douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.2 #17 · Leica the only Digital Rangefinder? | |
rscheffler wrote:
I would like to know what your definition of 'better quality' is. I mean this in all honesty because I'm interested in your opinion about this.
On paper the M9 won't hold a candle to current DSLRs at similar price point, or even those which are considerably cheaper. But that's how DSLRs are made nowadays. Feature bloat. Trying to be everything to everyone. It doesn't make them bad, not at all. It's just a different market and philosophy. The M9 is minimalist to the point where a lot more is left for the photographer (to potentially mess up), as Michael pointed out. What he didn't mention was that early in his M9 ownership, he nearly quit the system. But he persevered and learned how to use it to the best of his abilities. As with all other cameras, but IMO much more so with the digital M cameras, it is up to the photographer to learn the system's strengths and weakness and use them to his/her benefit, or how to best work around them.
I shoot with both a 1DX and the M9... I enjoy using the M9 more, despite its numerous weaknesses (slow buffer, slow start up, occasional banding issues, RF calibration/alignment, etc., etc...). The 1DX is a damn impressive SLR - certainly the best I've ever used. Super fast AF, fps, tough build, etc., etc. It has made me a more productive sports photographer. But in the end, it feels like a mass produced machine that in 18 months to two years I will replace with a 1DX Mark II, as it replaced my 1DIV, which replaced the 1DIII, etc... IMO, it's the 1DX that's considerably over priced.
I shoot the two systems side by side for work. There are certain applications where I won't use the M9, but I've done enough with it to know that I will typically get sharper images from it, both overall and at the pixel level. Is that what is meant by better quality? But what's important to me with the M9 is the general shooting experience. How the camera feels, how I go about capturing images with it. The quality of the lenses. The color. The size and weight. Sharpness is important, but not the most important (though it's frustration with AF imprecision and so-so wide angle lenses that drove me to try the M9). Nor is precise framing, which is often cited as a fatal flaw of rangefinder systems. It's actually the slight uncertainty when using the M9 that makes it a more interesting camera to use. Sometimes there is a slightly unpleasant surprise when reviewing the images, where I messed up. But often it's the opposite.
I don't believe any of the big brands will ever again make a rangefinder camera in the traditional sense. As already mentioned, the majority of the market will not accept a manual focus only camera with minimal automation options. The spec obsessed fanboys would never understand, shooting it down without even trying it.
That basically leaves Leica. To the OP, I would suggest finding a used M8. It has a host of 'weaknesses' but is likely your best option to trying the system. Here time is on your side because M9 prices will only continue to come down, and perhaps in 2-3 years we'll have a new M camera again, forcing down used prices even more. Yes, the cost of entry is relatively high, but also consider that if you really don't like the system and want to get out, you should be able to recapture much of that when you resell.
Up until I got the M9 (used) in late 2010, I had (mostly) only owned Canon since about, well, when I started photography as a kid in 1983. Looking back at the images from the past two years shot on the M9, I could/would have done all those on the DSLR, but there would have been subtle differences, both technical and creative. My regret right now is that I didn't give myself enough time to adequately learn the M3 I bought in 1992, before selling shortly thereafter, otherwise I might have realized much earlier what I have now learned about the quality of the rangefinder lenses and the philosophy behind the system.
You only live once... 
...Show more →
Agreed. Most current, V6 family sedans are quicker than a sports car from 35 years ago, but that doesn't mean they're more fun to drive. M cameras are about the journey just as much as the end result.
p.s. I'm not sure I agree about the M9 prices going down much more anytime soon. I think the new M-E will artificially inflate M9 and M9-P used prices for the next few years, but we'll see. I've still yet to see a used M9 in great shape break the $4K US mark.
|
