I currently own a 5DMKII with some Zeiss ZE glass,and they make me quite happy, except for the bulk and weight when shooting all day long...you've all been there...
So I've been considering an M9 with 3 Zeiss lenses, and as usually I signed up for Digilloyd web site to read his reviews on Leica system, which are fairly extense.
I got scared. What he says about the problems on focusing all Zeiss lenses, and even Leicas longer then 50s, makes focusing the M9 an adventure. Has it been the experience of M9 owners in this forum too? I use to see excelent M9 photos here, but this are low res pics and I can't know what percentage of keepers they represent. I use to print large, so very precise focus is a must. And we're talking about a 10-15K system, so it better be great!!!
Opinions on this?
Longer lens wide open can be a challenge til you get used to though the wider lenses you will find easier and more accurate to focus than on a DSLR.
If you add a 1.25 or 1x4x to the eyepiece the longer lenses are a lot easier to focus.
I never had any trouble with my 90mm f2.8 Elmarit M for example, but I also only really shot static scenes or posed people. I imagine trying to shoot people on the fly would be challenging but then again, a RF isn't really a tool for that. DSLR and modern AF glass.
Can't really compare a RF to anything other than a RF because your using a rangefinder to focus and compose.
Means no AF, no live view, and no DOF preview even. Just a different way of working that suits some people and not others.
Best to rent or borrow a RF as its something you've got to try hands on to see if you like it. Only way to really tell.
Its like someone trying to describe driving a manual transmission. Some people just hate it and others love it and can shift gears while adjusting the radio and talking on the cellphone like its second nature.
Let me preface this post by saying that I'd love to own an M9... in fact for a long while I was considering selling off a bunch of my Canon glass to help finance the purchase. I love photography and it's my first and foremost hobby but I don't make money off it... I *could* justify spending $7k on a digital body right now, but for me the M9 doesn't deserve that kind of coin.
Leica lenses are (for the most part) considered the best in the world, and while the M9 is certainly capable of capturing great images, it has some very serious deficiencies in terms of usability for my style of shooting. I don't really care about AF, but no Live View and an essentially useless LCD screen are a big deal. I have high hopes for the M10 (or perhaps a used M9 once the prices come into the realm of reason).
Nah, focusing is not much of a problem if you have a well calibrated kit. Wide angles are trivial to focus - much easier than on a DSLR. Longer lenses at large apertures and large distances are of course a bit more tricky, but that's the case with DSLR manual focus as well.
There is a learning curve but if your kit is well calibrated and you have normal eyesight (or eyesight that can be corrected by a simple diopter) then it should be no problem.
Live view would of course be great in a future version as it's much better when working off a tripod, but you get used to working without it. In return you get a compact full frame kit and you can use some exceptional lenses.
I'm fairly new to the M9 and also read a lot of negative comments about various issues. My opinion is that while these issues exist, they're not nearly as serious as they sound. Like any camera, the M9 has limitations. Once you become familiar with its limitations, you'll better know how to work with, or around them. At the moment, if you want a compact, full frame camera, the M9 is the only option. Therefore you have to be willing to accept some compromises in order to exploit its advantages.
What I found was that I could set up test scenarios and find focus anomalies. It got me thinking that there were problems with my camera or lenses. But when I actually went out and used the equipment as I normally would, I was usually very happy with the results. Not having ever subscribed to Lloyd's paid site, I can only guess how he goes about his testing and whether it is representative of your real world approach to photography.
As Luka noted, focusing wide angles is extremely easy and accurate. Where it gets more tricky (for me) is with 50mm and longer if working at or near wide open and farther distances. Generally at close range (up to about 2-3 meters) I don't have problems. It will also depend somewhat on what you photograph. When I photograph people, it's usually at fairly close range and frequently more wide open, and as mentioned, focus accuracy/difficulty is generally not a problem. For landscape type photos that are more distant, I usually stop down a fair amount, which eliminates focus issues.
