Leica M9

jimlizard

jimlizard

Messages
682
Name
David
Edit My Images
No
It'll be announced today! I just can't wait to confirm the specs! :)

I know some people don't understand the Leica M system but, even in the digital world, there is no other camera which can give you more pleasure to use.

I'm expecting a full-frame sensor without AA filter (like in the M8), producing around 18 Mpixels, as well as a better high iso performance.
Remember, photos are much sharper without the AA filter, like in a medium format digital back.
The prints I used to make with the M8, were at least as good as those from a 5D, so this should be on par with a 5D mark II.
Leica rangefinder lenses are amazing and, the wide angle ones, are much better than anything ever made for a 35mm SLR (maybe the Distagon T* 21mm is the exception), since distortion levels are very low.

It'll be too expensive for me at this time for sure, but I'll have to buy one soon or later. :)
 
jimlizard said:
It'll be announced today! I just can't wait to confirm the specs! :)

I know some people don't understand the Leica M system but, even in the digital world, there is no other camera which can give you more pleasure to use.
Click to expand...

Do you mean difficult to understand in terms of the rangefinder concept, which is pretty straightforward, or why people are prepared to pay Leica prices?

Your second statement is very subjective. I do have a pair of Leica binoculars, which I love for the build/optical quality, but they were a bit of an indulgence and I'm not sure I could argue that they are several hundred pounds better than the competition. I might buy an M series film camera one day, but this is just because I would like to have one, and I would generally choose a DSLR for its versatility.
 
MartynK, I mean that people sometimes don't understand why such "primitive" and mechanical cameras are still in the market today and why some people pay so much for them.

Of course my statement was very subjective / personal and, of course I agree with you when you say the price of Leica M equipment is not proportional with the quality, when we comparate it with Canon / Nikon SLR equipment, for example.
You are not able to get better files with an M8 than you can get with a 5D, for example. Sometimes it's exactly the opposite, since the M8 is terrible when we use high ISO.

However, there are times when you can catch better moments, especially if you like to do street photography and to shoot strangers.
People find that compact camera with a tiny lens, less agressive than a SLR, and they usually feel more confortable, which results in a better expression.
It's the kind of camera that doesn't calls too much attention, not only because of the size, but also because of the shutter's sound.

You can also have your left eye free, to antecipate the moment. Better than that, you can actually see the moment. With an SLR, you see everything except the exact moment. Sometimes it does matter.

Manual focus using wide angles is also much more precise.

It's also possible to walk around with a complete set of amazing prime lenses, just in a small bag. Yes, you can buy a nice zoom for the SLR, but the quality isn't the same, as we all know.

I'm not saying that rangefinder cameras are better, because they aren't for most of the works but, for some specific subjects, they are wonderful. :)

I hope you guys didn't get me wrong. I have myself an SLR and I love it. I sold the M8 because I needed the SLR for other works, but even using Zeiss manual focus lenses with my camera, the pleasure of shooting is not exactly the same. :)

Like in the Leica's commercial by Wim Wenders:

"A camera like your eye, your hand and your heart".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rlOppFsQGEY
 
OK, I understand you. I don't go out of my way to shoot people at all, because I'm not really interested in this type of photography, but I can see where the RF would fit in.

I can also see why you placed "primitive" in inverted commas, because there's nothing remotely primitive about the M series cameras and the lenses. They're beautifully made, with simple, manual, controls, very few features to clutter them up and deliver outstanding results. I still use my Nikon F2 for much the same reasons occaisonally.
 
MartynK said:
OK, I understand you. I don't go out of my way to shoot people at all, because I'm not really interested in this type of photography, but I can see where the RF would fit in.

I can also see why you placed "primitive" in inverted commas, because there's nothing remotely primitive about the M series cameras and the lenses. They're beautifully made, with simple, manual, controls, very few features to clutter them up and deliver outstanding results. I still use my Nikon F2 for much the same reasons occaisonally.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's it. ;)
About the F2, it's a terrif camera. I already had almost all models from that family (F Photomic, F3, F3 HP, F4s and F5), but I never had the F2, which happens to be my favourite.

