Who is happy with M8 and M9 and who is waiting for M10?

[Yoricko]

I'd still shoot with my Film M for personal stuff, but anything commercial will be in the digital domain.

 

[lainer]

Waiting

Waiting

Geez. I'm still waiting for a M9. I can't imagine waiting for the M10. I hope my M9 comes soon. I also ordered a 50mm Summilux 1.4 ASPH lens. I bet I wait longer for that.

This is my first Leica. Never owned one before. I decided not to compromise anymore and buy what I want. I've never owned any equipment that was top notch. I ordered and am waiting for the M9, because I like the results of the photos that come out of the camera. (Any M camera for that matter, but I prefer digital).
🙂

 

[jaapv]

I really think this whole thing can be a bit of the carrot on the stick. Rapid changes in technology and refinements by manufacturers happen at a rather fast pace. It becomes easy at this price point to become leery. This is just how it is, given the costs to produce something at this level, coupled to a digital technology.

But, if you wish to shoot digital with your Leica M lenses. Then, this is the only game in town. I am glad it is here, as are many others. This is why I bought my M8. I do not regret it, and I enjoy shooting with it. So, it really comes down to either jumping in or standing on the sidelines.

As for will I purchase the M9 - yes. The reason has to do with some significant refinements, that bring it's performance to a level I could live with for a very long time. The larger sensor will allow me to produce larger prints with greater effect. I see the M9 as the first step in a digital body I would retain as a backup. Should future developments offer something more desirable to me.

Just my thoughts...

How large do you print?😱 The M8 will yield prints of over 1 m wide that can easily be viewed at ten inches, if you are so inclined.

 

[Makten]

I'm very happy with the M8, but I'd rather have full frame. Not because of resolution or IQ, but because of the available lenses.
35 mm on FF is close to what I consider "perfect", but with a crop sensor, you'll lose one stop because of the sensor size and one stop because of the 28 mm lenses being slower.

So, with a 35/1.4 on FF you are two stops ahead of a 28/2 on 1.3x crop. That's quite a difference, especially if you want possibilities for short DOF.

Since I also own a D700, I'll keep the M8 for quite some time and use it for stopped down work and as a carry-with-me-always camera. I really like it. 🙂

 

[vincentbenoit]

I'm waiting for an M9 with low-magnification viewfinder. Until then I'll keep using my 0.58x film M.

 

[biggambi]

How large do you print?😱 The M8 will yield prints of over 1 m wide that can easily be viewed at ten inches, if you are so inclined.

I am sorry if the statement was misleading. I am not looking to print gigantic prints. I am referring to the larger prints vs smaller prints that I currently print.

As for print size, and what will be seen on the final print. The M9 has resolving power that is a step forward. I will ask that you look to Erwin Puts for details on his testing: http://www.imx.nl/photo/leica/camera/page164/page164.html

Kodachrome 64 has a higher level of resolution then the M9. Mr. Puts again:
http://leica-users.org/v19/msg13012.html

If the detail is not captured on the digital card, it certainly can not be printed. I look forward to a system that captures more. It is that simple.

Also, expanding upon my prior post. Part of the reason I see this as a long term purchase is the full frame sensor. There are others. I like the new ISO function, and the bracketing feature. I am not bothered by the fps and buffer issues, as some seem to be saying elsewhere (I don't remember if it's brought up in this thread). I choose the moment to shoot, rather then hope to capture something in a blur of frames.

I do wish they had not downgraded the screen surface. Once they have set a higher standard, it does not make sense to backslide on a flagship product. Also, a more advanced computer system would seem desirable in the near future. This will become critical with possible software/algorithm upgrades.

I think Leica has come through and given us what we have been asking of them. The resolution will increase as sensor technology progresses, and algorithms will address color noise, etc. But, given the current technology applied in a range finder, bravo.

 

[gilpen123]

I'm waiting for a rangefinder coupled contact lenses.

 

[David Hughes]

I really think this whole thing can be a bit of the carrot on the stick. Rapid changes in technology and refinements by manufacturers happen at a rather fast pace...

Just my thoughts...

Hi, Looking at the other makes I own/use, I don't see refinements when a new model comes out.

What I usually see is a few more gimmicks or, far worse, a repair that ought to have been done without a model change.

A lot of us using (say) the M2 are happy with 100 to 200 ASA and the M9 does more than that...

And I'm very happy with the Digilux 2, which just shows what level or spec. I'm happy to use.

Regards, David

 

[Richard Marks]

Dear Richard,

Interesting. I'd say almost the exact opposite. It takes me a while 'learn' gear, so changing equipment (except for a better version of the same thing, i.e. a newer Leica) actually makes my photography worse for a while.

