Upload & Sell: Off
Mitch, great examples!
The ice maiden was shot on the RX1 and a7R I was also trying out that day... Plus, she's averse to online appearances...
I agree about mixed light skin tones and want to add it will also depend on personal and possibly client expectations. A lot of the times when I'm shooting in such conditions, it's event type coverage and I generally want to supply the client with pleasant, normal looking skin tones, if possible. This is when the M9 can be a bit difficult. It's pretty much a given that with theatrical style lighting (strong color gels, or equivalent), that it's like that for the effect and trying to correct in post is often futile.
BTW, the lights you're thinking of are Kino Flo.
Carsten - very rich images and I particularly like the first one. I'd love to have some time with the 50AA...
Thomas - I've enjoyed your May 1st series!
Gary - looks like it's starting to green a bit in your area. Same here, finally...
Scheffler, very nice photos!
Yes, rangefinder focusing is fun. However, if you think you can focus correctly without magnified view with the A7r, it sounds pretty good given the sensor in the A7r... But if you have the M 240, maybe there is no reason to use the A7/A7r? But if you had to choose between an M9 or an A7r, which one would you choose (if you only shoot 50mm and narrower)?
Camera choice is so hard...
Thanks! With the a7R, it's going to be more difficult to nail wider angle lenses without magnifying the view. At 36MP, let alone 18 or 24, accurate wide angle focus can be very critical. With wides it's often the situation where focus peaking floods the entire scene with distracting peaking color implying good focus anywhere, when that's really often not the case...
As for M9 vs. a7R, I would have to ask "for what applications?"
If it's a camera for everything I do, then I'll opt for the 1DX, which I currently use alongside the M cameras. But if it's for day to day personal and casual shooting, I would go with the M9 and give up the modern sensor in exchange for a simpler, easier, faster, and for me, more intuitive shooting experience. Funny thing is, when I'm out with the M9 or M240, I'm often seeing and shooting at 50mm and wider. 90mm is about the least used of my 'regular kit' lenses that I bring along. Therefore, I don't feel I miss the use of longer lenses very often.
I think the M240 effectively bridges the technological divide between the M9 and a7 series, giving me live view for those times when I might want more precise framing, or the ability to confirm focus... So far I haven't felt compelled to adapt longer lenses to it, though I could. It also brings some UI improvements over the M9 that are relevant to my style of shooting, but maybe not to others.
For this kind of casual shooting, and also some of my paid work, I really value the compactness of the M system. While the a7 series cameras are quite small (I find them too small for their style of UI and would prefer something slightly larger), the lenses will not be that much different from DSLR lenses. Currently Sony is trying to keep lens size in check with slower zooms, but once the faster primes start to appear, I suspect they'll be fairly large and very similar to current DSLR options. Compare the Leica 21/3.4 against the Zeiss 21/2.8 (which I was thinking of getting before I got into Leica, but decided against it in part due to size and weight). Or a 28/2, 35/2, 35/1.4.... etc... the M glass is all a lot smaller and optically excellent. While the camera is a factor, my considerations lately have been more inclusive of factors, such as size, weight, optical quality, than was maybe the case 10-20 years ago. Back then the systems I used were more driven by specific performance gains at the expense of other, broader considerations.
Some more from the ice storm... this is around the time when the a7R packed it in... just as the light was getting interesting:
All M9 & 50 Lux ASPH