measurements after careful sharpening adustment to get similar spatial frequency response before measuring noise.