swoop
Well-known
When the M8 started showing up in the hands of photographers we started to discover its flaws.
1. IR issue. Resulting in magenta coloured blacks. I was really miffed by this for the longest time until I splurged and bought IR filters for all my lenses. Not a small expense.
2. Backfocus. A lot of initial M8's, including mine. Had some seriously badly calibrated rangefinders. Resulting in a slew of backfocus issues. I had to manually compensate for nearly two years until I sent mine in for upgrading and subsequently repaired. I can only hope that the M9's coming out of Solm's are paid a little more attention to than the M8's that were rushed out the door.
3. Bad white balance. For a long time I simply set manual white balance. Ever since the last firmware update, I feel the auto white balance is better at getting it right than I am.
4. Loud shutter. For its entire history Leica has been known as a subtle camera. But the M8 shutter was a lot louder than those from the SLR makers. The M8.2 shutter upgrade was a good start. It brought things back to usable levels and made the Leica the reporters camera again. The Pentax K-7 has one of the quietest shutters I've ever heard. And it's an SLR. I only hope the M9 does better in that regard.
5 Battery life. The battery in my M8 lasts for about 470 shots or so. I don't think that's a terrible number. Especially considering the size of the battery. I once spent 5 days on the road and only went through 2 batteries. But still it could be better.
I hope none of these make it into the M9. But we could probably see new issues. I'm primarily concerned about poorly calibrated rangefinders. And severe light falloff on the sensors.
I also think Leica is setting themselves up for another upgrade program. Using a standard LCD cover instead of including sapphire glass. And including the same .68x viewfinder from the M8's instead of using standard .72x or offering .58x or .85x versions. I imagine this is going to help keep costs down initially. But that once enough M9's sell, I feel as if eventually Leica will offer another upgrade program where viewfinder magnification and sapphire glass will be options. I just wish Leica would offer these things from the beginning. Like an a la carte order for the M9. Instead of having to pay more for it a year later.
1. IR issue. Resulting in magenta coloured blacks. I was really miffed by this for the longest time until I splurged and bought IR filters for all my lenses. Not a small expense.
2. Backfocus. A lot of initial M8's, including mine. Had some seriously badly calibrated rangefinders. Resulting in a slew of backfocus issues. I had to manually compensate for nearly two years until I sent mine in for upgrading and subsequently repaired. I can only hope that the M9's coming out of Solm's are paid a little more attention to than the M8's that were rushed out the door.
3. Bad white balance. For a long time I simply set manual white balance. Ever since the last firmware update, I feel the auto white balance is better at getting it right than I am.
4. Loud shutter. For its entire history Leica has been known as a subtle camera. But the M8 shutter was a lot louder than those from the SLR makers. The M8.2 shutter upgrade was a good start. It brought things back to usable levels and made the Leica the reporters camera again. The Pentax K-7 has one of the quietest shutters I've ever heard. And it's an SLR. I only hope the M9 does better in that regard.
5 Battery life. The battery in my M8 lasts for about 470 shots or so. I don't think that's a terrible number. Especially considering the size of the battery. I once spent 5 days on the road and only went through 2 batteries. But still it could be better.
I hope none of these make it into the M9. But we could probably see new issues. I'm primarily concerned about poorly calibrated rangefinders. And severe light falloff on the sensors.
I also think Leica is setting themselves up for another upgrade program. Using a standard LCD cover instead of including sapphire glass. And including the same .68x viewfinder from the M8's instead of using standard .72x or offering .58x or .85x versions. I imagine this is going to help keep costs down initially. But that once enough M9's sell, I feel as if eventually Leica will offer another upgrade program where viewfinder magnification and sapphire glass will be options. I just wish Leica would offer these things from the beginning. Like an a la carte order for the M9. Instead of having to pay more for it a year later.
thomasw_
Well-known
Swoop, I read your points. I hope it goes more smoothly this time with the M9 for both the buyers and Leica. All the mechanical/electronic problems being set aside as non-issues, still my biggest reservation is that 0.68x VF.
dougi
Established
.68x VF does seem an odd choice. Not wide enough to easily accomodate 28mm lenses and not high enough to presumably focus a 50 noctilux or the like consistently with the increased resolution available.
wontonny
Well-known
I think it would be a wise move on their part to have at least one person trolling these forums and others just to hear user feedback on their products. If these issues are resolved, I would consider buying a digital M.
leicashot
Well-known
28mm will easily work, so not sure what you're talking about. As most people use 28/35mm lenses it makes perfect sense to use a 0.68. Besides have you ever used a 28mm lens on either a .58 or .72 finder?
What percentage of users will use a Noctilux on the M9? That's why they're introduced the 1.25x and 1.33x magnifiers, which is not related to the increased resolution.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Maybe Leica figured with the extra megapixels the average photographer has more option to crop ... and will tend more towards the wider optics?
burninfilm
Well-known
In regards to the .68X rangefinder, I'm guessing that Leica is trying to streamline and offer a compromise in regards to the rangefinder magnification. Furthermore, they DO offer eyepiece magnifiers to help increase the VF magnification. So, a good compromise on the VF magnification coupled with optional accessories to aid in focusing longer and wider aperture glass. There could be worse options... you know... like no M9 at all... or Leica for that matter.
It's funny, all of these complaints about a camera that hasn't even been introduced yet. Let alone one that photographers claim to have been "wanting" for so long. Everybody complains they don't have a "full-frame" rangefinder body. So, Leica seems to have likely created one. Now they complain about the VF? WTF?
Know why they don't bother trolling sites like RFF? Because even if they listened to everyone's feedback, there's NO WAY they could please everyone! If they make a higher magnification VF, people complain about not being able to see the 28mm frame. If they decrease the magnification, they complain they can't properly focus longer lenses. Seems like the current .68X VF with accessory magnifiers is the best of both worlds.
Frankly, I'd just wait and see how the cameras work, and hold my complaints about the VF until I actually used one. Let's see what the M9 has to offer before ranting about it... before it's even introduced to the world!
It's funny, all of these complaints about a camera that hasn't even been introduced yet. Let alone one that photographers claim to have been "wanting" for so long. Everybody complains they don't have a "full-frame" rangefinder body. So, Leica seems to have likely created one. Now they complain about the VF? WTF?
Know why they don't bother trolling sites like RFF? Because even if they listened to everyone's feedback, there's NO WAY they could please everyone! If they make a higher magnification VF, people complain about not being able to see the 28mm frame. If they decrease the magnification, they complain they can't properly focus longer lenses. Seems like the current .68X VF with accessory magnifiers is the best of both worlds.
Frankly, I'd just wait and see how the cameras work, and hold my complaints about the VF until I actually used one. Let's see what the M9 has to offer before ranting about it... before it's even introduced to the world!
Alex Krasotkin
Well-known
Sounds really too promising that they have solved previous problems...but how they have managed to invent Full frame on the rangefinder???
Turtle
Veteran
Again, 0.68 is a VERY smart choice as it will make little difference to 35 and 50 lines but make 28mm lines an awful lot more useful - its about bloody time! For may users, it might even make the need for a 0.58 redundant by just giving enough of a complete sense of the 28 FOV in a glance. Well done Leica!
PS Leica's are IMO a bit desperate 75/90/135mm lenses and if you are not racing about with 28-50mm lenses you are missing out IMHO
PS Leica's are IMO a bit desperate 75/90/135mm lenses and if you are not racing about with 28-50mm lenses you are missing out IMHO
J. Borger
Well-known
Again, 0.68 is a VERY smart choice as it will make little difference to 35 and 50 lines but make 28mm lines an awful lot more useful - its about bloody time! For may users, it might even make the need for a 0.58 redundant by just giving enough of a complete sense of the 28 FOV in a glance. Well done Leica!
PS Leica's are IMO a bit desperate 75/90/135mm lenses and if you are not racing about with 28-50mm lenses you are missing out IMHO
.68 VF again is almost a dealbreaker for me. VERY inconvenient at best.
Not everybody is into wide angles. And the VF magnifier is NOT a very elegant solution.
I need .85 or even better: 1:1
Last edited:
burninfilm
Well-known
Okay... so... I guess you'll have to go buy the other "full-frame" digital rangefinder...
