What's so good about the M8/M9 anyway?

[Roger Hicks]

Roger cannot ignore these things. In another thread he said that he puts some rubber glue and black tape and even bits of wooden tooth-picks onto his M9 so that some of the buttons and functions will not work.😕

Re-read the post in question, and you may be less confused. The toothpicks are on Contaxes and Kievs, and on the Canon 50/1.2, to to disable the infinity locks; the Dymo tape (colour not mentioned) is on shutters with MXV settings so they aren't accidentally knocked from X to M synch (a standard trick for professionals in the days when most studios used cameras with leaf shutters and selectable sych); and the rubber bump on the M9 is so that the on-off switch is not accidentally turned to continuous or to self-timer. The last is again a common modification: I see that Doug does the same, and he has even posted a picture of it.

Of course there may be those who prefer their cameras and lenses to lock solid at infinity; their flash synch to fail; and their M9 to take two pictures instead of one, or wait 12 seconds before takling the picture; but I am not among them.

Anal-retentives who do everything slowly and precisely, and obsessive-compulsives who always check everything three times, wouldn't have a probem with any of the above. But I prefer to work quickly, and to have my equipment do exactly what I want it to, when I want it to. Note that I am not calling you (or any other specific person) anal-retentive or obsessive-compulsive. I am merely pointing out that there can be good reasons for disabling unwanted features.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Yhbv24]

I'll talk about the M9 here. The good part about it is it's the only 35mm-sized digital rangefinder on the market. The bad is that it needs batteries =).

That said, any camera is simple if you want it to be. The option to manually focus, set aperture, shutter speed and ISO is there. Want raw images only? No problem. Of course, this really only applies to digital SLRs.

I shoot only film, and my cameras don't even need batteries (save for the meter), yet I find digital SLRs to be just as easy to use.

As for the reason Leicas are so expensive? Because people are willing to pay for them! As for we all? We certainly are not all willing to pay that much, Leica has certainly not attracted me with their offerings. I would prefer my Bessa R4 over an M6 if I had to choose.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I cannot think of any functions on my M8 that I would disable.

There are functions on the E-P2 that I would disable, they make it too complex to get to important settings.

The interesting thing about digital cameras- firmware is just typing. If someone would just type in code to provide a simple interface, it would happen. I would like to see a tiered system for digital cameras, "Switch to Camera Classic" mode on an E-P2, and the dial becomes shutter speed and thumbwheel becomes aperture.

The Marketeers will prevent it. I'm betting some firmware developer at Olympus has an E-P2 coded to be a Pen EE.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger,

I was trying to make a comment about the big market some people here see for cameras with less buttons (that is the interface for functionality I am not allowed to call functionality) but more expensive. I do not think it (the market) is very big.

Dear Sig,

I don't think anyone sees it as a big market. But the mere existence of simple, stripped down cameras (Leica, Alpa) shows that the market exists, and the fact that people are willing to pay handsomely for them indicates that bells and whistles are not universally prized.

I was merely taking issue with your use of the word 'functionality' to describe what I (and many others) would regard as unnecessary bells and whistles.

The 'ignore the bits you don't like' argument is ofen advanced, but it isn't actually an arguent at all. As soon as the bells and whistles get in the way, or even have the possibility of getting in the way from time to time, the functionality of the camera (in the strictest sense - its ability to take pictures) is actually impaired.

As I have said repeatedly, some like bells and whistles, and others don't. Fortunately, those of us who like our cameras as simple as possible are abe to find them. It would be perfectly easy to turn nasty and say that those who know what they are doing will always prefer cameras without bells and whisles, but of course it's not true. The same feature can be a crutch to the incompetent; a valuable option to someone whose style of working it suits; and a complete pain in the bum to someone whose style of working it doesn't suit.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I find it very frustrating to use something that I did not even write the software for myself. Much easier when it does what you code it to do.

But the M8 is close, The M9 is closer. The compression algorithm for the M8 raw files is not very sophisticated. Would have been better to use Huffman code with a fixed symbol table and maintain all 16-bits in about the same file size and write time requirements.

 

[noimmunity]

I cannot think of any functions on my M8 that I would disable.

There are functions on the E-P2 that I would disable, they make it too complex to get to important settings.

The interesting thing about digital cameras- firmware is just typing. If someone would just type in code to provide a simple interface, it would happen. I would like to see a tiered system for digital cameras, "Switch to Camera Classic" mode on an E-P2, and the dial becomes shutter speed and thumbwheel becomes aperture.

The Marketeers will prevent it. I'm betting some firmware developer at Olympus has an E-P2 coded to be a Pen EE.

When I was in Amsterdam a couple of years ago for a conference there were a group of open source hacktivists there showing off different cameras they'd cracked and reprogrammed. It's just that the people who have the skills to do that and the people who want certain kinds of UI that are being discussed here haven't so far been able to connect.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I cannot think of any functions on my M8 that I would disable.

There are functions on the E-P2 that I would disable, they make it too complex to get to important settings.

