carstenw wrote:
So far, your typical walking-around style really doesn't benefit from the M9.
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but based on other comments I've gotten I think it is a minority opinion. I would also disagree as the content of the photos is on average quite different from my 5DII output. I can't recall that I ever did any street photography with the 5DII + ZE glass. In fact I did little walking around style photography (some with the 35/1.4 distagon, but not a lot).
My tripod based landscape photography does not benefit from the M9 but it's necessary for me to see that I can do it with the camera if I'm going to use it when traveling. It has to be able to be a substitute for the 5DII on those occasions even if it is not the optimal system.
Anyway, since this is a picture thread, I suppose I should post some pictures. Fortunately I have some to post because unlike some other people (we shall not name names) I use my rangefinder
Okay, well you make some good points, and I don't want to drag this out, so let's just leave it like this for now. Maybe I am partly projecting a bit, but it is a common pattern. Generally there are three types of Leica owners:
- Annoying "Leica can do no wrong" fanboys, who give all owners much of their reputation as snobs.
- Satisfied long-term users.
- People who buy Leica for the wrong reasons, realize they don't like it, sell, and bad-mouth it in various ways in the future.
There is a small fourth contingent of people who realize it isn't for them, but don't make bad comments.
I will be interested to hear what you have to say after your Egypt trip. Here is a link to my page, in case it is of interest. Sadly, I had just gotten into more serious equipment at that point and still had much to learn, so I am not completely happy with the results. Maybe I will get a chance to go back one year with my own family, and redo many of the shots. The 80 Lux, one of my favorite lenses of all time, was much in use in the middle of the trip, around the felluca ride. The 50 Cron was also used a lot near the beginning of the trip. The 17-40 was used almost exclusively at 17mm for interiors or pyramids.
- The reason I pick up on the comparison to your 5DII+ZE kit is the way you phrase things. It is not "I prefer", but "down-right ugly" and sub-standard", and at other times it feels like the dislike is a constant, lying just under the surface.
- I currently don't use my M8 that much because I have had it since 2006, don't have much opportunity to travel at the moment, and the D3 is still new and exciting. My 100MP I have owned for only about 2 weeks. I also long for a FF M, but the M9 is not completely to my liking. I find the colours slightly weak, the results slightly softer than what I get with the M8 (could be simply lower contrast, I haven't had a lot of access to the M9), and I suspect that the M9's colours are still slightly polluted by IR light. I also really love real chrome, and am not completely happy with the finishes of the M9. Thus, I am kinda camping out on the direction of my M ownership, half thinking I should just get the M9, half wanting to wait for the M10.
carstenw wrote:
Okay, well you make some good points, and I don't want to drag this out, so let's just leave it like this for now. Maybe I am partly projecting a bit, but it is a common pattern. Generally there are three types of Leica owners:
- Annoying "Leica can do no wrong" fanboys, who give all owners much of their reputation as snobs.
- Satisfied long-term users.
- People who buy Leica for the wrong reasons, realize they don't like it, sell, and bad-mouth it in various ways in the future.
There is a small fourth contingent of people who realize it isn't for them, but don't make bad comments. ...Show more →
Hehe. So the only choice is to be a fanboy a satisfied long term user or somebody who got the camera for the wrong reason? You don't think that there is a category of say users that see both strengths and weaknesses of the system? You seem to rule out that there are users with legitimate grievances which by your own definition would put you in the "Leica can do no wrong" category
I will be interested to hear what you have to say after your Egypt trip. Here is a link to my page, in case it is of interest. Sadly, I had just gotten into more serious equipment at that point and still had much to learn, so I am not completely happy with the results. Maybe I will get a chance to go back one year with my own family, and redo many of the shots. The 80 Lux, one of my favorite lenses of all time, was much in use in the middle of the trip, around the felluca ride. The 50 Cron was also used a lot near the beginning of the trip. The 17-40 was used almost exclusively at 17mm for interiors or pyramids.