Do you want to sell yours? :)
 
jimlizard said:
Yes, that's it. ;)
About the F2, it's a terrif camera. I already had almost all models from that family (F Photomic, F3, F3 HP, F4s and F5), but I never had the F2, which happens to be my favourite.

Do you want to sell yours? :)
Click to expand...

No, sorry! You can find them, but they're getting long in the tooth now and good examples are getting expensive, particularly the F2AS.
 
KayJay said:
I heard the sensor is developed by Canon.
Click to expand...

For the M9 or the F2??????

I'd be delighted if Canon, or anyway else, developed a sensor for the F2. Digital clockwork in that magical body would be a dream. Thom Hogan reckoned Nikon took the FM3D (FM3 with a digital sensor) to the prototype stage, but never released it. This is about as close as it got.................
 
MartynK said:
No, sorry! You can find them, but they're getting long in the tooth now and good examples are getting expensive, particularly the F2AS.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. Good ones are getting really expensive.

About the M9, the Canon sensor was just a rumour. I just watched the M9 official presentation a couple of minutes ago and they confirmed it still uses a Kodak sensor, however it is full-frame and has a much better high iso performce.
 
MartynK said:
For the M9 or the F2??????

I'd be delighted if Canon, or anyway else, developed a sensor for the F2. Digital clockwork in that magical body would be a dream. Thom Hogan reckoned Nikon took the FM3D (FM3 with a digital sensor) to the prototype stage, but never released it. This is about as close as it got.................
Click to expand...

There were a lot of rumours going around that they were supplying the sensor for the M9. Don't know if that is the case though.
 
KayJay said:
Ah sorry. My bad. It looks so sexy.
Click to expand...

Yes, they are wonderful. :)
The only Leica M which doesn't look so sexy - in my opinion - is the M5.
It isn't ugly at all, but not comparable to the beauty of the other models.
 
I do hope Leica have got it right with the M9. It looks promising, at least in addressing the M8's many shortcomings. The M8 was a shambolic travesty.

I can't help thinking that somehow digital doesn't sit totally comfortably with the Leica concept and methodology of working, which peaked with the 35mm film M6 in all its glorious mechanical and optical loveliness. Digital is instant and easy, hugely so compared to film; that's its appeal, so why spoil it with clumsy rangefinder focusing? If you want to indulge yourself in the skilful manual craft of photography, a film camera is surely the ultimate incarnation?

The digital spiritual successor to the classic film Leicas is more like the little D-Lux 4 (Pano LX3), or even more so the Panasonic GF1 or Olympus E-P1. The new Leica X1 also announced today (fixed 24mm, APS-C compact) seems to be neither one nor the other - if it only had interchangeable lenses, it might be different, but it doesn't. Even a short zoom would dramatically widen its appeal.

But then again, I still can't see where Leica is going, other than deeper into an esoteric niche. £5k for a camera that doesn't do anything uniquely better, and most things rather worse :shrug: It's only USP is just to be different, largely for the sake of it, and at a crazy price. I also didn't like the idea of a new Leica Store Mayfair being opened - just the sort of place, and people, that shouldn't be encouraged.
 
There is nothing wrong with coupled rangefinder focusing per se, with practice it can be quicker in tricky or low light than AF. I do agree though that the camera doesn't do anything spectacularly, a bit dissapointed with the top iso of 2500 and the availability of alternative viewfinder magnifications (as in there isn't any) is a big mistake
 
I am SURE the pictures are sharp, and that it is more discrete than an SLR but i think you really have to have the horn for a Leica to get one. If you even apply any kind of logic in terms of specification on what you get for your £5k....you'll be kicking yourself not getting a 1DsMKIII/5Dii/D3/D700....etc.

Just at a glance...

Sensitivity range ISO 160 - 2500 (ISO 80 'pulled'*)

ISO 2500 and its FULL FRAME? Please...........my 3 years old 30D can do ISO 3200.

Continuous shooting 2 fps, max 8 images

Erm.....You can argue that you don't need faster than that because you are not shooting sports....but tell that to the 5D users who has 4fps and doesn't shoot sports if they would be happy with 2fps ! I can pull 2FPS I think on a manual 35mm film camera...

Other things such as only 1/180 on flash sync, the screen is also last gen at 230,000 pixels which they haven't improved since the M8 apart from making it "brighter" ?

I can't see this being a workhorse camera personally, which to me means a very expensive toy ! A niche one at that.
 
The last time I was up at Leica UK in Milton Keynes, the Service Dept manager was bemoaning that fact that they'd become an up-market jewellery company...

I had a problem with my M6 chewing up batteries at a great rate of knots and had him replace the battery contacts which had worn so that the camera was always 'on'...
He also told me he'd recalibrated the focus as it was 0.02mm out at 20 feet... I laughed at that and said that DOF on the 35mm lens would take care of that, to which he replied that some customers would find it excessive, but who, in all probability had never put a roll of film through their cameras...
"People buy our cameras as ornaments now, hence all the snakeskin and gold editions..."

He seemed really saddened by it and when it came to pay for the repairs, he let me off as I was someone who actually used the thing in anger...
 
I guess that is the danger. It's like people buying limited edition super cars and never putting them on the road for people to see. It is a shame. The problem they have is either continue with their principles or try and compete with the mainstream camera manufacturers. It is a niche manufacturer, they have to keep their loyal customers happy but whether they are doing that now is probably up for debate.
 
I am SURE the pictures are sharp, and that it is more discrete than an SLR but i think you really have to have the horn for a Leica to get one. If you even apply any kind of logic in terms of specification on what you get for your £5k....you'll be kicking yourself not getting a 1DsMKIII/5Dii/D3/D700....etc.
Click to expand...

that's why I just gothe 5dmkii. The camera in of itself is not bad, it's just about 3 times the price of what itshouldbe wihout the leica badge.
 
Raymond Lin said:
I am SURE the pictures are sharp, and that it is more discrete than an SLR but i think you really have to have the horn for a Leica to get one. If you even apply any kind of logic in terms of specification on what you get for your £5k....you'll be kicking yourself not getting a 1DsMKIII/5Dii/D3/D700....etc.
Just at a glance...

Sensitivity range ISO 160 - 2500 (ISO 80 'pulled'*)

ISO 2500 and its FULL FRAME? Please...........my 3 years old 30D can do ISO 3200.

Continuous shooting 2 fps, max 8 images

Erm.....You can argue that you don't need faster than that because you are not shooting sports....but tell that to the 5D users who has 4fps and doesn't shoot sports if they would be happy with 2fps ! I can pull 2FPS I think on a manual 35mm film camera...

Other things such as only 1/180 on flash sync, the screen is also last gen at 230,000 pixels which they haven't improved since the M8 apart from making it "brighter" ?

I can't see this being a workhorse camera personally, which to me means a very expensive toy ! A niche one at that.
Click to expand...

If you compare a Leica in terms of spec, it just doesn't stack up at all. But that's not the point - it's how you feel using it, and you either get that, or you don't. That's my point about film really, and if you are really into the whole picture taking method, craft and process thing, then digital kind of plays against that. Well, that's just an opinion ;)

Personally, I don't get the Leica thing despite my best efforts over the years. However, I do have an expensive mechanical watch that I have worn everyday for the last 24 years. And it keeps rubbish time! :eek: Same illogical psychology :cuckoo: (Why don't Leica make posh watches? They would surely sell better than their cameras do - I want one already.)

Arkady said:
The last time I was up at Leica UK in Milton Keynes, the Service Dept manager was bemoaning that fact that they'd become an up-market jewellery company...

I had a problem with my M6 chewing up batteries at a great rate of knots and had him replace the battery contacts which had worn so that the camera was always 'on'...
He also told me he'd recalibrated the focus as it was 0.02mm out at 20 feet... I laughed at that and said that DOF on the 35mm lens would take care of that, to which he replied that some customers would find it excessive, but who, in all probability had never put a roll of film through their cameras...
"People buy our cameras as ornaments now, hence all the snakeskin and gold editions..."

He seemed really saddened by it and when it came to pay for the repairs, he let me off as I was someone who actually used the thing in anger...
Click to expand...

Leicas are not really expensive for what they are - premium quality hand made in West Germany. Not mass produced in Japan.

I'm pretty certain that everyone at Leica (except in the marketing department :lol: ) would love to see prices halved and more cameras in the hands of serious working photographers. I don't think Cartier Bresson would ever have been seen poncing around with a gold plate and aligator skin camera, but I guess that's the price of survival.

It's kind of the same with classic sports cars, wrapped up in their climate controlled garages and insured for millions (in case the place catches fire) and only wheeled out on special occasions to be polished, looked at and admired, not driven in anger.

It's all rather sad and I think a bit pathetic TBH :'(
 
Radiohead said:
What does expensive mean?
Click to expand...

But the Leica M9 is ridiculously expensive by any objective criterior. Surely no point in arguing that, especially as it misses the point. And comparing it to expensive top end hi-fi is also irrelevant, because that stuff actually sounds very good indeed, better than cheaper kit.

What the Leica M9 is, is a camera that is not only very costly but demonstrably inferior in many ways, is harder to use, and produces images that are only as good as the best available from cheaper rivals, and certainly not better than them.

Leica is different. That's what you pay for, and whatever that certain uniqueness brings. This chap will surely be getting (another) one http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-472172/Eric-Clapton-No-Lens-Scapon.html

But thank you so much for the link. When scolling down I found a link on the left hand side to 'Joyful Nudes'. Splendid :thumbs:
 
I think Leicas were fine when they were film cameras - I could easily justify the expense then as the cameras were superbly engineered and milled out of solid aluminium billets, as opposed to being stamped out of sheet metal (as most cameras were back 'then'...)...
The shutters were whisper-quiet and the whole package was unobtrusive and discrete...
The batteries only powered the light-meter and so lasted for ages, making them ideal for long, long trips in rough, out of the way places...

Plus: Film was film was film - the image quality depended as much on the film as on the camera + lens - you could use Kodachrome 25 in a Zenit or a Pentax K-series with a good M-42 lens and get the same results as with a Leica...

Now with the advent of digital, the non-removable chip and software algorithms decide the image quality - and that much-vaunted build-quality isn't enough for me to part with that amount of cash...all of those electronics needs power, so the batteries only last as long as any other digi camera...

As professional tools, Leicas have had their day...and as jewellery? - who apart from photography buffs has even heard of them these days?
 
As I said, Leica is not about taking logical options, but about making decisions with your heart (and pocket :D ).

There is a guy in an american photography forum, who is a well succeeded fashion photographer. To do his work, he uses a 1Ds MKIII, a Nikon D3X (yes, both systems), an Hasselblad with a P45+ back and, sometimes, a Leica M8.

He said that, professionaly, he needs the big toys but, if he could only have a digital camera for his own pleasure, he would choose the M8, without thinking twice.
I know how some people hate them (even Leica M fans) and I totally respect that, but it's also interesting to see how other people feel about these little cameras.
Only special objects are able to create this kind of different hate/love feelings.

By the way, I belong to the group of people who love them, as you already noticed for sure. :)
 
HoppyUK said:
Leicas are not really expensive for what they are - premium quality hand made in West Germany. Not mass produced in China/Thailand/Malaysia.
Click to expand...
Corrected for you. ;)

I totally agree, I think that generally Leica kit is fantastic value for money - and folk who endlessly compare specs feature-for-feature with some hulk of mass produced digital tinsel are entirely missing the point.
 
Radiohead said:
What does expensive mean?
Click to expand...
Thanks for that, nice read.
icon14.gif
 
i think they look nice and i've never used one but the fact it doesn't do anything awesome for 4-5k is ridiculous.

i can't see the investment in r&d as they've basically fixed problems and as pointed out the technology is hardly cutting edge.

if someone can logically explain to me why they're not excessively milking an established brand name i'd be impressed.
 
Raymond Lin said:
If you even apply any kind of logic in terms of specification on what you get for your £5k....you'll be kicking yourself not getting a 1DsMKIII/5Dii/D3/D700....etc.
Click to expand...
What about the fact that it is THE most compact full frame digital camera?

6a00df351e888f88340120a553588c970b-800wi


To me, that is much more impressive and 'worth' paying for (not that I've got the money!)

I would not doubt that the Japanese manus will be looking very hard at this and working on ways to make something similar. If for no other reason than to get you to buy 'new' kit all over again when they finally have sold as much undemanding legacy dross (old 35mm SLR chassis with digital sensors and old lens designs) as they can and will need to find new markets. In 5 or 10 years time a '1DsMKIII/5Dii/D3/D700....etc' will just be landfill and specs fanboys will have different 'ultimate' to compare whatever Leica do next - perhaps a digital CL? :D
 
i'm not seeing the logical explanation if i'm honest, if you could be a bit clearer that would be appreciated.

and regarding undemanding legacy dross well leicas are an exemplary example of this, same chassis not many improvements (flaws in prior versions) and "old rangefinder chassis with digital sensors and old lens designs"

and looking at the speed leica are updating their m series in comparison to their release schedules for their film equivalents back in't day it'd seem they're going the same way with landfill and specs

to me leica is so far from ultimate it's untrue, granted the film performance was supposed to be of the highest quality but from what i gather their digital offerings are generally not comparatively to what other companies are offering technology wise even to the extent they've had flaws?

it's just a brand name to me and honestly not one i desire very much and thinking a bit deeper one that has been watered down a bit with the tie in with lumix...budget leicas? same build? :S
 
alexkidd said:
i'm not seeing the logical explanation if i'm honest, if you could be a bit clearer that would be appreciated.

and regarding undemanding legacy dross well leicas are an exemplary example of this, same chassis not many improvements (flaws in prior versions) and "old rangefinder chassis with digital sensors and old lens designs"

and looking at the speed leica are updating their m series in comparison to their release schedules for their film equivalents back in't day it'd seem they're going the same way with landfill and specs

to me leica is so far from ultimate it's untrue, granted the film performance was supposed to be of the highest quality but from what i gather their digital offerings are generally not comparatively to what other companies are offering technology wise even to the extent they've had flaws?

it's just a brand name to me and honestly not one i desire very much and thinking a bit deeper one that has been watered down a bit with the tie in with lumix...budget leicas? same build? :S
Click to expand...

:clap: :plusone:


It seems to me that the people who are vouching for Leica are playing the "If you have to ask, you won't get it" card.

I've used a Leica film body, albeit only very briefly, and admittedly it was wonderful.
But then I'd have made careful decisions about the film/lens I placed in/on there, which is more than half the decision regarding film (i.e. film/lens>camera)

The Leica looks to be, I dunno.. okay. I've seen some shots from it, and the reviewer ranting and raving about the wonderfulness of them and I'm sat there :thinking: wondering what all the fuss is about.

Generic Leica Fan said:
"But it's a Leica!"
Click to expand...

Exactly my point.
 
I'm with Alex on this - and I still own a Leica...
How many people schilling for them here actually own the damn things...?
 
alexkidd said:
and looking at the speed leica are updating their m series in comparison to their release schedules for their film equivalents back in't day it'd seem they're going the same way with landfill and specs
Click to expand...
I'll have any Leica's you are chucking away.
 
When does the Panasonic version come out?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top