I took a look at a few of your travel galleries. I think the Portugal 2010 gallery is quite representative of what would work well with an M9. I didn't check each photo, but it seemed you worked mostly at 50mm and wider, which is prime rangefinder territory. Would an M9 have resulted in better photos? I don't really think so, because the results are more a function of you the photographer. But it would have meant a much lighter, smaller kit to carry.
Something worth considering is the level of Leica support you can find in Brazil if you run into rangefinder calibration or other issues.
I've not used the M9, only an M6, but it should be the same experience. The system is a bit hit and miss. Some subjects are easy to focus on and other could be rather tricky. Personally I think this is the only weakness of this camera but the good news is that it is very easy to fix, if Leica just adds an electronic focus aid such as hi-def electronic live viewfinder with focus mask. For static subjects, you can of course review your image for focus accuracy and reshoot if necessary but the moment is long gone for moving subjects. Fingers crossed they see this opportunity and introduce it for the M10.
My main issue (mind you, I have used rangefinder less than most here) with rangefinding, is long lenses and close focus (partially exact framing too, but less important). I either have to accept that I can barely see what I'm supposed to compose with a 90mm, and if I go longer.. well, I shouldn't. And having a minimum focusing distance of 70cm ++ on 30 and 50mm lenses is a huge drawback for me. That is very dependent on style of course. Both these could be fixed with a M10 with a evf/ovf-combo or/and live view.
Tanks all of you for your insights. It's becoming more clear to me that up to 50mm, there is not much of a hassle. Longer, maybe. I basically like street photography like rscheffler noticed, and as I love travelling, I end up doing some landscape too. Shooting in the street I like longer lenses, a 85/90mm would be fine. I currently use 21,35 and 100 Zeiss ZE lenses, and sometimes 50mms from Canon and Olympus. Trying one is certainly on my plans before committing, but here in Brazil I can't find one to rent. Next time I travel, I'll try to arrange it, it's certainly of utmost importance. Or, as I will be saving for it (what a ridiculous price tag...) maybe when I'm done the M10 will be out...who knows what it will bring...!
Part of what makes a RF fun as well remember is that everyone can't do it, and even an experienced photographer misses shots.
Its the total opposite of the latest high tech cameras that just require you to press a button and give you perfect shots 99 times out of 100.
There are times when I want that of course, such as a wedding, where I want to not miss a single moment, but then there are times when I want to feel like I'm a real photographer and not a button pusher.
To go back to another car analogy, its like the difference between a modern car with all the high tech stability controls, torgue vectoring etc vs a stripped down true sports car.
Now if I'm driving around town with a family darn right I want the car to do everything possible to keep everyone safe.
But go out to a track for a day to do some laps and that stuff isn't that fun. Actually having to really drive the car with pure driver skill is whats fun.
When you get a great lap time you know its all because of the driver, not the car doing part of the work.
I found the M9 to be the same way. When I got some really good shots, I really could feel that it was from practice, not just buying the latest and greatest, and thats a good feeling.
Getting a shot that 90% of photographers could pick up the camera and do is unique these days.
I'm a sports shooter for a living and in my field, with modern gear, its becoming so easy for everyone to just hold down the shutter and machine gun til they get a great shot.
With a M9 there is no machine gunning, no relying on the AF system, no face detection, no scene modes etc.
Its up to the photographer to make it happen and thats why people enjoy it and other people might hate it.
millsart wrote:
Part of what makes a RF fun as well remember is that everyone can't do it, and even an experienced photographer misses shots.
Its the total opposite of the latest high tech cameras that just require you to press a button and give you perfect shots 99 times out of 100.
If by perfect shot you mean in focus and correctly exposed, then yes. Personally I never liked a photo just because it was in focus or properly exposed. Achieving that shouldn't make you feel like a photographer - you need to take the medium well beyond that. Shock, inspire, create beauty, make a social commentary, etc - that's photography.
Great points, and I agree that there is a certain degree of unknown when working with the M9 that relies more on experience and envisioning the final image. It makes getting good results more fun and satisfying than with current DSLRs, but is less of a sure thing. I think it's this uncertainty and lack of fallback systems to minimize user error that results in much criticism of the camera for its price point. Something to remember is that Leica is not immune from assembly and calibration issues, which they even admit. But neither is any other manufacturer. My entire SLR history has been with Canon products and since going digital I've exclusively used the fairly expensive 1D series cameras. Yet here, at an average $5K price point, I have also encountered problems. Over on the Canon board there was a time when there was much discussion about lens copy variations, etc...
André: Lloyd seems to be a very technically inclined photographer. If you are similar, and evaluate images in a similar manner, then it's possible you may share his opinions about the M9.
Graham Mitchell wrote:
If by perfect shot you mean in focus and correctly exposed, then yes. Personally I never liked a photo just because it was in focus or properly exposed. Achieving that shouldn't make you feel like a photographer - you need to take the medium well beyond that. Shock, inspire, create beauty, make a social commentary, etc - that's photography.
Yes of course, but I believe we are talking about the technical merits of a camera here, not the esthetic qualities of the photography in general.
The OP didn't say he read someone said that the M9 can't produce good social commentary as well as another camera, rather he posed a question regarding physically shooting with the camera.
I believe this forum is more about the technical aspects of equipment rather than how beautiful a shot may be etc. Lots of other discussion boards here such as he people photography or b/w that would be a better place to discuss those aspects of photography if you choose as they aren't very camera specific.
Yes, I was more concerned about the technical problems, because although I agree that art and vision are more important, I want the tool to respond the way I expect it to. If I canŽt focus a lens properly, no matter why, it wonŽt allow me to express myself the way I envision... And yes, Lloyd seems a little bit too technical sometimes, but it serves a purpose if you take it in the right perspective...
Focusing a Leica M9 is no different than any other M camera. There have been various improvements to viewfinder through the years, but the mechanics are essentially unchanged.
The focus patch stays the same size regardless of the lens used. Therefore, wide-angles are easier to focus than teles. Having said that, I can focus a 90mm lens on my .72 M6 finder with no trouble. It requires a bit more care, buts it's certainly doable. I viewfinder magnifier obviously helps.
In low-light, low-contrast conditions, a Leica M (IMHO) will outperform most DSLR's that will typically hunt in those situations. On the downside, focusing with an M is a two-handed operation.
Where rangefinders really shine is in the file image/quality. The closer lens to focal plane distance dramatically improves overall image quality. When you see the files from an M9 and a good Zeiss lens like the 50mm f/2.0, you may never want to go back to your DSLR.
I would suggest you rent an M9 from LensRentals.com and check it out for yourself. No matter what advice you get here, nothing compares to hands-on personal experience.
I am selling my m9 and one of the reasons is focusing. The others are, availability of new lenses, close focusing distance is too far, the LCD is useless, and high ISO is terrible. But really it is a personal decision because given time I could overcome these issues and really enjoy the m9.
I also felt like you, my 1DMKIV and 24 1.4, 50 1.2, 85 1.2, and 70-200 II are an awful lot of weight to lug around. The m9 does fit the bill as far as taking my Canon kit and condensing it into a highly portable high quality and attractive little full frame camera. Although the limitations and learning curve were too much for me. The m9 would be an excellent companion camera, but the guilt of having that much $ tied up in two systems with my growing family, just didn't seem right. I will try again when Leica updates the m9 to the m10, maybe the differences will be less and I could move 100% to Leica, but not now.
Erin, this is valuable feedback. It seems obvious to me that my next step shall be finding a way to try one before anything else. I'll figure out a way...
Graham Mitchell wrote:
. . . if Leica just adds an electronic focus aid such as hi-def electronic live viewfinder with focus mask. For static subjects, you can of course review your image for focus accuracy and reshoot if necessary but the moment is long gone for moving subjects. Fingers crossed they see this opportunity and introduce it for the M10.
An electronic viewfinder may be part of the upcoming Leica EVIL system, but it would never be integrated into the M system. M shooters would revolt in droves if Leica changed such a fundamental design element of the M system.
