saintotto
Member
My M9 REVIEW of my experience of working with the M9 is up on my blog now. Thoughts and comments welcome
http://www.ottoschulzephotographers.com/blog
thanks
otto
http://www.ottoschulzephotographers.com/blog
thanks
otto
Leica M9 Review
- Thread starter saintotto
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 15
- Views 3K
leicashot
Well-known
Welcome to the forum and nice review Otto, but more importantly- excellent application of the M9 as a tool in skillful hands. It's refreshing to see it used as it was intended.
saintotto
Member
thanks so much for the welcome and the kind comment! sincerely appreciated!
ricnak
Well-known
Good review Otto.
Welcome to the forum and happy M9 users club!
Cheers
Helen
Welcome to the forum and happy M9 users club!
Cheers
Helen
saintotto
Member
thanks so much helen!
masterkin
Member
So weird but I was actually viewing your wedding shots a few weeks ago. I don't know how I got there but you do awesome work!
Great review, btw.
Great review, btw.
Olsen
Well-known
Otto,
First of all; very good photos you have on your site.
But I am not at all sure that I agree with the heap of superlatives you credit to the M9. Nor the small details you find less attractive.
First of all; M9, like M8, have this tendency to reproduce some skin tones that looks unreal, sometimes. Unless the motive is a heavy drinker or has a serious heart problem. Sure, this can be fixed in post processing. But this was something that we M8 customers complained about and little has been done to fix it.
Except for the fact that 18 million pixels really isn't up to it anymore. All the competitors are up around 21 - 23 million pixels and testing existing glass to the limits. This is particularly bitter since Leica, most probably, has the best glass around. A 23 million pixel M-camera would have shown the world what a leader Leica is in optics.
The M9 sensor is practically the same as that in the M8, except for the size. There is both disadvantages and advantages with this AA filter-less sensor. You have had serious luck only to find moire' in one picture, so far. You will find more. With a AA filter included the M9 would have been far behind competition regarding resolution.
There is something I miss with the way M9 reproduced the world. It lacks the crispy contrast rich world that my Canon 1Ds III reproduces. How come? I fear that the old Kodak sensor no longer is up to what we expect of a high performance camera of 7,000 $. Some of it can be saved by post processing, but other cameras delivers this right out of the box. Some of it can't the M9 deliver at all....
That said, like the M8 the M9 reproduces some scenes, often with mixed colour temperature that no other cameras can match. A certainly unique quality. This alone is a good reason to use both a M8 and a M9. It could well be that the M8 and M9 will be sought after cameras on the 2.hand market just to be used to reproduce these unique coloured scenes.
It is an advantage that the M9 is a small and compact camera. But then we have to accept that the battery is small. But it takes no space so a spare is easy to carry around. Which is no deal at all. Be sure to run the battery dry a few times when it is new. Then it reaches it's full capacity. This small compactness of the M-system is a great advantage. In many ways. I have had small children starting to cry when I have pointed the 1Ds III towards them.
But will the M-system survive the future? I don't think so. Unless Leica decides to shake off their old fan club of 'oldies' and goes for some modern ideas. Like AF, live view and a cheaper 'solid state' rangefinder.
First of all; very good photos you have on your site.
But I am not at all sure that I agree with the heap of superlatives you credit to the M9. Nor the small details you find less attractive.
First of all; M9, like M8, have this tendency to reproduce some skin tones that looks unreal, sometimes. Unless the motive is a heavy drinker or has a serious heart problem. Sure, this can be fixed in post processing. But this was something that we M8 customers complained about and little has been done to fix it.
Except for the fact that 18 million pixels really isn't up to it anymore. All the competitors are up around 21 - 23 million pixels and testing existing glass to the limits. This is particularly bitter since Leica, most probably, has the best glass around. A 23 million pixel M-camera would have shown the world what a leader Leica is in optics.
The M9 sensor is practically the same as that in the M8, except for the size. There is both disadvantages and advantages with this AA filter-less sensor. You have had serious luck only to find moire' in one picture, so far. You will find more. With a AA filter included the M9 would have been far behind competition regarding resolution.