Admittedy, I do keep several systems on hand, so if I want a change from Leica I can go to a different format, or a reflex -- but the Leica is the ground state, as far as I am concerned. And I genuinely can't imagine buying and selling the same system three times.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger

I think I have made my self disciplined so as not to just endlessly buy cameras. I do some paid work but it is not the day job!

I always come back to Leica but from time to time it is good to use other things😱. It is good not to have too much of a brand affiliation. It can lead to very biassed views. The intersting thing is I find is that it does seem to improve my photography and its not just my opinion, others have made the same observation. You are no doubt at a stage where your photographic style has largely evolved and clearly a change may well be a retrograde step.

Current set up; M7 50 cron, Contax G2 kit, *****d700 14-24, 35, 50 70-200

The biggest jump for a long time for me has actually been an RH designs analyser pro. really improved my black and white printing. I can not recommend this too highly.

Each to their own!


Best wishes


Richard

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger

I always come back to Leica but from time to time it is good to use other things😱. It is good not to have too much of a brand affiliation. It can lead to very biassed views. The intersting thing is I find is that it does seem to improve my photography and its not just my opinion, others have made the same observation. You are no doubt at a stage where your photographic style has largely evolved and clearly a change may well be a retrograde step.
. . .

The biggest jump for a long time for me has actually been an RH designs analyser pro. really improved my black and white printing. I can not recommend this too highly.

Best wishes


Richard

Dear Richard,

I know full well what you mean. From 'Voluntary Limits',
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps voluntary.html

Why photographers are like cats

Anyone who has owned cats, or spent much time around them, know that cats are very finicky (but strange and fickle) about their diets. For weeks on end, they will eat exclusively a single brand and flavour of cat food, be it Moggiechops with Added Rabbit or Supacat Chicken Extra, disdaining all else.

Then, one day, they look with manifest disbelief at what is in their bowl, saying as clearly as if they had used the spoken word, "What is this disgusting muck, and why on earth are you putting it in front of me?"

This turning up of the feline nose normally happens just after their owner (we use the word loosely) has stocked up with 72 cans of the stuff. There is, apparently, a good evolutionary reason for their change of preference, though the choice of timing is simply a matter of the natural cussedness of cats.

The explanation is that if a cat grows too dependent on a single food, it risks starvation if that food supply dries up. Changing periodically is therefore genetically programmed into the the cat's psyche. This makes sense, though it is disputable whether it makes any more sense than the aforementioned cussedness. On the bright side, keep the cans a year or two, and the cat will come back to liking it. Or get another cat. Or a dog; they'll eat anything.

What is the relevance of this to photographers? Simply that many -- not all -- photographers seem to need a periodical change of camera, and preferably of format, to recharge their creative batteries.

If you are share this cat-like characteristic (and we do), then we suggest the following:

(...now read the article...)

Frances completely agrees about the excellence of the Analyzer Pro, too.

Cheers,

R.

 

[biggambi]

Hi, Looking at the other makes I own/use, I don't see refinements when a new model comes out.

What I usually see is a few more gimmicks or, far worse, a repair that ought to have been done without a model change.

A lot of us using (say) the M2 are happy with 100 to 200 ASA and the M9 does more than that...

And I'm very happy with the Digilux 2, which just shows what level or spec. I'm happy to use.

Regards, David

David,

I may be completely missing your point, as it really is not clear to me. But, I don't think you have taken this comment in the spirit is was given. The question of the post seems to me to be M8 - M9 - or wait for something better. I think if you are going to wait for something better, you will be tempted to be always waiting. Hence, the use of the carrot on the stick. You will be chasing something, but never attaining it.
Since, technology changes rapidly, and people would wait forever if they where overly concerned with obsolescence via improvements in the near future.

Kindest Regards,
M

 

[Richard Marks]

Voluntary Limits

Voluntary Limits

Dear Richard,

I know full well what you mean. From 'Voluntary Limits',
http://www.rogerandfrances.com/subscription/ps%20voluntary.html

Why photographers are like cats

Anyone who has owned cats, or spent much time around them, know that cats are very finicky (but strange and fickle) about their diets. For weeks on end, they will eat exclusively a single brand and flavour of cat food, be it Moggiechops with Added Rabbit or Supacat Chicken Extra, disdaining all else.

Then, one day, they look with manifest disbelief at what is in their bowl, saying as clearly as if they had used the spoken word, "What is this disgusting muck, and why on earth are you putting it in front of me?"

This turning up of the feline nose normally happens just after their owner (we use the word loosely) has stocked up with 72 cans of the stuff. There is, apparently, a good evolutionary reason for their change of preference, though the choice of timing is simply a matter of the natural cussedness of cats.

The explanation is that if a cat grows too dependent on a single food, it risks starvation if that food supply dries up. Changing periodically is therefore genetically programmed into the the cat's psyche. This makes sense, though it is disputable whether it makes any more sense than the aforementioned cussedness. On the bright side, keep the cans a year or two, and the cat will come back to liking it. Or get another cat. Or a dog; they'll eat anything.

