jhapeman
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.43 #11 · Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread | |
denoir wrote:
The relevancy of DR depends very much on what you shoot. The DR by numbers are not something that Puts is alone to claim - there are plenty of other tests that confirm it. If it is an issue or not depends on the subject. For landscape photography it is very relevant, but then again the M9 is not exactly the best system for that anyway (no live view, focusing system, form factor, pixel count etc). For those things where it excels - social photography, street photography, portraits etc DR is much less of an issue.
jhapeman wrote:
Would you mind pointing me to any other DR tests? I can only find one other test, the one from DxOMark, and it shows that the M9 has a tiny bit MORE DR than the M8, and both it and the M8.2 are not much different than the 5DII:
http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Camera-Sensor/Compare-sensors/(appareil1)/640|0/(appareil2)/250|0/(appareil3)/483|0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Leica/(brand2)/Leica/(brand3)/Canon
As for your assertion about the M9 as a landscape camera, you are sorely mistaken in my opinion. Many people have shown--in this very thread no less--that the M9 is a superb landscape camera. I love using it for landscape shooting. There is a whole thread of images devoted to the M9 for landscapes over on the GetDPI forums:
http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13523
denoir wrote:
You mean this?
http://peltarion.eu/img/m9_dr.jpg
That's total dynamic range, not usable. And even considering that, the M9 is more like the Panasonic GH1 than the 5D2:
http://peltarion.eu/img/m9_dr2.jpg
As for other DR tests, I seem to recall Lloyd Chambers did one and I think dpreview usually does such tests.
Anyway, if you don't trust Erwin Puts in questions of Leica then I don't think you'll trust anyone. He's one of the top Leica experts in the world. It's not a coincidence that he gets to play with all the Leica prototypes and that he has a close cooperation with the company.
Of course you can use it for landscape shooting. There are some amazing landscape shots here in this thread, but it doesn't mean that it's particularly good at it compared to a high end DSLR. The obvious problem is the lack of live view on a 18 megapixel camera. You can't get pixel accurate focus. You don't have DOF preview - in fact you have no idea of what the sensor is going to see. The camera body is small and not intended for tripod operation. Again - of course you can use it from a tripod but it's not a very good solution compared to larger camera. Also composing with frame lines is of course a PITA and there are no long tele lenses.
In short not a camera optimized for landscape photography. It's about as optimized for landscape photography as a medium format camera is for street photography. Can it be done? Sure. Is it optimal - no way.
Range finder cameras are not new. The M8/M9 doesn't introduce anything conceptually new. The reasons why in the film era photographers turned to medium format cameras and large format cameras for landscapes and not range finders hold just as well today. A (D)SLR has always been a compromise - a jack of all trades that is fairly convenient for any type of photography. A range finder camera, like a large format camera is a specialized tool that is far superior to a (D)SLR in its domain but inferior for other tasks.
Luka
...Show more →
Luka,
I think you just proved my point: Total vs. usable DR. First off, this is the ONLY other objective test I am aware of. Dpreview has not done any tests of the M9 at this point; while Lloyd Chambers may have done so, I am not aware of it, nor do I pay for his reviews. As for Puts, I am not the only one who doesn't find his expertise to have transferred to the digital age; Irwin was a self-proclaimed lens expert. His skills in the digital age are questionable IMO, and his "tests" reflect that. Case in point, these DR tests, which totally debunk his test which frankly made no sense anyway. Puts' expertise in lenses does not have to extend to digital camera systems, and in my opinion it clearly does not.
What I have been trying to tell you, if you would care to listen, is that the *usable* DR of the M9 is excellent. It's easily got as much "usable" DR as the 5DII, particularly at base ISO. I have shot many thousands of exposures with both systems and can confirm this through actual experience. The M9 is a different beast than the Canon; you have to expose your shots totally differently than the 5DII to get the most from them, but they can take an amazing amount of manipulation, particularly at base ISO (where, BTW, the DxOMark graphs show that the DR is virtually identical to the 5DII at about 11.7 stops). At base ISO, I can easily pull up an additional 2-3 stops from the shadows on an M9 shot, and that can't be done on the 5DII or the GH1, both of which are relatively noisy in the shadows.
As for the comments on landscape shooting, you are confusing camera systems with final desired output. Do you realize that the original "Ur-Leica" was invented by Oskar Barnack as a camera he could take hiking in the mountains? In other words, it was invented as a portable landscape camera. Yes, if I want to make the absolute largest prints possible, then a MF or even a LF camera is the best choice (for ANY type of shooting)--but you can't take camera systems like that a lot of places. The extreme sharpness of the Leica glass and the sensor of the M9 make it far more suitable for landscape shooting than a DSLR in my experience. Live View is completely unnecessary for this type of shooting--good heavens, it's only been around for a few years--and in most cases a tripod isn't necessary either. As for your point about the tripod, it's rather ridiculous. All you need for a tripod is a tripod socket--which of course the M8 and M9 have; the size of a camera has nothing to do with suitability for use on a tripod. You can get a very nice bracket from Really Right Stuff if you want maximum tripod flexibility--just the DSLR tripod brackets. With such a lightweight camera, a very lightweight tripod can be used, making the M9 a great "backcountry" landscape camera. With regards to your point on focusing, clearly you don't have a lot of experience with a rangefinder, as precise focusing with a rangefinder--particularly with wide-angle lenses--is much easier than with a DSLR. You mentioned DOF preview--for landscape shooting, you are stopped down to go for hyperfocal in most cases--so who needs DOF preview? What MF or LF camera has DOF preview?
Really, I never said it was optimized for landscapes. You started by implying it wasn't suitable, and I was simply pointing out that you were (and still are) wrong on that count. What the M9 is not good for is macro and long telephoto shooting. Otherwise it's an extremely capable camera with what is likely the best image quality of any 36mm FF camera out there today. I also will hold forth that any claim of a lack of DR is Internet myth and not supported by factual data or practical use experience.
Jeff
|
It is great to see your photos, contributions and your viewpoints. Your abilities and talent would definitely benefit from MF, or with a camera like the D3x 
