Rahul, thanks for the kind words and welcome to the thread!
Thanks Charlie! That's quite the gang... looks like they're not shy about cohabiting with humans.
So I've been chipping away at the never ending backlog of images to process and today got around to working on some M9 images from early November in NYC while my M240 was at Leica for the day getting the RF calibrated. While casually looking through the images, I noticed this:
... I guess my M9 also has sensor delamination/corrosion. So far these are the only two spots I have found during regular editing. The bigger one is quite near the edge of the frame. Both are in the upper left quadrant.
Here's the entire frame:
M9 & 28 Cron
So now to decide if I want sensor replacement or trade towards an M240. My SO says I should get the sensor replaced, since the guts of the camera will then be pretty much new (though the shutter is 145K actuations). And it would be the cheapest route. But I can't shake the desire to get a second M240 since it would be a lot more practical as an identical back up. Or so I think. I suppose it will also depend on what Leica offers for the M9.
Ron - that's a bummer. Although it would be nice to have both an M9 and M240, I say go for a second M240. You will always have the option to tweak your M240 files to have a similar output to M9 if you really have the desire. I think that lady and her "laser beam look" burnt a hole through your sensor.
I'm traveling this week and this is a high contrast shot as I came out of the hotel lobby near the Heathrow airport yesterday before flying back to the states.
rscheffler wrote:
Rahul, thanks for the kind words and welcome to the thread!
Thanks Charlie! That's quite the gang... looks like they're not shy about cohabiting with humans.
So I've been chipping away at the never ending backlog of images to process and today got around to working on some M9 images from early November in NYC while my M240 was at Leica for the day getting the RF calibrated. While casually looking through the images, I noticed this:
... I guess my M9 also has sensor delamination/corrosion. So far these are the only two spots I have found during regular editing. The bigger one is quite near the edge of the frame. Both are in the upper left quadrant.
So now to decide if I want sensor replacement or trade towards an M240. My SO says I should get the sensor replaced, since the guts of the camera will then be pretty much new (though the shutter is 145K actuations). And it would be the cheapest route. But I can't shake the desire to get a second M240 since it would be a lot more practical as an identical back up. Or so I think. I suppose it will also depend on what Leica offers for the M9....Show more →
Hi, Ron, Let me know what you find out about your M9 trade in? I feel I really need a 2nd body if travel with M system, mainly for without changing lens in field but also for back up. I feel either a D810 with Zoom or two M will do to meet my requirement in field. haven't bought my 2nd M9 yet, I may just hold off to see if trade in for M240 is feasible solution before make that decision
@Gary first and last my favs. While i admire the work of all the 240 shooters here, and regard the preference as a personal one, I doubt all the post in the world will make a 28 shot from the 240 look like Ron's shot above. I did a complete double take when I looked at it, not realizing it was with his M9, thinking what in the world did he shoot that with? . But I'm sure it depends on the subject, light, aperture etc. Great shot Ron
@ Ron re street gang. In fact I've been chased a number of times trying to defend my bird feeders. Those Elk have my old alpha lab afraid to go in the yard when they are around, even though Wolf predation is not uncommon since reintroduction. I never go after them without a loose shirt to wave if necessary .
Sorry to see your M9 has "it". How long has it been in the wild? I'm guessing three years?
@ Michael Lovely set Incredible DOF. How far did you stop down for those?
Ron, I read today on LUF one report from a user who sent the camera to CS but they said there was no corrosion. They will just do the usual CLA and return it to him, despite posting a shot with a clear few spots of corrosion on the forum. Imo, it would be wise to wait until the problem gets too visible to be "unseen", say 10-15 spots.
Good point Edward. I'm still not on what the mechanism is for this "corrosion" though... Most corrosion is associated with metals and not glass. I would guess that environmental conditions is the main factor at play here. Perhaps this issue is more prevelant in certain climates? Ron - maybe you can sent their tech a pic or two and have their feedback before sending it in....
BTW - last night I noticed a 50mm f/1.2 listed in the lens listing in my camera? I don't think Leica ever produced an m 50/1.2 - correct?
Gary Clennan wrote:
Good point Edward. I'm still not on what the mechanism is for this "corrosion" though... Most corrosion is associated with metals and not glass. I would guess that environmental conditions is the main factor at play here. Perhaps this issue is more prevelant in certain climates? Ron - maybe you can sent their tech a pic or two and have their feedback before sending it in....
BTW - last night I noticed a 50mm f/1.2 listed in the lens listing in my camera? I don't think Leica ever produced an m 50/1.2 - correct?
Gary, I think they use the word corrosion because the coatings are indeed metallic. The glass itself, which is also a mineral, does not corrode, but the coatings have a reaction with humidity, causing gazes to accumulate beneath them and produce bubbles.
Bjorn - thanks for the info. TBH - I never knew that lens existed. I don't recall any pics being posted here with it and don't hear much on the internet. Being so close in speed to the 50lux, there may have not been a huge market for it.
Congratulations Joakim! I see you already gave it a good work out! Fantastic shots and the lens renders very nicely. Any comments about the improved build quality (compared to non Summarit lenses)?
Thank you Edward. The build quality feels solid and in no way like a "cheaper" lens, very Leica so to speak. Focusing is smooth with a somewhat short throw, for good or bad, and the rubber ring gives a good grip when focusing.
Only minor issue I had today was that when using gloves the aperture ring is a little close to the hood but I think that is just something to get used to. Another thing is that I got a lot of miss focused shots when shooting wide open but even at 2.4 there is not much Dof so this is something behind the camera that needs to be fixed
Congrats Joakim! I think the Summarit line is very underrated. I also noticed right away the f/0.1 difference in f stop! Looking forward to seeing more from you with this lens.
Gary Clennan wrote:
Good point Edward. I'm still not on what the mechanism is for this "corrosion" though... Most corrosion is associated with metals and not glass. I would guess that environmental conditions is the main factor at play here. Perhaps this issue is more prevelant in certain climates? Ron - maybe you can sent their tech a pic or two and have their feedback before sending it in....
BTW - last night I noticed a 50mm f/1.2 listed in the lens listing in my camera? I don't think Leica ever produced an m 50/1.2 - correct?
It was the first Noctilux, with hand-polished aspherical elements. A good copy is supposedly very good, but there is definitely variation. They are rare, and mostly go to collectors now. The prices are obscene.
... I guess my M9 also has sensor delamination/corrosion. So far these are the only two spots I have found during regular editing. The bigger one is quite near the edge of the frame. Both are in the upper left quadrant.
