The 35/2 sort of worked for me right away while the 50/1.5 has required much more adjustments and I have yet to come to terms with the 25/2.8. Today I suddenly realized why: I had not photographed any ducks with the latter two! I don't know how I could have missed that holiest of holy rituals, so I took a truckload of duck shots today to make up for my inexcusable oversight
adamdewilde wrote:
How do you calibrate it?
Isn't Vertical alignment just a matter of popping off the red dot and twisting the screw?
Best,
adam
It's much too complex to post from my phone. There's a good post on LCF I'll link you to in about 15 hours, as I fly home today.
You're correct wrt vertical alignment, only that since the M4-2 that screw requires an expensive proprietary tool. Hundreds of dollars from Leica but Zhou or Youxin Ye make a copy for less, I remember seeing on ebay.
Luka, I find your landscapes comment interesting, as I find the m9 infinitely superior from a portability, precision and especially IQ perspective, what about the 5D-II makes it superior for landscape shooting? I sold two of them when I got the M9 and haven't looked back.
denoir wrote:
There is actually one Leica lens whose rendering style I mildly approve of and that's the 75 Cron. Although I am by no means blown way by what I've seen in samples, I am not offended by it either. On the whole I think I like it.
It is a nice lens, quite sharp, but I find it a bit sterile. Perhaps you will disagree. Apart from the 90 Macro (which really isn't a macro lens, even with the adapter), it is the M lens with the greatest magnification at MFD, so perhaps you would like it for that reason too.
adamdewilde wrote:
How do you calibrate it?
Isn't Vertical alignment just a matter of popping off the red dot and twisting the screw?
It would be if Leica didn't put a thin layer of lacquer over the screw once adjusted. You need to take the top off, which isn't that straightforward and requires unscrewing the bottom too, clear off the lacquer, adjust it, and possibly put new lacquer on again.
thrice wrote:
Luka, I find your landscapes comment interesting, as I find the m9 infinitely superior from a portability, precision and especially IQ perspective, what about the 5D-II makes it superior for landscape shooting? I sold two of them when I got the M9 and haven't looked back.
Dan, Live view and lenses primarily. There is no substitute for live view when it comes to pixel level focus accuracy and framing.
For wide aperture landscape photography being to preview the DOF is essential (through live view of other means).
The crappy LCD and image review function of the M9 makes it impossible to determine if you have nailed focus or not. AWB is often a joke which makes judging colors difficult. In short, what you see on the LCD looks like crap and you can't really tell what the image will look like once processed from RAW.
There are no long lenses for M, only moderate tele lenses and there are a bunch of minor things such the annoying mandatory noise reduction step or dust constantly getting on the sensor.
As for resolution, yes the M9 has a slight edge, but when you have good glass on the 5DII, it really is slight.
Look at these two shots:
They were taken many days apart but the framing is roughly the same as is the aperture. The lenses are both 35mm Zeiss.
Ok, let's see how it looks at 100%, from RAW, default settings in Lightroom:
There is a slight amount of motion blur in the Canon shot but even if we ignore that you can see that the M9's lead isn't exactly massive. The 35/2 ZE is also not a top performer at infinity.
What I like with the M9, or rather what I disliked with the 5DII was that the latter had a lot of regular noise in the shadows giving very limited latitude. It is more portable and lighter yes, but as I use a light tripod (Gitzo 1541T) a light camera means sensitivity to wind.
Finally, while I don't use filters myself many landscape shooters (you included do). I can't begin to imagine what a PITA it must be to try to align an ND-grad filter without seeing where it is being applied (i.e. TTL).
The bottom line is (IMO) that the M9 can give slightly higher IQ especially if you use the lenses at smaller apertures (the largest difference between ZE and ZM glass is at larger apertures) but the price is pretty steep in terms of usability.