Thanks! I've read half of it and will read the rest later. Interesting and informative. Very nice pictures as well!
- The reason I pick up on the comparison to your 5DII+ZE kit is the way you phrase things. It is not "I prefer", but "down-right ugly" and sub-standard", and at other times it feels like the dislike is a constant, lying just under the surface.
Ah, but I was speaking of that particular picture. If you looked at the night shots in the post before I almost had just positive things to say about the rendering.
Charles, as someone who has used a large range of lenses, do you find the Leica wides give you more highlight latitude than Zeiss wides? I need to ask the question of Jeff as well as he has used a lot of CV stuff and settled on Leica/ZM lenses. I really like your 28 Elmarit shots, is it the ASPH version?
Dan, amazing shots! #1 and 2 are excellent, love the lighting on the mountain of #2. Great stuff
Luka, really nice shots! Really like the rendering of #2. I do like the rendering with Leica lenses when you are doing a B&W conversions.
Interesting discussions! My personal opinion, is that M9 and DSLR's are two very different and unique photographic systems. In many ways I am glad that Leica do have a different rendering and feel to images particularly with the CCD sensor. Initially when I embarked on learning about the M9, there are number of people I contacted in the FM forums. At first, I approached looking solely for Zeiss lenses with the M9, but my opinion has changed since. If I really aspire to the Zeiss look, I am fortunate to have the 5DII with ZE lenses to resort too. In my recent readings, there are so many different lenses old and new, that can be tried, and for now I have barely scratched the surface.
Dan, yes it was the 28 Elmarit Asph I have been reluctant to use the 28 Elmarit since I acquired the ZM 25 for landscapes as I prefer the Zeiss rendering. The 28 FL has always been a favourite of mine as a walk about lens. Yesterday afternoon, I decided to go for an hours walk, by the beach and the lighting was really harsh, so I decided to the 28 Elmarit, set it on f/8 and the hyperfocal setting of 1.5m to infinity, and there was my expensive P&S for the arvo. It was fun and easy, as I had no expectations with the harsh lighting.
Dan, to answer your question, I found the 28 Elmarit worked a lot better yesterday, in the harsher lighting. More high light latitude possibly... interesting though
BTW, all my B&W conversions on done with Silver Effex Pro 64 bit plugin. Thanks for all the comments
denoir wrote:
Hehe. So the only choice is to be a fanboy a satisfied long term user or somebody who got the camera for the wrong reason? You don't think that there is a category of say users that see both strengths and weaknesses of the system? You seem to rule out that there are users with legitimate grievances which by your own definition would put you in the "Leica can do no wrong" category
Well, no..., now you are the one who is projecting I mean only generally satisfied, i.e. sees a place for the camera in their kit, and are satisfied with it for specific uses. Some owners use only Leica M cameras, others add a DSLR.
We all complain about it from time to time though, mostly because of various rangefinder limitations, or the hard-to-believe fact that it is often necessary to send a 3500 Euro lens back to Solms once, and occasionally even twice, to get it adjusted properly. I had to send back my 50 Lux ASPH three times. The first time it was focusing problems similar to yours and stiff focusing, then it came back with a loose aperture and focusing ring, IIRC, and then it had a stiff aperture ring. My other lenses were perfect though. My 28 Cron has amazingly tactile and perfect operation. My 90AA is near perfect, just a little looseness in the aperture ring, but it is an older lens I bought second-hand. At some point I will send it in to have it coded and the aperture ring made slightly stiffer.
At the moment, another reason I am not using my M8 is that the photography I am doing when I find a little time often makes use of close focusing.
Thanks for your comments about my Egypt photos. I did get a few that I really like, but I see others where I could have exposed or processed much better, and when you have taken a possibly once-in-a-lifetime trip like this, it is hard not to feel a little frustrated about that.