There is something I miss with the way M9 reproduced the world. It lacks the crispy contrast rich world that my Canon 1Ds III reproduces. How come? I fear that the old Kodak sensor no longer is up to what we expect of a high performance camera of 7,000 $. Some of it can be saved by post processing, but other cameras delivers this right out of the box. Some of it can't the M9 deliver at all....
That said, like the M8 the M9 reproduces some scenes, often with mixed colour temperature that no other cameras can match. A certainly unique quality. This alone is a good reason to use both a M8 and a M9. It could well be that the M8 and M9 will be sought after cameras on the 2.hand market just to be used to reproduce these unique coloured scenes.
It is an advantage that the M9 is a small and compact camera. But then we have to accept that the battery is small. But it takes no space so a spare is easy to carry around. Which is no deal at all. Be sure to run the battery dry a few times when it is new. Then it reaches it's full capacity. This small compactness of the M-system is a great advantage. In many ways. I have had small children starting to cry when I have pointed the 1Ds III towards them.
But will the M-system survive the future? I don't think so. Unless Leica decides to shake off their old fan club of 'oldies' and goes for some modern ideas. Like AF, live view and a cheaper 'solid state' rangefinder.
dfoo
Well-known
... and then it wouldn't be an M at all!
saintotto
Member
AF and live view? No way Olsen. That wld honestly completely ruin it for me. Sure they can improve things on it but I gotta tell you as someone that shoots mostly with the Nikon DX3 ( superb ) and D3s I am very pleased with the M9. We can debate details for days but in the end, for me, when I look at the final image ( not only the quality but the type of image im able to capture because its a Leica - small and unobtrusive, the lenses etc) for me the M9 wins!
Leica, pls keep the M's like M's. Yes, pls continue improving the sensor quality, iso abilities etc. But the M9( or M10) shld look and feel like a M always.
at least for me!
Leica, pls keep the M's like M's. Yes, pls continue improving the sensor quality, iso abilities etc. But the M9( or M10) shld look and feel like a M always.
at least for me!
TennesseJones
Well-known
enjoyed your pictures, thank you..
Olsen
Well-known
I agree with that Leica must upgrade M9's computer's speed and capacity. It's the worst in the business. Most likely it is the same computer as in the M8. With M9's 50% larger files the speed is reduced accordingly.
I undertand many of these retro feelings around the Leica M system. After all, I am a 'old' Leica user myself.
It is us old users that feel warm with this old fashioned RF system with manual focus and all that. Most of us will die soon, anyway. New camera users have other priorities and habits. Using the rear lcd panel as means of both composing and focusing is today the standard. Regardless of if it is a dedicated digital camera or a cell phone. If Leica can't capture these new generations of camera users then they are bound to die out with us old guys.
I undertand many of these retro feelings around the Leica M system. After all, I am a 'old' Leica user myself.
It is us old users that feel warm with this old fashioned RF system with manual focus and all that. Most of us will die soon, anyway. New camera users have other priorities and habits. Using the rear lcd panel as means of both composing and focusing is today the standard. Regardless of if it is a dedicated digital camera or a cell phone. If Leica can't capture these new generations of camera users then they are bound to die out with us old guys.
saintotto
Member
using the LCD screen as a method of composing is by no means the standard. i have never done this, nor do i know any of my friends ( also professional photographers) that does this? honestly, really confused by that...look, im sure some do it but by no means is this the modern standard in pro photography.
if it is then i have certainly missed it!
if it is then i have certainly missed it!
saintotto
Member
i do however totally agree that the M9 buffer/computer needs a major upgrade! absolutely. and doesn't take much for that little red light to start blinking...
drinkingeye
Well-known
amazing work, otto! welcome to RFF and thanks for the interesting review, cheers
Olsen
Well-known
Neither have I.
But lcd composing/focusing is now standard among all users of more standard digital cameras and cell phones. That is what we see around us. Lcd screens will become better and better, so it is not such a bad idea. Particularly when using AF. I use AF a lot with my Canon 1Ds III gear. Works excellently. Photography with AF becomes fast and intuitive.
woodleica
Established
I love the M9. Really like your work Otto and also your photos featured on the Leica Blog
http://blog.leica-camera.com/interview/otto-schulze-capturing-the-decisive-moment-part-1/
http://blog.leica-camera.com/interview/otto-schulze-capturing-the-decisive-moment-part-1/
