Thank you Rod, Luka!
Luka, although, no direct experience yet , the 35/1.4 ASPH Summilux is an extraordinary lens. I have as you know the 50/1.4 Lux ASPH, which has been sent away to be recalibrated to Germany, should here within 2 days now. The 50 Lux Asph, is by far the best lens I have used. The new 35 Lux ASPH is meant to be even better. You have the incredibly sharp but smooth rendering wide open. There are a lot of reviews, but I am starting to appreciate, there are also wide tolerances of the focusing of these lenses, and really once you get a lens second hand, send it away and have it calibrated with the M body if it has not been done so already. If the body is set to the master calibration, and they do vary, eg Lloyd with his test camera, there is no need to send the camera back with the lens. This will explain some of the variances in people's experiences.
The 50/0.95 Nocti is sublime!!! This so differentiates the style of photography from the mainstream, like an art form, to those who know how to use it. Have a look on the Get DPI site, of Ashwin Rao, in the M section thread. He has some extraordinary shots with this lens.
Damn you Charles! Looking at Ashwin Rao's shots..not a good idea. Amazing rendering. Every time I write off the M9 as not suitable for me I start thinking about it again. Although I maintain that it would not be good for my style of landscape shooting I can see a bunch of other uses for it.
The worst thing is that the body isn't all that expensive any more - $7,000 in the US and about $8,500 here in Sweden. But that's only the start.. then we get into the lenses $10,000 for the noctilux ($12,000 in Sweden) add another $5,000 for a 35/1.4 and so on. I think I'd be looking at some $30,000 before I got a kit I was happy with. I don't think I could justify that for a system that would get limited use.. Still, very appealing. I really like the concept of the M9 and there is indeed some great glass for it.. but no. I'll wait for the M10 - if they have addressed the issues that bother me with the M9 then I'll really consider it.
Sorry, I don't have any 35lux or 50 noct (yet ). The 35Lux ASPH is probably one of the best 35mm out there right now if you can find one. If Zeiss had a 35/1.4 in M mount, I'll grab one yesterday
So, meanwhile here's a few more from Provincetown, Cape Cod with M8 35CronIV
Great shots Joe!!! Love the composition and rendering of #4.
denoir wrote:
Damn you Charles! Looking at Ashwin Rao's shots..not a good idea. Amazing rendering. Every time I write off the M9 as not suitable for me I start thinking about it again. Although I maintain that it would not be good for my style of landscape shooting I can see a bunch of other uses for it.
The worst thing is that the body isn't all that expensive any more - $7,000 in the US and about $8,500 here in Sweden. But that's only the start.. then we get into the lenses $10,000 for the noctilux ($12,000 in Sweden) add another $5,000 for a 35/1.4 and so on. I think I'd be looking at some $30,000 before I got a kit I was happy with. I don't think I could justify that for a system that would get limited use.. Still, very appealing. I really like the concept of the M9 and there is indeed some great glass for it.. but no. I'll wait for the M10 - if they have addressed the issues that bother me with the M9 then I'll really consider it. ...Show more →
The M9 is not cheap, but it is an amazing piece of engineering with its quirks! The lenses, are exceptional but most of them can be purchased second hand. Even the older pre Asph lenses, have some truly amazing rendering with a talented eye.
I understand the the older version of the 50/1.0 Nocti renders better than the new version, but that is only conjecture. I have only bought a few lenses new, and rest are all second hand. I believe that the an investment in the lenses is worthwhile long term. Even combining them with the NEX 5 or 7 is a great option.
Thanks Charles, and yes, I echo that, the M9 is not cheap. If my wife found out, I'll be out sleeping on the streets I taped mine up with gaffer tape and let everyone know it an upgraded M8, which is true
Regarding renting an M9 - I would except for some reason camera/lens rental doesn't really exist here in Sweden. It's really strange and a lot of photographers are complaining but currently that option doesn't exist.
Charles, yes one could get used older versions of the lenses but I'd probably feel I was missing out something. As for the NEX 5/7 it's nothing I would consider. FF is a minimum requirement. Plus part of the appeal of the M9 is its mechanical build quality and overall interface.
Edit: I suppose I should post some pictures
Leica has promised a new X1 firmware before Christmas and they've made some noises about improving the AF. If they manage to do that and fix the jumping aperture bug when using MF then perhaps, just perhaps the X1 may become a camera that is nice to use..
My criteria is FF also, and is reason for the path I have taken. I would assume that the NEX 7 would be FF, although the NEX 5 would be fun to try out, having the lenses already I have been the road many time with crop sensors, EP-1, Oly E-620, Canon 10D, 20D and recently 7D. For myself, it is better to keep it simple and light (not cheap ), and make the most the FF IQ.
Joe, yes the M9 is just a slightly upgraded version of the M8.
Thanks Charles & Joe! Those shots were actually taken the first day I got the camera. I took quite a few photos that day but I have only posted a few.
Joe, MF in the classical sense is impossible with the X1 as it doesn't keep the aperture constant during the process - it stops down the lens automatically in a fairly erratic fashion. Even if it was not for that, the interface for manual focus pretty much sucks - you have a wheel on the back of the camera that can be used to change the focal plane.. slowly.
One thing that I do on occasion is to use zone focusing. I use AF to place the focus at a certain distance and reduce the aperture to get a fairly large DOF. Then I switch it to MF and turn off image preview (or it chokes the camera after the first picture and you get awful shutter lag). That works exceptionally well - it is basically silent, you have zero lag and you can shoot continuously.
Ha! I didn't know about the shifting aperture in MF. Guess I haven't read much on the X1 but thanks for sharing. I suspect Leica did that on purpose to get you to upgrade to the M9
Yes, and to add insult to injury the AF system isn't exactly what you would call reliable. As I typically use the optical viewfinder I never know if the AF has done its job or not. Unpleasant surprises are not very rare to put it mildly...
denoir wrote:
Great shots Charles! The waterfall is my favorite.
A very nice portrait Jairy!
There are two M lenses that I find interesting but I don't think I've seen any shots with them here: The 50/0.95 Noctilux-M and the 35/1.4 ASPH Summlux-M. Does anyone have some experience with those?
Ask and ye shall receive. Let's start with a few from the 50/0.95 Noctilux; I'll need to dig around more to find some with the 35/1.4 Summilux as I haven't sorted them out into much of set as of yet.
Luka: I really like your shots of Stockholm. I have only visited once for a few days back in March 2008, but I really loved it. Perhaps my favorite city in Europe.
Charles: With regards to the Noctilux, I think that the rendering of the old vs. the new is a matter of personal preference. I also think that a bit of rationalization kicks in: Some of those who spent a small fortune for the old one don't want to believe that the new one could be better, especially if they can't afford it since they spent all their money on the old one. Seriously, though, the old one is pretty soft wide open and rolls off very subtly to the bokeh due to the sperical aberrations inherent in its design. That can be viewed as a flaw, or as a positive, in which case you call it "signature" and extoll its praises. People have different preferences.
jhapeman wrote:
Joe: Great shots, I actually prefer #1.
Luka: I really like your shots of Stockholm. I have only visited once for a few days back in March 2008, but I really loved it. Perhaps my favorite city in Europe.
Charles: With regards to the Noctilux, I think that the rendering of the old vs. the new is a matter of personal preference. I also think that a bit of rationalization kicks in: Some of those who spent a small fortune for the old one don't want to believe that the new one could be better, especially if they can't afford it since they spent all their money on the old one. Seriously, though, the old one is pretty soft wide open and rolls off very subtly to the bokeh due to the sperical aberrations inherent in its design. That can be viewed as a flaw, or as a positive, in which case you call it "signature" and extoll its praises. People have different preferences.
Amazing images Jeff! Thank you for sharing Great stuff.
You are right about the old vs new. All my lenses are the newer versions, as I personally think they work better with the M9. I love romantic/pastel rendering but I still want the sharpness and detail to be there. It is the reason why I have a hate/love relationship with the 50/1.1 Nokton. It is not an easy lens to master!