Luka, is it ok that I had a bit of a giggle that the noctilux was the line drawn for expense
Luka/Carsten I enjoyed the conversation fwiw and am glad it didn't degrade... you both had interesting points - beneficial for someone like me deciding.
carstenw wrote:
Generally there are three types of Leica owners:
- Annoying "Leica can do no wrong" fanboys, who give all owners much of their reputation as snobs.
- Satisfied long-term users.
- People who buy Leica for the wrong reasons, realize they don't like it, sell, and bad-mouth it in various ways in the future.
There is a small fourth contingent of people who realize it isn't for them, but don't make bad comments.
carstenw - I bought the M system as a way to alleviate future back pains, and future chiropractor bills. As someone who brings a 5DII and two prime lenses with him where ever he goes without fail, I needed a light HQ system. The M system is that system, the cost will take care of itself 20 years down the road when I'm not visiting a back specialist. I'm just not happy with Leica's lenses. They don't do for me what the ZE lenses do. There's no real reason to elaborate, they're just not giving me what I want out of my captures. I've tried all the ones everyone here has recommended, none of them have wowed me right off like the ZEs have.
Will I keep the M9? Probably, but that's only because I know myself, I know I'll bring a camera everywhere I go, and I really cannot handle the Canon system for day to day nonsense "fun" photography.
Now that I've said all that, I'm going to praise denoir, because those black and what 75cron shots are pretty amazing, I'm digging them a lot. I guess there's a bit of hope with Leica yet
charles.k - really liked your shots, great stuff.
thrice - Really good work on your vacation in NZ.
denoir wrote:
As for which Zeiss, if you are going to get the 5DII + 24-105L, then I'd recommend the Zeiss 21 Distagon. IMO it's the best lens I've ever used. The 100 MP is also awesome. Other good Zeiss ZE lenses are the 35/2 and the 50 MP. I would not recommend the 50/1.4 Planar and the 85/1.4 Planar early on in a Zeiss collection. Although they can be quite good but not suitable for some uses (wide open closeups).
I agree with denoir, but will point out the 100MP is a bit fussy at times, and would probably be the hardest lens to gain full confidence with. As a first ZE lens, I'd suggest the 50MP or 21. The 21 will wow you if you're a landscape shooter, or just like wides, and the 50MP is the best 50 (for my style of photography), so you shouldn't have a problem with it, even if you don't shoot what I shoot.
And yes, I would stay away from the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 for a while, at least until you really find a need for it, and then I'd pick up the 85 1.4 first, as it's the better of the two (assuming you like the FL).
Just go over to the ZE thread and look at the photos, you'll get a good idea of the lenses.
Weird, initially I was 'wowed' by the focus/defocus separation and '3D' of my Zeiss lenses but now I miss the painterly quality and colour of my Leica 19mm. Maybe if I were a documentary photographer or an architecture photographer but I'm a painter who can't paint. I suppose the grass is always greener.
Dan, great shots again! I agree with you. Both styles of rendering have their place. For portraits I definitely prefer the Leica lenses, but for colour landscapes the Zeiss. B&W is old and new to me. I started in B&W film, but rediscovering it with the way the leica lenses just draw the richness in tonality, so this is very new to me.
Edward, I also agree with Luka and Adam, the 5DII & 24-105L is great setup. If you are doing any type of documentary work, which you are with the animals, this will work great. If you watch any of the National Geographic photogs, a lot of them use this lens, but the secret to their shots is that they get lighting right and make it work in the field. My only concern would be that the 7D AF system is far superior to the 5DII. The 7D AF for animals is brilliant. The 5DII is mediocre, but very workable. For desert scenes, with great lighting, the combo of the ZE 21 and 100MP will just draw colours and rendering out of nowhere.
Dan, really love the first shot in your second to last shot. Such scenes with snow, high contrast and sun can be very difficult to get well exposed but you did it superbly. The other shots are also great.
Charles, lovely shots. Again, beautiful light an B/W conversion. Did you use a standard preset or is it a custom one?