What is the relevance of this to photographers? Simply that many -- not all -- photographers seem to need a periodical change of camera, and preferably of format, to recharge their creative batteries.

If you are share this cat-like characteristic (and we do), then we suggest the following:

(...now read the article...)

Frances completely agrees about the excellence of the Analyzer Pro, too.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger

Firstly a fascinating article. It seems to relate mainly to film cameras where format plays a very significant role in camera choice. I would add that things are a bit more complex now as higher resolution digital cameras can produce images that can enlarge well beyond the equivalent 35mm film format. And to this effect they are fulfilling a medium format type role but hand held to boot and with more depth of field. One gets close to medium format like quality but without the tripod and the 10 minutes of fidling. The pictures are of course more spontaneous. One could mount one's compact gear on a tripod and mess about and no doubt composition would be more considered, it is just that it feels a bit daft some how.

Another complexity is that image stabilisation and high ISO performance on digital SLR's means that an SLR can now encroach on low light photography formerly exclusively the domain of rangefinders albeit in a somewhat hefty and more obtrusive manner.

Even more confusingly people are scanning negatives digitally for inkjet prints and others are making negatives from digital files for dark room printing😱. All of the conventional boundries are thus less well defined. I think I have reached a stage where I can get a tune out of most systems and part of the interest in changing my gear is in working out how to get the best from it and this is probably what keeps me interested. Chopping and changing film gear is actually quite easy as long as one looks after it but clearly the losses can be more severe interms of high end digital unfortunately.

On the subject of cats I have to say finicky-ness might be some left over evolutionary process but for a domestic moggy it might well shorten its lifespan. I often fantasize about having ours stuffed.

I am Glad Frances likes the analyser pro. Validation indeed. I am thinking of looking at the RH unit for compensating temperature change during film processing that looks seriously tempting. It is probably over kill but Im a bit of a techie. Something to do with the day job probably!

Best wishes



Richard

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Roger

Firstly a fascinating article. It seems to relate mainly to film cameras where format plays a very significant role in camera choice. I would add that things are a bit more complex now as higher resolution digital cameras can produce images that can enlarge well beyond the equivalent 35mm film format. And to this effect they are fulfilling a medium format type role but hand held to boot and with more depth of field. One gets close to medium format like quality but without the tripod and the 10 minutes of fidling. The pictures are of course more spontaneous. One could mount one's compact gear on a tripod and mess about and no doubt composition would be more considered, it is just that it feels a bit daft some how.

Another complexity is that image stabilisation and high ISO performance on digital SLR's means that an SLR can now encroach on low light photography formerly exclusively the domain of rangefinders albeit in a somewhat hefty and more obtrusive manner.

Even more confusingly people are scanning negatives digitally for inkjet prints and others are making negatives from digital files for dark room printing😱. All of the conventional boundries are thus less well defined. I think I have reached a stage where I can get a tune out of most systems and part of the interest in changing my gear is in working out how to get the best from it and this is probably what keeps me interested. Chopping and changing film gear is actually quite easy as long as one looks after it but clearly the losses can be more severe interms of high end digital unfortunately.

On the subject of cats I have to say finicky-ness might be some left over evolutionary process but for a domestic moggy it might well shorten its lifespan. I often fantasize about having ours stuffed.

I am Glad Frances likes the analyser pro. Validation indeed. I am thinking of looking at the RH unit for compensating temperature change during film processing that looks seriously tempting. It is probably over kill but Im a bit of a techie. Something to do with the day job probably!

Best wishes

Richard

Dear Richard,

First highlight: I don't really agree. The M8 at 18 MP seems to me to be about equivalent to the best 35mm can do, and I'm not convinced that you see the difference until at least 25-30 MP.

Second highlight: superb image, 'get a tune out of most systems'. I'll steal it. It's just that as I get older I concentrate more and more on the image, and I think (I hope) I'm getting better at it. I know a musician who can literally get a tune out of anything. Have you ever actually seen someone play the jawbone an an ass? Or a pile of rocks? He makes a modest living out of demonstrating primitive instruments and early 'music'. But it's not my style. As you say: to each his own.

Cheers,

R.

 

[-doomed-]

FWIW, and out of courtesy, I'm waiting for the M10, so that I can pick a used (and probably babied) M9 for less than the M10 (which may have 25MP, video capabilities and remote control, live view and an espresso maker built-in). 🙂

This is the only reason to wait for the m10 . At this point id settle on a nice used m8 or 8.2 , or hang with film a bit longer.

 

[Richard Marks]

This is the only reason to wait for the m10 . At this point id settle on a nice used m8 or 8.2 , or hang with film a bit longer.