[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/jhapeman/5058506191/]
[/url]L1002089.jpg by jhapeman, on Flickr
I find the M9 to be a great low-light camera. The color rendition at high ISO's is better than the Nikons and Canons, even if the noise if 1-2 stops worse. With LR3, the noise is very manageable, and with fast glass and good technique (the second shot was taken at 1/12s, something VERY hard to do with the mirror slap of a DSLR), you can get outstanding results that don't lag far behind the best DSLRs. Hopefully the M10 will make a jump in IQ above ISO 1600, in which case the digital M's will be the ultimate night shooting cameras.
charles.K wrote:
Amazing images Jeff! Thank you for sharing Great stuff.
You are right about the old vs new. All my lenses are the newer versions, as I personally think they work better with the M9. I love romantic/pastel rendering but I still want the sharpness and detail to be there. It is the reason why I have a hate/love relationship with the 50/1.1 Nokton. It is not an easy lens to master!
Thanks Charles. I don't know if you've seen my blog post on the fast 50's for the M9, but the Nokton 50/1.1 definitely renders more like the old Noctilux than the new (although the bokeh is *way* less smooth on the Nokton, unfortunately). To be honest, I actually think its a bit sharper on the plane of focus than the old Noctilux...but the new Noctilux is just crazy sharp wide open. It is like a 50mm Summilux on steroids.
Excellent images again Jeff ! #1,2 and 3 are definitely my favourites
Yes with low light, I have found with the 5DII, I need to maintain about 1.5 x 1/FL shutter speed to eliminate any movement, but with the M9, I can regularly use 0.5 x 1/FL shutter speed with good technique, which equates to about 1 1/2 stop advantage, which negates some of the advantage with the higher ISO DSLR's
More good shots with the X1 Luka. I like the sunset shot colors a lot.
denoir wrote:
Regarding renting an M9 - I would except for some reason camera/lens rental doesn't really exist here in Sweden. It's really strange and a lot of photographers are complaining but currently that option doesn't exist.
Charles, yes one could get used older versions of the lenses but I'd probably feel I was missing out something. As for the NEX 5/7 it's nothing I would consider. FF is a minimum requirement. Plus part of the appeal of the M9 is its mechanical build quality and overall interface.
Luka, I know you're set on FF but you don't have that with the X1 now. Why not buy an M8 and see how it works for you? Any lenses you buy will work nicely on an M9 and almost certainly the M10. That would give you a feel for the M cameras and if you don't like the M8, reselling it isn't that hard. It's also no where near the commitment of an M9. I was pretty committed to FF after having a 5D and 5D2 also but there was no way I was going to jump into an M9 cold turkey.
I've thought quite a bit about the M9 as well but have decided against it, at least for now. The longer I shoot it, the more I've realized that the 50mm FL on the M8, which gives an effective 67mm, is pretty close to the ideal all around focal length for me particularly for portraits. If I go to the M9, the closest thing available is the 75mm. To say the least, the choices in 75mm are no where near as good as in 50mm. In fact, I've been thinking that I shoot my pre-ASPH 35mm so little that I'm not sure it's worth keeping given the investment.
As to feeling you need to buy new lenses. Why, when there are so many good used lenses? As nice as Charles' Lux 50 ASPH is, the difference between it and my E46 pre-ASPH isn't enough to me to justify the 2X price difference. Buy an M8 for a test drive and take the price difference and buy a used Noctilux or Lux 35 and see for yourself what it's capable of. You'll probably sell the X1 after you do as it really won't satisfy you after you do that. My two cents.
, the 35/1.4 ASPH Summilux is an extraordinary lens. I have as you know the 50/1.4 Lux ASPH, which has been sent away to be recalibrated to Germany, should here within 2 days now. The 50 Lux Asph, is by far the best lens I have used. The new 35 Lux ASPH is meant to be even better. You have the incredibly sharp but smooth rendering wide open. There are a lot of reviews, but I am starting to appreciate, there are also wide tolerances of the focusing of these lenses, and really once you get a lens second hand, send it away and have it calibrated with the M body if it has not been done so already. If the body is set to the master calibration, and they do vary, eg Lloyd with his test camera, there is no need to send the camera back with the lens. This will explain some of the variances in people's experiences.
I taped mine up with gaffer tape and let everyone know it an upgraded M8, which is true 
