M9 camera profiles have not been updated in Lightroom, so your pictures would not be as good as the M8 with the profiles for it.
Wait until the profiles are added to Light room before every one gets out of wack on how bad the M9 is.
O are you listening !!!
I assume this is supposed to be shouting?
To start with, I don't use Lightroom, I use Raw Developer. I open files in this excellent programme without the public color profiles, as this is a good neutral place to start raw development - preferring to tweak the profiles myself, if necessary.
Raw Dev appears to correctly recognize the camera anyway, regardless of extra tweaks that may eventually be released.
When opened like this, and alongside M8 files opened in the same way, you can do some worthwhile comparisons for yourself.
Anyway, I'm definitely not deciding there's anything 'bad' about the M9, but I'm interested to see that everyone is suddenly deciding its the post-processing that makes all the difference to the IQ of a camera - I just read the
exact same thing over on getdpi two minutes ago.
The other interesting response is that the first few days everyone was ooohing and ahhing about how the M9 colors were so much better than the M8 - then all of a sudden we're told that the color profiles don't exist yet, and we shouldn't base any judgements on what we're seeing now.
Still as I've said, the M9 does rock - would LOVE to get one. But I'm pretty sad about all the M8 bashing that went on last week, and all the flip-flopping I've read from people desperate to justify spending money they maybe couldn't afford in their GAS frenzy.