So much complaining, and people haven't even used the camera yet... makes me wonder why Leica would even try at all! LOL
So much complaining, and people haven't even used the camera yet... makes me wonder why Leica would even try at all! LOL
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
There has been an etrremely involved and theoretical thread on VF magnification and body thickness on LUF. The 0.68 is the very highest magnification that will give 28 mm framelines on this body thickness without a drastical redesign of the RF/VF unit.
To the focussing accuracy:
In response to the problems with the M8, Leica has built a huige focussing rig to adjust the cameras. Since then the problem is solved. Leica assures me that a ff camera will have less focussing issues than a cropped camera.
And Leica does read these forums, even if they won't react (officially).
To the focussing accuracy:
In response to the problems with the M8, Leica has built a huige focussing rig to adjust the cameras. Since then the problem is solved. Leica assures me that a ff camera will have less focussing issues than a cropped camera.
And Leica does read these forums, even if they won't react (officially).
Last edited:
larmarv916
Well-known
The real problem with the .68 viewfinder is that...you will not be able to get accurate focus on 75, 90 and 135 FORGET It! So even a 50mm will be tough and if you have a .95 Noctilux at F1. You only need to be off a hair to get ZERO focus ! This just again underscores how the internal culture of Leica...is out of touch with the real world and it's real customers. I do not need a camera that makes sharp focus MORE difficult ,with the most important Leica lenses. That I spent a small fourtune to buy ! No I have a great full frame high Mag viewfinder...it's a M3 ! Also I can use any of my other full frame camera's M5 or M6TTL, What this whole mess makes me want to do is order a new MP .85 Why bother with a camera that does not deliver a better actual image with better focusing ?? They really blew it big time.
Pherdinand
the snow must go on
it's not only about focus accuracy. The vf image size for 90mm will already be ridiculously small,barely bigger than the focus spot.
That's why i got the bessa r3a, for the 1:1 viewfinder. Very usable for 90mm and very very nice for 50.
That's why i got the bessa r3a, for the 1:1 viewfinder. Very usable for 90mm and very very nice for 50.
J. Borger
Well-known
I do not have to use the M9 to know i do not like the RF/VF unit of my M8 at all!!
J. Borger
Well-known
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I think you should read a bit up on the subject instead. With a .68 viewfinder the crossing point of accuracy to the finder of a good SLR (R-series Leica) will be with a hypothetical 100 mm 2.0 lens. A 135 4.0 is just on the limit. 135 3.4 will need stopping down. All other lenses are well within the focussing accuracy. And yes- you only need to be a hair out to be out of focus. That, in common usage, is called skill.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I find this one far easier to focus than your Bessa....
Attachments
Ray Kilby
Established
well... there is a history to this.
well... there is a history to this.
I agree with a great deal with what is said here. It is a matter of wait and see. But, to be fair to the guy who started the thread, the first M8's were very below par. I had one and suffered with it. Sold it, regreted it emotionally, but professinally... well the D3 and Ziess lenses were the answer. I hope, I really hope that Leica get this one right. Which means not pleasing all the people all the time, but most of us some fo the time. As long as it is is full frame, range finder accurate, no back focus issues, IR problems solved, white balance issues solved, no shutter release problems and missed exposures, the software stable and not being sold something that is immediately 'upgradable' so you don'y feel ripped off. Because that is the history of the M8.
But I do think we have to wait and see, I agree with that.
well... there is a history to this.
I agree with a great deal with what is said here. It is a matter of wait and see. But, to be fair to the guy who started the thread, the first M8's were very below par. I had one and suffered with it. Sold it, regreted it emotionally, but professinally... well the D3 and Ziess lenses were the answer. I hope, I really hope that Leica get this one right. Which means not pleasing all the people all the time, but most of us some fo the time. As long as it is is full frame, range finder accurate, no back focus issues, IR problems solved, white balance issues solved, no shutter release problems and missed exposures, the software stable and not being sold something that is immediately 'upgradable' so you don'y feel ripped off. Because that is the history of the M8.
But I do think we have to wait and see, I agree with that.
J. Borger
Well-known
Nice theories Jaap.
But why use people the clunky magnifier for their 50/ 75 and 90mm lenses and end up with more in focus shots
.l