Not a great strategy.
It assumes some one else buys M9's in significant enough quantities to create an adequate sized pool of second hand ones. It also assumes that there will be an M10 and that it is significantly better than an M9 to cause people to part with them. if total M9 sales are very low second hand prices will remain very high and there may not be an M10.

Dont get me wrong though I really do not want to pay out £5,000!

Regards


Richard

 

[Richard Marks]

Dear Richard,

First highlight: I don't really agree. The M8 at 18 MP seems to me to be about equivalent to the best 35mm can do, and I'm not convinced that you see the difference until at least 25-30 MP.

Second highlight: superb image, 'get a tune out of most systems'. I'll steal it. It's just that as I get older I concentrate more and more on the image, and I think (I hope) I'm getting better at it. I know a musician who can literally get a tune out of anything. Have you ever actually seen someone play the jawbone an an ass? Or a pile of rocks? He makes a modest living out of demonstrating primitive instruments and early 'music'. But it's not my style. As you say: to each his own.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger

Regarding the first highlight fair enough! I realise Erwin Putts has recently shown that ASA25 B and W film is just an edge beyond the M9, but once one gets up to ASA400 or greater i would say digital can print bigger. But then getting really good quality colour scans from slide film is a problem for me so my digital pics generally are better for big enlargements. I do not thing colour print film can touch '35mm format' digital.

Second highlight. You are welcome! It is not a theft. Regarding advancing age and photography agreed one may concentrate more on the image.Im glad you pointed that out and not me. One other difference is that a professional has quite a bit more time to take photos than I do so maybe it will take me a lot longer to reach that point of saturation of a given style. I really do not want to become too staid in any one particular way. One of my best pics this year was taken with a Lubitel (horendous to use) a friend asked me to try out. I took a meter reading with my i phone. I have been back to the same spot a few times with my own gear and not got as good. Freshness and spontaneity is worth something.

Regarding cats my attitude to ours when she is on hunger stirke is to remind her of a phrase i picked up whilst working in China "hunger is the best sauce"

Regards

Richard

 

[biggambi]

Roger Hicks: "The M8 at 18 MP seems to me to be about equivalent to the best 35mm can do, and I'm not convinced that you see the difference until at least 25-30 MP."

I think we need to be careful in this area, when making comparative statements to film. Kodachrome 64 has been tested to have a resolution that exceeds 90 lp/mm. Tmax 100 is considerably higher yet, at about 120 lp/mm When Mr. Puts tested the new M9 he observed a considerably lower degree of resolution, at 62 lp/mm. This would indicate a difference that would become visible upon enlargement. Of course this all would have a threshold regarding the final print size chosen. The human eye's ability to resolve the detail vs print size becomes the key. But, I do not believe we should be claiming that the M9 resolves at a level equal to 35mm film. I agree that the M9 is a significant jump forward, but it is not yet there.

As to the second part of your statement. I couldn't agree more, given the current technology and algorithms. There have been test results that would appear to confirm it.

Take care,
M

 

[DerekF]

Not a great strategy.
It assumes some one else buys M9's in significant enough quantities to create an adequate sized pool of second hand ones. It also assumes that there will be an M10 and that it is significantly better than an M9 to cause people to part with them. if total M9 sales are very low second hand prices will remain very high and there may not be an M10.

I believe M9 prices will drop enough within a couple of years—even in the absence of a successor—that it will become feasible for me to own one. In the meantime, I'm perfectly happy with my film Ms. In that respect, I don't see how waiting is not a great strategy. The M9 will be around for some time (new and/or used) so I don't see what the rush is in getting one if you don't absolutely want or need one now.

 

[Rayt]

I am still waiting for the next M8 upgrade.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Roger Hicks: "The M8 at 18 MP seems to me to be about equivalent to the best 35mm can do, and I'm not convinced that you see the difference until at least 25-30 MP."

I think we need to be careful in this area, when making comparative statements to film. Kodachrome 64 has been tested to have a resolution that exceeds 90 lp/mm. Tmax 100 is considerably higher yet, at about 120 lp/mm

Sure, there are endless qualifications to be made, not least that a comparison between a random array of soft-edged 'image particles' (grain) and a regular array of hard-edged 'image particles' (pixels) is impossible.

Film resolution is an excellent example if such qualifications. First, reliable, consistent on the film resolution of more than about 100 lp/mm is all but unknown, mainly because the film is not located well enough. Second, the relationship between sharpness and contrast for the two media -- film and digital -- is very different.

The '18-22 MP' figure that is often bandied about for 35mm equivalency comes from film manufacturers, referring to slow, fine-grain slide film optimally exposed using a top-flight lens on a tripod-mounted camera, but it is open to wide argument. All I can say is that while I'd often idly wondered how reliable it was, the results from my M9 really do give me the impression of film-like quality: slow, fine-grain film quality. The faster the film, as Richard points out, the lower you can set your standards for megapixel compatibility.

Cheers,

R.