Letter to M9

One man's opinion and the Canon is a very good camera too... whatever works to get the photos you want. I take no offense to this.
 
Funny stuff.

The first time I used a Canon on assignment it was pitch black and it wouldn't focus for anything. All the shots were off. I got better with the camera after awhile but ended up going back to the M9. Both have their troubles. I guess it's all about which ones faults you're better able to put up with. As frustrated as I get with M9, and having a 5D mk2 sitting on the shelf that makes everything easier. I never feel like I'm doing my best work unless a Leica is in my hands.
 
Some truth, and it's all personal of course, but I would LOVE an m9 - would probably be the perfect camera for me. I can live with the long startup and would love rangefinder focussing.

That being said, I also love my 5d. It's so trustworthy you can't dislike it, and it fits my hand like a glove.
 
gilpen123 said:
Is D700 better in this than the 5DII? Nothing can beat RF in lowlight focusing IMO.
Click to expand...

They're both pretty similar - d700 has a better AF system overall, but with both the 5d just use center point, focus and recompose and it's super quick and accurate. Too many people make the mistake of using all focus points or trying to use the outer ones in lower light - center point is where it's at. That goes for the d700 too.

Pop an ee-s style focussing screen in either of the 5d's and it's easy to manual focus too - I can do it accurately in super low light with a 50mm f1.4.
 
For me focusing with a ground glass and split screen specially horizontal is more difficult, coiinciding image is far better for me.
 
fdigital said:
They're both pretty similar - d700 has a better AF system overall, but with both the 5d just use center point, focus and recompose and it's super quick and accurate. Too many people make the mistake of using all focus points or trying to use the outer ones in lower light - center point is where it's at. That goes for the d700 too.
Click to expand...


Exactly. 99% I have only the center point active, and I have also disabled auto-focusing when using the shutter release button (I use the rear "*" button for that). Of course, this confuses the hell out of everyone else that wants to use any of my Canons. I explain, and yet...complete mind blowout.


Oh, and shame on Leica, for not making the M9 an autofocus system. And shame on motorcycles for not being SUVs.
 
During my DSLR days (Nikon D300) I use the AE/AF button for exposure lock and shutter for focus. Much eaiser to miss focus when you lock before you click the shutter. (that's me).
 
I'm not terribly fast with RF focus in relatively close (say, 35mm in a standard sized room), even the X100's slow AF is faster most of the time, so I sympathize. But I imagine that's a practice, practice, practice issue.

My problem with SLRs, aside from size, is AF inaccuracy. Seems that every contemporary lens (particularly consumer-grade but also pro) has to be calibrated to each body. I've only had two exceptions - my original 5D and 35L and then the D700/24-70G. Both were great, great combinations, if you didn't mind carrying a whole lotta weight everywhere. Sold the 24-70G, got a 50/1.4G that never seemed right AF-wise, even at f/2.8 and was too inaccurate to use at f/1.4 (which made the lens itself pointless).

Granted, I've heard that the M9 has issues with minute RF misalignment as well, to a degree that may not have been noticeable with film.
 
Double Negative said:
Heh, I suppose... Maybe a little. :p

I shoot 1D bodies, so I'm a little spoiled I guess. I tried to like the 5D (and I'm not knocking the output certainly) but it's not my bag. Maybe the Mark III will change my opinion. Though honestly, I'd rather just use the M7/M9 for full frame.
Click to expand...

1D's are tanks! Going to work must be like a trip to the gym :p

I shoot adapted Contax, Zuiko, and Leica Primes on my 5Dii's. Have an old Contax RTS focus screen installed in one and Canon High contrast Matte screen in the other. All manual all the time (Focus and Aperture). The 5Dii is great for this type of work.
 
I was just going to post this link.. As someone that has a 1DsM3 and an M6.. I can see what he is saying... But I feel like its a "pick the right tool for the job" situation. I feel like you have to WANT to use a Leica...

Has anyone seen this documentary about Charlie Kirk? It's decent, he has a lot of opinions about Leica and what makes a good photo.


http://blog.uchujin.co.uk/2011/09/charlie-two-cute-dogs-kirk-a-documentary/
 
Double Negative said:
I shoot 1D bodies, so I'm a little spoiled I guess. I tried to like the 5D (and I'm not knocking the output certainly) but it's not my bag. Maybe the Mark III will change my opinion. Though honestly, I'd rather just use the M7/M9 for full frame.
Click to expand...

Ah man.. AGREE.. there are so many little differences that you notice right away when you have a 1DM3 and shoot a 5D2. The build, the sound of the shutter, the finder, the weight, the focus system, the meter..... the list goes on..

On the flip side, you also notice the ISO! The 5D kills the 1DM3 there.. Although.. now that we have the M4...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom