retrofocus
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
uhoh7 wrote:
Great posts 
Adam, love the update, very interesting. I had no idea you had any Sony stuff at all! The most important part of your message: the Q and your M are "the fun part of photography". People without immersion don't really get it, I know I didn't get the M attraction at all. Two months everyday with M9 and Sony backup, I got it.
I will be very interested to hear your impression of the GFX. You always point out interesting stuff. Your Hassie comments are REALLY interesting. I never feel prejudiced by your peeves, sometimes they ring, other times they don't, but I always love to read them.
XT-2 I am with you. I love Charles K, his shooting, his thinking. But I would shoot myself if I had to live with the XT-2.  Sony colors, also there is something just off. I have fought many a Sony sky
Frezeiss, the 24mp Sony is nothing to write home about, I use it all the time. I can't believe the 240 is worse. Ron and Gary and Edward and Allen, doesn't seem to hold them back one bit  I'm sure there are little pros and cons. For ISO the A7 is barely better than M9, to my taste. I know the 240 is at least at that level. The A7rii is WAY ahead in ISO, and any flavor A7s is off the charts in ISO performance. The 24 is the worst. The A7r is better than that, which I never realized untill Kasson pointed it out.
M10 is what it is.....well almost. We won't really know for a few firmware upgrades, where the WB is going to settle. But that can be addressed in post, anyway pretty easy. Very polished body, it seems. Best Rangefinder ever, obviously. ISO is no better than r2, but that's pretty good. Shutter, LV EVF all a big step up from M240.
For that crap I just grab the A7
The M9 is the least distracting digital camera I've ever been near. It would be more distracting without any screen for me. The screen is small, but tough. It's plenty good to check exposure, frame and focus. The A7 screen lies all the time, you can't trust it without a fumbly zoom. The M9 zoom and all controls are so much smoother.
The shutter, however is from the 18th century. I don't care it's slow. That stupid winding, I could live without.
Very interesting times where our interest is divided between M flavors, A7rii et al, XT-2 and other Fujis, and the new mirrorless MF cameras. Leica SL and S have some fans too.
Frankly, Leica is impressive, despite no 36-42mp. M10, SL, Q and S 007, plus 246. These are gorgeous things which can really deliver and for handling, they are second to none, each with a few foibles, of course. Every single one of those is a unique product. The foundation is an incredible lens line and the ability to shoot a bunch of lenses (M and SL). Missing is wide spread implementation of AF. Just a minor little oversight, and of course, the 500/4. The SL lenses are hysterical. Canikon still really under no threat, after all this sturm and drang.
Of course they could be. We see all the pieces. Nobody will do the system. I'll bet they just give in and do it themselves. Would be so easy. A7 style body which can take all their old glass, but with a sensor which can deal with steeper angles for a whole new line of fast zooms which are smaller.
Of course the "that is impossible" koolaid is guzzled far and wide.
For professional systems, it's inevitable. The buyers are ready now....Show more →
Okay, I kept silent for long, but I have to say something now regarding all your pro-M9 enthusiasm. I have no doubt that you enjoy and like the camera a lot. But....it is sooo outdated by now, and I did not at all like it when I just had a look at a used M9 in a camera store a few weeks ago. The M9 display is simply horrible, especially when zoomed in, practically close to unusable - my 5D MkII display is miles better here (and also from 2009). The viewfinder - horrible compared to my M6/M7 film cameras (and I tested it with the same 35/2 lens mounted on each camera). This was already the killer in my decision-making process to get the used M9. Then the shutter - as you pointed out it felt like from a different century. I don't even need to discuss ISO performance - don't even try higher ISO numbers of the M9. Long delay after the shutter release was pressed. The controls - this is something I likely would get used to, not ideal but usable I found.
I talked to the owner of the store and told him why I would not get this camera. His answer was to ignore the display on the back and only look at taken photos on a monitor screen - pretty much using the M9 like a film camera. Okay, I can see this point - but then why would I pay over >$2K for it?! I rather continue using my beloved film Ms instead.....better price/quality ratio, and I don't mind the film handling and development.
As I said earlier, from what I read the M10 is probably finally a decent digital M - just by far out of my reach price-wise of what I would be willing to invest into a digital camera.
|