The interesting thing about digital cameras- firmware is just typing. If someone would just type in code to provide a simple interface, it would happen. I would like to see a tiered system for digital cameras, "Switch to Camera Classic" mode on an E-P2, and the dial becomes shutter speed and thumbwheel becomes aperture.

The Marketeers will prevent it. I'm betting some firmware developer at Olympus has an E-P2 coded to be a Pen EE.

Dear Brian,

Exactly. I'd love Leica to provide a menu option that disabled both C and self-timer on the on-off switch of the M8/8.2/9, so that it was just a simple on-off switch, with three 'on' positions and one 'off'. Then Doug and I wouldn't need to resort to mechanical blocks. In the unlikely event I ever wanted either C or self-timer, I could then turn them on again in the menu.

All it needs is one more option on the self-timer menu: 0 seconds delay, single-shot only.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

So you don't like continuous shooting or self timers.
You would rather search in the menus to enable these functions. That is strange.

No, I don't like continuous shooting or self timers when all I want is one shot as soon as I press the shutter. I know I am not alone in this.

Any switch can be knocked. Do you deny this? There is no need for snide swipes at Leica or Portugal.

And no, it's not strange to suggest what I do about a simple firmware change, which as Brian says is 'just typing'. What is strange is to suggest that everyone thinks the way you do, which is clearly not the case. Menus are useful for setting things you don't change often, buttons and dials for things you do change often.

Cheers,

R.

 

[yanidel]

All I need in a digital Leica compared to a regular Leica is an ISO dial. You can put the screen on for kicks if you must. I am not a chimper. I took the photo so I already know what it looks like. Make it shoot only raw (no use for jpegs). My computer does a way better job of dealing with everything else, far better than any digital camera regardless of who makes it.

On the M9, there is no need to took to the LCD to change ISO's. If you work within a series, let's say 200 400 800 1600, you can change it by touch only by pressing ISO and moving cursor up or down. All you need is to remember what is the ISO that was last set and a bit of practice. That is by the way much faster than with the great R-D1 dial.

In general, it has been one month I have gone full manual with the M9. A bit challenging at first, but once you know how to read light, aperture speed and ISO are the only things you need to change and no mre LCD is needed. Exp compensation is not needed anymore either as you compensate with the speed or aperture. The M9 becomes the simplest camera to operate and any failure is your failure, technology can no more be blamed.

 

[Roger Hicks]

The M9 becomes the simplest camera to operate and any failure is your failure, technology can no more be blamed.

This is precisely why I like the M9, too. If you're working fast, no-one gets it dead right, all the time: not me, not automation. I find that I get fewer errors if I rely on my own judgement than I get with automation.

The strange thing is that I used automation on the M8 and M8.2 far more than on the M9. Somehow, for me, the M9 is more of a 'real' camera, so I use it in a more traditional manner. Why? Dunno, but that's the way I feel.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ronald M]

What is so good is they provide the digital experience with a RF body. The controls are simple and effective like a real camera. The pics are superb in my opinion.

What is bad is dependence on a battery/electronics you may or may not get in 5 years, ten years.
The cost is high. You are wedded to Leica service and the continued existence of Leica Camera

My Nikons can run on AA cells just fine, D200 takes 6 in the grip, D700 takes 8 in the grip. Everlast rechargeable NiMH seen to work fine. They are far from a M camera experience, but there is a mode called M where the photographer can control all that he wishes. Wide lenses are nowhere up to Leica standards. Normals decent. Modern teles are very sharp with good microcontrast, just the plastic build is not metal. What can I say?


They are good because they are the way to the future because film is dying, like it or not. Not that I disike film. I have bought 3 film Nikons in the past 18 months, two pro and one semi pro model, all mechanical no batteries. The Leicas are still in use.

 

[Roger Hicks]

What is so good is they provide the digital experience with a RF body. The controls are simple and effective like a real camera. The pics are superb in my opinion.

What is bad is dependence on a battery/electronics you may or may not get in 5 years, ten years.
The cost is high. You are wedded to Leica service and the continued existence of Leica Camera

My Nikons can run on AA cells just fine, D200 takes 6 in the grip, D700 takes 8 in the grip. Everlast rechargeable NiMH seen to work fine. They are far from a M camera experience, but there is a mode called M where the photographer can control all that he wishes. Wide lenses are nowhere up to Leica standards. Normals decent. Modern teles are very sharp with good microcontrast, just the plastic build is not metal. What can I say?


They are good because they are the way to the future because film is dying, like it or not. Not that I disike film. I have bought 3 film Nikons in the past 18 months, two pro and one semi pro model, all mechanical no batteries. The Leicas are still in use.

Dying? Well, the universe as we know it is dying, but it's unlikely to happen tomorrow. A more realistic model for film is an asymptotic decline in demand and (probably) in availability. But assuming human colonization of space, and indeed the survival of the human race, I'd expect total film production to be greater in 50,000 years than it is today. Likewise buggy-whip prodction. In a big, rich word, even niche markets can survive. In a big, rich, human-colonized universe, the same is even more true.

Cheers,

R.