Denoir, I think you're comparing apples to oranges. Use the M9 for what it's good at and skip the rest. I'm obviously not the only one seeing you taking "different" pictures with it, which from my point of view is something good. There is more life and sort of "movement" in your M9 shots, probably because they are not shot from a tripod.
The ZM 25/2.8 seems fantastic! I don't think I've ever seen anything so far that is more "3D" on this forum. Get an external viewfinder, and you'll probably like it much better. How about a Voigtländer one?
--------------------
And let me say that your shots with the M9 so far, have been giving me second thoughts about the M9. I want one now!
Makten wrote:
Denoir, I think you're comparing apples to oranges. Use the M9 for what it's good at and skip the rest. I'm obviously not the only one seeing you taking "different" pictures with it, which from my point of view is something good. There is more life and sort of "movement" in your M9 shots, probably because they are not shot from a tripod.
Hehe, little did you know that while you were writing that I was preparing a post with tripod only shots.
The ZM 25/2.8 seems fantastic! I don't think I've ever seen anything so far that is more "3D" on this forum. Get an external viewfinder, and you'll probably like it much better. How about a Voigtländer one?
Yes, the 25/2.8 is quite good, especially stopped down a bit. I haven't decided about the external viewfinder. I'm getting a feel for the angle of view and my compositions are becoming more accurate.
And let me say that your shots with the M9 so far, have been giving me second thoughts about the M9. I want one now!
Glad to be of help
I have a bunch of shots from earlier today that I think you may like more than the ones above (not tripod based). I'll process and post some of them tomorrow
You took some fine duck shots. Very nice and these are some of the better (or best) examples I've seen with the 50 Sonnar recently. Also, looks like you have come to terms with the 25/2.8. Like the 3rd one best.
Are you using the same sharpening on these pics as you did on your 5DII pics?
Thanks Joe Nice shots!
Luka, I was wondering where the duck shots were Excellent shots! Amazing landscapes Luka, so much I prefer them over the ZE's You are really making the ZM 50/1.5 and 25/2.8 sing You have changed my mind about the ZM 35/2 too
I have read discussions with regards to the 75 Summilux of Jeff's which is excellent. Does any one else have experience with this lens? The use would be for portraits, a classical rendering similar to Nocti'.
Some shots from last night! 50 Lux of course for the low light. Interestingly I used the SB 58 flash later on when there was virtually no light, but still have to learn how to use it properly.
this shot is wonderful, glad to hear your starting to get on with that lens, i've seen some amazing shots from it.
denoir wrote:
Speaking of landscapes, it looks like the ducks did the trick.. the 25/2.8 and I have come to an understanding http://peltarion.eu/img/m9/zm25-18.jpg
Luka, more great stuff! I'm sure more advanced photographers know this already, but what going on with the caution sign? How is that one section effected but not the rest..very unique look...done in post?
Sorry to keep butting into this thread, it's impossible to resist drawing on the wealth of knowledge present.
Charles: Group shots are notoriously difficult but you managed to pull it off quite well. Love that beach shot!
Sebboh: Here's one with the 50/1.5, probably at f/5.6 (the M9's guesstimate of the aperture is completely unreliable when it comes to longer exposures)
dimitris77: As sebboh said - different days, different light.
h00ligan: It's just a long exposure. It was windy so the sign moved during the exposure. As it was fastened at the top only the lower part moved.
Nice series, I like how you captured various emotions on the 2nd group shot but my fav got to be the 2nd last shot. Like the intensity in her emotions and the other's flowing hair and hand movement
Thank you Adam! Yes all the shots were with the 50 Lux asph. With the very low light, and trying to keep the iso to a minimum, a number of shots were at 1/15 sec. Appreciate the comments
I'm obviously not the only one seeing you taking "different" pictures with it, which from my point of view is something good. There is more life and sort of "movement" in your M9 shots, probably because they are not shot from a tripod.
Excellent shots! Amazing landscapes Luka, so much I prefer them over the ZE's 
