Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Leica M9 / ME

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 11-18-2018   #41
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is online now
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 30,282
Most of the time when I take photos I set ISO to 160, and sometimes to 320.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2018   #42
Corran
Registered User
 
Corran is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: USA
Posts: 1,273
If Kodak's T-max 3200 film had the same grain and overall performance as T-Max 400, folks would be head-over-heels about that film and likely not shoot much TMY anymore in darker conditions. That's about the difference between the M9 and my D800, and most FF sensors most likely.

Of course whether one "needs" that or not is a different question. The technical performance of the M9 is easy enough to quantify though. I preferred to shoot it in good to decent light. When I did commercial work in low-light, I grabbed my Nikon every time.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2018   #43
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by raid View Post
Leica is still "in". It is a symbol of top quality.
It's not the symbol of quality. It's the symbol of luxury.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2018   #44
Deardorff38
Registered User
 
Deardorff38 is offline
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 595
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
It's not the symbol of quality. It's the symbol of luxury.
The older film Ms that are still going strong are a symbol of quality...an M10 body for $7300 USD (body only) is indeed a symbol of luxury....
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-18-2018   #45
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deardorff38 View Post
The older film Ms that are still going strong are a symbol of quality...and M10 body for $7300 USD for a body is indeed a symbol of luxury....
My M3 that has worked perfectly since 195.. is a symbol of quality.
My $5500 M-E that broke after 3 months of use is a symbol of...luxury.

My Summicron 50mm DR is a symbol of quality. The 50mm Sumicron APO that Leica released without internal flare coating is a symbol of... luxury.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #46
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
Only Leica can pull that: if Nikon, Fuji or Canon had you send one of their models back to japan to replace a corroded sensor, their rep would be destroyed. But Leica does it and still charges 8k on their next model.
Right, and not many are singing the praises of CCD Nikons that sell for $100-200 these days... ok, not FF, that's one side... but...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #47
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Here is about low light M9 bashing.
Compared to modern CMOS... there is a major difference. You know this... you just love playing devil's advocate.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #48
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
Compared to modern CMOS... there is a major difference. You know this... you just love playing devil's advocate.
I'm ain't playing anything. My night at the fairground photography was published. Handheld taken with M-E.
I covered day and after sun went down Manhattan 2017 trip with same camera. Including street photography.

Modern CMOS rendering on high ISO is not natural, after all, it is amplified, calculated to amount of light which not exists.
Sure it is handy for faster shutter speeds and smaller apertures, but I prefer flash even at CMOS FF cameras instead of high ISO or with high ISO.
Just small hint of -2.0 and bounced flash makes huge difference.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #49
olifaunt
Registered User
 
olifaunt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 203
Digital cameras will always depreciate in the long term, no matter how well kept.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #50
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by mod2001 View Post
...I can't absolutely no reason, let alone proof, why it shouldn't do the same in 2018 or 2025.

Juergen
I agree completely with regard to 2018. I'm not so sure about 2025. However, your point is well taken. The photographer is much more important than the camera and lens.

At the same time, dismissing significant improvements in imaging technology as being frivolous is self-deceiving. Camera signal-to-noise and resolution improvements that improve of MTF 50 performance (independent of lenses, displays and printing technologies) can improve every photograph regardless of the scenes' light level, or subject detail.

Technology and creativity are not mutually exclusive.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #51
Ccoppola82
Registered User
 
Ccoppola82 is offline
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: NY
Posts: 283
Every once in a while I get the urge to splurge on a digital Leica. The likelihood of me getting more than 6-7 years out of a digital is slim. That being said, if I got a good one for a steal, I would likely jump at it.
__________________
Leica M2/M6
Hasselblad 500CM

Instagram
Coppola_Art
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #52
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,293
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
...
Modern CMOS rendering on high ISO is not natural, after all, it is amplified, calculated to amount of light which not exists.
This is simply disinformation.

After the shutter closes it is physically impossible to create information that was not present when the shutter is open.

Neither amplification nor calculation can increase the datas' information content. That light (spatial illuminance level) did in fact exist. The difference with contemporary CMOS imaging technologies is the uncertainty for the parameters estimated to model the light's spatial illuminance is much lower than before.

However, as signal-to-noise levels increase and artifact levels decrease, DC signal amplification and calculation create the potential for people to render images that don't match the perceived light observed by the photographer. The issue is how people use the increased information content.

Digital imaging is just a method to measure light. More measurement accuracy is not inherently bad or misleading. Whether it's for medical imaging, chemical and biological sample analyses or radar applications (just to name a few areas) corporations and governments pay a lot of money for advances in measurement accuracy. Are they throwing their money away?

Your criticism actually addresses how some photographers intentionally or naively render the images in ways you find aesthetically objectionable. I feel the same way.

Blaming the technologies or trying to make the case inferior measurement accuracy is an advantage is just a distraction.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #53
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
I can shoot ballet and freeze movement at 4000 asa using original theater lightning when 5 yrs a go i would have to light the entire set w/ strobes!
I've done such shots without a problem almost a decade ago with the Nikon D3s. Since then the progress in sensor performance has not been so dramatical. If I compare today the D3s to its third successor D5 the difference is negligible in 99% of the shots. You cannot distinguish the shots in a blind test. Been there, done that.

Most of the little sensor progress in the last years happened in the "extreme" areas as e.g. extremely high ISO.
But whether you have a little less noise at ISO 12800 or wether you have 1/4 stop more dynamic range is irrelevant for 99.9% of the shots.
But you have to pay thousands of bucks for this little progress.
Used professional-type DSLRs of 5-10 years old offer a much better price-performance ratio compared to the new stuff. You can save lots of money buying used.

Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
Deny all you want but old digital is worth nothing for good reason.
Have a look at e.g. the Nikon D700, D3, D3s, D3x, Canon EOS 1Ds MkII and MkIII, EOS 5D Mk II and III.
Its the opposite of what you have said, you get very good price-performance ratios.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #54
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
I've done such shots without a problem almost a decade ago with the Nikon D3s. Since then the progress in sensor performance has not been so dramatical. If I compare today the D3s to its third successor D5 the difference is negligible in 99% of the shots. You cannot distinguish the shots in a blind test. Been there, done that...Have a look at e.g. the Nikon D700, D3, D3s, D3x, Canon EOS 1Ds MkII and MkIII, EOS 5D Mk II and III. Its the opposite of what you have said, you get very good price-performance ratios.
Photography is about more than a price/performance ratio. I know that's hard to grasp, but for some photographers here, its seems to be all about finding the cheapest whatever it is. Could be the cheapest developer, could be the cheapest film, could be the cheapest digital camera. It is almost as if the resulting image is of no importance. Although you may not be able to see a difference between a D700 and a D850, many can. In large measure, it depends on what you do with the image after you take it. If you are just posting to the web, almost anything will do. If you are making large prints, it's another story.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #55
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
Photography is about more than a price/performace ratio. Although you may not be able to see a difference between a D700 and a D850, many can.
I've written that I've compared the D3s to the D5.

Nevertheless, what are 99% of digital shooters doing? They just view their pictures on a computer monitor with a 2k or 4k resolution = 2MP or 8MP pictures. The 12 MP of the D700 are completely sufficient for that. And the 45 MP of the D850 are just simply destroyed and not visible in this standard viewing situation.
This fact that the whole imaging chain is decisive for quality is unfortunately ignored by most photographers.

To really see significant differences you have to make big prints bigger than 30x40cm. How often do digital photographers do that? Likely in less than 0.01% of the cases.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #56
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
Modern CMOS rendering on high ISO is not natural, after all, it is amplified, calculated to amount of light which not exists.
I`m not talking about turning night into day... I am talking about making a lower noise image at the same ISO.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #57
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
To really see significant differences you have to make big prints bigger than 30x40cm. How often do digital photographers do that? Likely in less than 0.01% of the cases.
One in ten thousand photographers makes a print larger than 30x40cm? I never realized I was in such an elite group. Most of the prints I see are at least that large.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #58
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
One in ten thousand photographers makes a print larger than 30x40cm? I never realized I was in such an elite group. Most of the prints I see are at least that large.
A standard photo printer does up to 13 x 19" but with borders it is closer to 30x40cm. He might not be too far off. Many people do not even print. My preferred format is making books. My biggest book is 30x30cm or 12x12" ... sure, I`ve made the occasional 24x36" print, but I generally don`t. So, yes, you could be more unique than you realize based on the people you keep company with.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #59
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
A standard photo printer does up to 13 x 19" but with borders it is closer to 30x40cm. He might not be too far off. Many people do not even print. My preferred format is making books. My biggest book is 30x30cm or 12x12" ... sure, I`ve made the occasional 24x36" print, but I generally don`t. So, yes, you could be more unique than you realize based on the people you keep company with.
You need 16MP for a 30x40cm print at 300dpi with no cropping, so I think a 12MP Nikon D3 would come up short even for most photographers. Of course, as I said, if you only post to the web, almost anything will do.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #60
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
You need 16MP for a 30x40cm print at 300dpi with no cropping, so I think a 12MP Nikon D3 would come up short even for most photographers.
Yes, but let us remember many great photos were made with 12mp cameras and some people still use these to do serious work today. Large prints have also been made with these cameras... it only depends on viewing distance. For up close inspection, more res will always feel better. But I`ve also seen huge prints made from 35mm film that are not sharp or clear up close. They still make an impact though...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #61
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
You need 16MP for a 30x40cm print at 300dpi with no cropping, so I think a 12MP Nikon D3 would come up short even for most photographers. Of course, as I said, if you only post to the web, almost anything will do.
I have done so much direct comparisons with big prints from different film and digital cameras. MP count is much much overrated.
Using an excellent lens, having a really sharp picture and good color (or BW) are the most important things.
I've made excellent 50x75cm prints from 12 MP.

30x40cm prints from the D3(s) are made with about 240dpi.
From a normal viewing distance you can't see a significant difference to 30x40cm 300dpi prints from the D5.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #62
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
I'd say if you are satisfied with the output of you 12MP cameras, then by all means continue to use them.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #63
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I`m not taking about turning night into day... I am talking about making a lower noise image at the same ISO.
To me it is little bit more complicated,
I use M-E ISO 2500 let's say for Halloween walking in the neighborhood.
With J-3 @1.5 it comes clean enough, Or it is subway and I'm using ISO 2500 and f2.8.
Or it is velodrome and I need 1/500, ISO 2500 comes again. Or it is this submarine in Manhattan and I have Orion-15 f5.6 attached. In all of these real life and taken situations I have no issues with M-E ISO 2500.
I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen.
Not a problem.
Even more complicated part is what I'm finding high ISO cameras not so pleasing as low ISO cameras. For example, to me nothing renders like Canon 5D with ISO1600 as real max. I updated to 5D MKII for more ISO and it is not as pleasing on ISO 1600 and below.
It is dual side sword, I think.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #64
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen. Not a problem.
No surprise there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
I'm printing from it on Letter size and Even more complicated part is what I'm finding high ISO cameras not so pleasing as low ISO cameras. For example, to me nothing renders like Canon 5D with ISO1600 as real max. I updated to 5D MKII for more ISO and it is not as pleasing on ISO 1600 and below.It is dual side sword, I think.
I think different people have different senses of what is "pleasing". Sounds like you prefer the rendering of a CCD sensor to that of a CMOS sensor. You like the 5D and the M-E. That's fine, but what works for you might not work for someone else.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #65
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
I have done so much direct comparisons with big prints from different film and digital cameras. MP count is much much overrated.
Using an excellent lens, having a really sharp picture and good color (or BW) are the most important things.
I've made excellent 50x75cm prints from 12 MP.
I agree... I`ve done 20x30" or 50x75cm prints with 12mp as well... they are ok as long as you don`t get too close. However, with the latest 42mp sensors, one can print 100x150cm and have the same ok experience. It always depends on the photographer, gallery, or museum`s needs, but we`ve all seen huge prints and we`ve all seen small prints. It really depends on the space that they are displayed in if it is needed or not. I`ve seen the whole wall used as a print in museums... from bad 35mm negatives! It was still impactful.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #66
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Santiago, Chile
Age: 45
Posts: 19,696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
To me it is little bit more complicated,
I use M-E ISO 2500 let's say for Halloween walking in the neighborhood.
With J-3 @1.5 it comes clean enough, Or it is subway and I'm using ISO 2500 and f2.8.
Or it is velodrome and I need 1/500, ISO 2500 comes again. Or it is this submarine in Manhattan and I have Orion-15 f5.6 attached. In all of these real life and taken situations I have no issues with M-E ISO 2500.
I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen.
Not a problem.
We expect things to look a lot different then... letter size might be ok and a small screen, obviously the same... the M9 at 2500 was a disaster IMO. These days, ISO 3200 on CMOS can be pretty clean with decent dynamic range. Sorry, but the M9 doesn`t have the best latitude at ISO 160 even. I`ve used both. It`s cool though... use what works for you. It`s all subjective.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #67
Beemermark
Registered User
 
Beemermark's Avatar
 
Beemermark is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Wilmington, NC
Posts: 1,655
" Is the M9 price falling with the stock market?"

I wish. The M9 was introduced in September 2009. The Dow was at ~9700. Today the Dow closed at 25017.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #68
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
 
Rob-F's Avatar
 
Rob-F is offline
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The Show Me state
Age: 78
Posts: 5,862
Oh, yes, that was the original topic, wasn't it? Good point: maybe it isn't the stock market, just that digital cameras lose value as newer ones come out.
__________________
May the light be with you.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #69
Ko.Fe.
Kostya Fedot
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Posts: 7,039
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
We expect things to look a lot different then... letter size might be ok and a small screen, obviously the same... the M9 at 2500 was a disaster IMO. These days, ISO 3200 on CMOS can be pretty clean with decent dynamic range. Sorry, but the M9 doesn`t have the best latitude at ISO 160 even. I`ve used both. It`s cool though... use what works for you. It`s all subjective.
I'm coming from ISO400 @3200 film in M4-2 perspective. I have letter sized prints from these negatives and I like them.
M-E ISO 2500 obviously lacks pixel details on 1:1 viewing. Yet, I can't classify it as the noise, but grain.

Latitude is the term I would use for how much ISO160 could be pushed. And M-E files have good latitude for it.
The thing you are criticizing is dynamic range. Just like in audio, high end equipment gives more in the low to high frequencies , the modern cameras gives more within frame. More gradations. M-E ISO160 is not high dynamic image. It is just like digitized slide.

Back to real life, in my family and among people who is using my photography all of talks like these are totally irrelevant. Nobody cares as long as image is in focus and exposed well.
M-E does it better and it doesn't feel too digital .
And nobody need huge prints among us, we are not mansion people...

But obviously, M-E and M4-2 is not the high end combo for forums dwellers, even at RFF...
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #70
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,252
The corrosion issue drives rarity - the M9 with new sensor count far less than usual ones, thanks to Leica's highly efficient exchange program - and rarity plus the CCD image quality myth (which somehow neutralizes the digital decay by arguing the older being better) drives the price.

High prices are justified by paying customers. So in the end it's the number people with disposable income out there determines whether the bloated price could stay.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #71
shawn
Registered User
 
shawn is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,099
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ko.Fe. View Post
The thing you are criticizing is dynamic range. Just like in audio, high end equipment gives more in the low to high frequencies , the modern cameras gives more within frame. More gradations. M-E ISO160 is not high dynamic image. It is just like digitized slide.
Dynamic range in audio equipment is Signal to Noise ratio, not frequency response. The loudest peak compared to the quietest sound not lost in noise. Dynamic range in cameras is also signal to noise ratio. Those with lower dynamic range have more noise in the signal. Those with lower dynamic range have poorer high ISO performance as the two are linked.

Latitude is just another term for dynamic range. The difference between the brightest bright (not clipped) and the darkest dark that isn't lost in the noise. At ISO 160 the M9 has a PDR of 8.67. At ISO 2546 it is 4.82. An APSC Fuji X-Pro 2 has more dynamic range than that at ISO 10,000. The M10 at ISO12,800, Nikon Z6 has more at ISO16,000.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Chart...,Nikon%20Z%206

Shawn
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #72
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsrockit View Post
I agree... I`ve done 20x30" or 50x75cm prints with 12mp as well... they are ok as long as you don`t get too close. However, with the latest 42mp sensors, one can print 100x150cm and have the same ok experience. It always depends on the photographer, gallery, or museum`s needs, but we`ve all seen huge prints and we`ve all seen small prints. It really depends on the space that they are displayed in if it is needed or not. I`ve seen the whole wall used as a print in museums... from bad 35mm negatives! It was still impactful.

I print 100x70cm most of the time and my camera is a D700. It´s doable but far from what a 120 neg can give me. Otoh i just did a 2 day job shooting ballet w/ a Sony @7... I had to do w/ their lightning and it was dark. Dancers were running around like crazy. I set my aperture at 8, speed at 250 and fired away. My lens was a small zoom so i had to crop a lot. Camera is 16mp or 20mp and i was working at 4000 iso... i didn´t even know what i was doing cause the menu on that Sony is so miserable... but the results blew my mind. My D700 will never shoot in the dark like the Sony did. Usually, high iso was the achilles heel of digital but these new sensors ime reinvent photography at low light. It´s a miracle.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #73
Guth
Observational Documenter
 
Guth is offline
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark_pw View Post
The price of M9 has been hovering around $3500 for some time.

I've recently found the price of M9 at $2500. Like this one.

https://ebay.to/2OOSqpk

Is the falling market hurting Leica lovers?
I cannot speak to the technology differences between various digital cameras but I did not get the sense that's what this thread was about. From my perspective such a pricing trend would seem like a positive one for anyone out there who has been wanting to use a M9 to make photographs with but who has not yet been able to afford one.
__________________
My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #74
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guth View Post
I cannot speak to the technology differences between various digital cameras but I did not get the sense that's what this thread was about. From my perspective such a pricing trend would seem like a positive one for anyone out there who has been wanting to use a M9 to make photographs with but who has not yet been able to afford one.
A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #75
ptpdprinter
Registered User
 
ptpdprinter is offline
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 1,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
I print 100x70cm most of the time and my camera is a D700. It´s doable but far from what a 120 neg can give me. Otoh i just did a 2 day job shooting ballet w/ a Sony @7... I had to do w/ their lightning and it was dark. Dancers were running around like crazy. I set my aperture at 8, speed at 250 and fired away. My lens was a small zoom so i had to crop a lot. Camera is 16mp or 20mp and i was working at 4000 iso... i didn´t even know what i was doing cause the menu on that Sony is so miserable... but the results blew my mind. My D700 will never shoot in the dark like the Sony did. Usually, high iso was the achilles heel of digital but these new sensors ime reinvent photography at low light. It´s a miracle.
The Nikon D700 is 12MP and the Sony A7 is 24MP. For your print size, I expect it was a considerable step up in quality.
__________________
ambientlightcollection.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #76
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
The Nikon D700 is 12MP and the Sony A7 is 24MP. For your print size, I expect it was a considerable step up in quality.
Otoh i didn´t like dealing w/ that camera. I could get used but nikons and Fujis give me a solid vibe and the sony doesn´t.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #77
Guth
Observational Documenter
 
Guth is offline
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 131
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.
From my perspective the bottom line is that people like what they like. Whether someone considers certain cameras to be "better" by way of core technologies, specs, looks, etc. doesn't really matter. Everyone's preferences are different. That's why we all like different things. Some people might prefer a Leica M9 over other cameras for whatever reason and if they can pick one up for cheaper than a year ago then more power to them. I myself have never even seen a M9.
__________________
My RFF Gallery
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #78
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guth View Post
From my perspective the bottom line is that people like what they like. Whether someone considers certain cameras to be "better" by way of core technologies, specs, looks, etc. doesn't really matter. Everyone's preferences are different. That's why we all like different things. Some people might prefer a Leica M9 over other cameras for whatever reason and if they can pick one up for cheaper than a year ago then more power to them. I myself have never even seen a M9.
It´s not "better" but better.

Just like Leica lenses are better and not "better".
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-19-2018   #79
Ste_S
Registered User
 
Ste_S is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 100
Quote:
Originally Posted by ptpdprinter View Post
One in ten thousand photographers makes a print larger than 30x40cm? I never realized I was in such an elite group. Most of the prints I see are at least that large.
I think the 1 in 10,000 figure is being generous to be honest. Majority of photography is done with phones, shared to social media and not printed. Hobbyist photographers stuff mostly lives on their hard drive, sometimes is shared to social media and is rarely printed.

The majority of people who do print mostly print 6x4", 7x5" or A4, as most people don't have inkjets that can print anything larger than that.

If you're printing at A3 or larger regularly you're in a very small group.
  Reply With Quote

Old 11-20-2018   #80
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
 
jaapv's Avatar
 
jaapv is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands
Posts: 8,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.
A Leica M9 costs nothing new. It was discontinued years ago. Although we can debate your doubtful statement about image quality - many M9 users prefer the way a ccd sensor renders-, it is rather silly to compare new prices and technology of cameras that are several generations apart.
__________________
Jaap

jaapvphotography
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 17:35.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.