My 75 Cron saga continues. I'm not sure if I should laugh or cry but this happened today: I went to the store just after they opened and took a queue number. An older guy comes in after me, takes a number but instead of waiting he goes directly to a clerk that just arrived and starts asking about a 75 Cron. My turn comes and another clerk points at the one talking to the old man and says "He's the Leica expert, you should talk to him". So I do and we have an interesting discussion (me, the clerk and the old man). I explain the issues with the two lenses (75 Cron and 90 Elmarit) and there is no problem. He gave me my money back for the Elmarit and I got a new Cron. The old guy had purchased a 75 Cron as well.
So far so good. Then we start testing the lenses. The clerk checks them out for infinity focus and confirms that my copy is off. Then we start testing them for front focus and this is where things begin to go wrong. The new one front focuses as well. Not quite as much but still significantly. We try another M9. Same thing. We try a third M9 and it gets even worse. We try a 90 summarit and it focuses perfectly on my camera. The old guy then asks me to try his newly bought Cron. It focuses perfectly. They only had a total of two Crons in stock...
So had the old guy not cut the queue I would have gotten the one that focuses correctly. Instead I had to take the one that was somewhat better than my original. The infinity focus is still not at mechanical infinity but a hair off - definitely better than the first copy.
I've also discovered that my M9 rangefinder is slightly off in the vertical direction. So in the end I will have to send camera + lens to Leica but I think that I at least for a while can live with the imperfect focus of the 75. One improvement with the new copy is the aperture ring - the old one had some play in it and I had changed the aperture by mistake a bunch of times.
I really can't help but wonder if Leica would not save a truckload of money if they improved the quality control a bit. The guy in the shop said that they had sold 23 M9s so far and that 15 of them had to be sent back for calibration. I find that to be a bit ridiculous.
---
Anyway, I never got around taking any duck shots yesterday (it could explain my bad luck ) but I'll try to take some time to do so today.
Thank you Luka! The B&W is just done through Silver Effex Pro 64 bit version. The conversion is slightly modified depending which lens I am using. I find the film type Kodak ISO 32 Panatomic X, with the grain turned off, gives the richest effect, adjusting the brightness marginally higher works well for prints. I then use copper toning to marginally warm up the prints, but this is all, as I generally don't like to mess around PP'ing too much.
I feel for you, as this is frustrating. The positive aspect, is that you will end with an excellent setup, after you take some shots of the ducks !!!
Thanks Charles for the comments a few pages back I like your first B&W shot you took with the 28 Elmarit, very, very, nice shot. If you like the 28FL, have you given the 28Cron a try?
Rod, love the Noct portrait
Dan and Luka, great pics from both of you as always You guys are posting so much that I'm having trouble keeping up .. but keep it coming!
Carsten, very nice set of pics from your earlier trip to Egypt
Luka? Where are the docks? I see great ducks in #1 & #2
Charles, your B/W shots are FANTASTIC! That is what I like most about the M8/M9...the B/W conversion that are far better than my Nikon. Re the 28 Elmarit ASPH, how do you like that lens compared to the Zeiss 25? Seems to have even more contrast....maybe even too much yet extremely sharp all over
Thanks Philippe & Ryan Isn't there an actor called Ryan Philippe?
I find the whole Leica & B/W thing intriguing. First of all there's the sensor that blows highlights in a similar way to film. Then there's the glass itself. I'm guessing the lower local contrast which I don't appreciate all that much in color shots works very well B/W, preserving some of the finer tonality. I like Leica rendering for B/W & film while I like Zeiss more for color and digital...
You are of course entitled to your opinion, but based on other comments I've gotten I think it is a minority opinion. I would also disagree as the content of the photos is on average quite different from my 5DII output. I can't recall that I ever did any street photography with the 5DII + ZE glass. In fact I did little walking around style photography (some with the 35/1.4 distagon, but not a lot).
.. but keep it coming!
