[Leica] Image difference between M and "new" M9

[john at mcmaster.co.nz (John McMaster)]

A would lean towards the M, it copes with high contrast far better

john

> -----Original Message-----
> 
> Thanks John,
> 
> I don't have an immediate need, but I may be called upon to document a
> project in Africa in 2015 where high quality images would really matter so 
> I've
> been pondering either an M9 or an M (with backup from my M8 and
> whatever Sony camera I happen to be using at the time.)
> 
> I find that working with my M8 is very easy and natural, more so than my
> NEX-7 or my (huge) 1Ds Mk II.  My Leica glass is still good stuff.
> 
> At some point I'll be wanting to have a few real dng files from both 
> cameras
> to work with.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Adam Bridge
> 
> On Sep 13, 2013, at 1:40 PM, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> > Little difference other than you can use a magnified LV for focussing
> > a Noctilux ;-) I can point you in the direction of shots taken with
> > f1.0 Noctilux, 75mm Summilux and 90mm Summicron II (the latter two
> > will feature in this week PAW)
> >
> > The M files can be pushed/pulled far more than M9 ones if needed as well
> as better high ASA, it feels nicer to use and allows the (slow) use of SLR
> lenses. If you can afford it, and find one for sale, the M is preferable 
> to the
> M9 although the M9 still produces stunning results....
> >
> > john
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>
> >> Is there a verdict out on the image quality produced by the M and the
> >> M9 with the same lenses?
> >>
> >> I read about the new M and they always seem to be using the new
> lenses.
> >> I'm wondering about the "old" lenses.
> >>
> >> If you can point me in the right direction I'd appreciate it.
> >>
> >> Adam
> >>