M9 review on Luminous Landscape

hehe..
Reichmann said:
"Of course if high resolution full-frame is all one wants, then this can now be had for as low as $2,000 in the form of the Sony A850 and less than $1,000 more for the A900 and 5D MKII. But, the point is that with the move to a full-frame sensor the M9 Leica now seems to have positioned itself alongside the top cameras in the category, at least in terms of price, rather than in some rarified category all by themselves."
Click to expand...

Well.. I don't know about all you folks out there with thousands and thousands of dollars to spend on hobby cameras but putting yourself in a category based on price seems a bit rarified imho. :D

Cheers,
Dave
 
I think I'm going to want one of these. And just look at this:

"Owners of older Leica lenses will be very pleased to learn that there is now a full listing available within the camera for manual lens parameter settings when optics without the newer 6 bit encoding are attached. "

/T
 
The claim that the M9 is a mature product is a rather enthusiastic statement. Leica film cameras are mature products because they really can not be improved upon by any significant degree - the only improvable component - film - is a separate product.

I'm sure that the sensor in the M9 is fantastic, but will leica never bring out an improved sensor for their future digital Ms?
 
Take a look at Sean Reid's review on reidreviews.com. Very detailed. Very exciting. Looks like Leica has actually listened to its customers on this one. I think they have a real winner on their hands.

/T
 
"Old Europe"

"Old Europe"

As a European I have to smile a little of Michael Reichmann's text of one of the pictures; 'Old Europe'.
 
endustry said:
Considering the credibility hit that LL took for failing to mention the IR issue in their initial M8 review, I'm surprised Leica even chose to be associated with them for this release.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Reichmann, over the years, has basically said every iteration of just about every camera (mainly Canon) has been "the greatest thing since sliced bread" ;)

It doesn't surprise me one iota that he's said the same thing about the M9.
It may very well be an awesome tool - if you can afford it.

I've never really looked hard and fast at his body of work because a lot of the stuff I have seen is "meh" (and that's likely because I prefer people rather than landscapes and/or nature - to each his/her own however) but, as is my understanding, the man has a bunch of $$$$ so he can afford to buy a whack of gear when it becomes available.
I think he'd be doing that even if he never started up the website.

If Leica does sell and sell and sell M9s then that's a good thing - it would only prompt another camera maker to realize that there's a market there for a "less expensive/less luxurious" full frame digital rangefinder.


Cheers,
Dave
 
Cosina and Carl Zeiss are in a sweet spot now that M9 has been launched and the M-system has yet another bright future. When all the M9 buyers have emptied their pockets, they can only afford lenses from Voitländer and Zeiss. If they can't have their own digital rangefinder, Cosina/Zeiss are crying all the way to the bank.

To make a digital RF camera is a risky and expensive business. Both RD-1 and M8 shows that.
 
Nikon Bob said:
Leica and the M9 don't look too bad now especially as they are the only FFRF game in town. As you say though, what happens when the other players produce FF products at a much lower price than they are today. It will be interesting to see how that shakes out.

Bob
Click to expand...

But they won't accept M mount glass. It's Zeiss and Cosina who need to get in the game.
 
dcsang said:
Exactly.

Reichmann, over the years, has basically said every iteration of just about every camera (mainly Canon) has been "the greatest thing since sliced bread" ;)

It doesn't surprise me one iota that he's said the same thing about the M9.
It may very well be an awesome tool - if you can afford it.

...

Cheers,
Dave
Click to expand...


Yep. he also has a strong view that digital is better tha film - period and has done some tests to demonstrate that - albeit that they have at times been flawed. For his purposes, the current crop of full frame high res dslrs and mf digital backs are almost certainly better than film, but film remains better than people think if they scan themselves and actualy has a look of it's own. That message is emerging in the post honeymoon flush of digital conversion. I use both.

I also have a view that his website is both pretty commerical and that he has always sought to drive sales of the latest and greatest, as do the print mags.

Mike

Mike
 
FWIW, I like Reichmann. His minor flaws as a writer seem to me to come from excessive enthusiasm and not from overly commercial intent. That site always makes me want to go use my stuff.
 
snausages2000 said:
I think the $1,000 FF camera will emerge within 2 years. And when it's the size of the G1, with no noise at 20,000 something ISO, and offers HD video, the M9 will be in an interesting position. If the M9 sells well initially, I think it'll only accelerate Canon/Nikon/Sony's production of compact FF cameras at 1/7th of the cost.
Click to expand...

Sensor technology will continue to improve and costs will continue to go down. Nothing new here.

There is a $2000 FF camera now, yet the top end FF cameras are $7K+. When there is a $1000 FF camera, the top end cameras may still be at $5K+ or so, at which point the M9 will cost less as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom