Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2014/04/23

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] M or M9
From: mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner)
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 18:43:38 -0400

For me seeing a totally noise free image is like seeing a totally grain
free image. Makes me feel like I'm looking at an image in which the enlarger
is out of whack.  
A little bit of "edge" a little bit of bite... goes a long way in this crazy
world.
MUSH! I say!
In other words I agree with Lluis.
But good for you to attempt such stuff in B&W Geoff!
As the guy says "Dying is easy B&W is hard!"

But all the more wistful of the information I'm not seeing here knowing they
were probably shot with a Leica Apo-summicron 75mm or some other over the
top wet dream of a Leica optic.

And the Ladies don't need it. They don't need to be fuzzed.! They don't need
to be romanticized. The trick is to just not zoom in on them too much. Give
them some space. Not be clinical.  And this you've done as these are pretty
much full length shots.

- check out the work of Avedon and Penn.


On 4/23/14 5:56 PM, "Lluis Ripoll" <lluisripollphotography at gmail.com> 
wrote:

> My friend, I'm not sure to express well in English, I think we are too
> concerned by these things.
> 
> What we call noise,  or grain in film days, is like the hair on the human
> body, a popular Spanish quote says "Where there?s hair, there is joy".  A
> picture without grain, without noise  (in the sense too clean).... is like 
> a
> depilated body.
> 
> Cheers!
> Lluis
> 
> 
> El 23/04/2014, a las 23:28, Geoff Hopkinson <hopsternew at gmail.com> 
> escribi?:
> 
>> And it is in general more responsive (I think 50% higher frame rate if on
>> continuous), for example when shooting a rapid sequence where I have never
>> hit the buffer limit over the 6000 frames or so I have shot thus far with
>> mine.. The RF is calibrated with new process and equipment and to an even
>> higher standard. It is at a conservative guess more than a stop better for
>> noise performance. 2000 ISO is doable where needed in my experience
>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/154320088
>> The LCD for menu and review is bigger and better by far.
>> Ergonomically it is only marginally changed (a little thumb rest) but the
>> setting controls are better. The movie button is a PITA (unless you intend
>> to shoot movies) and I have tripped it by accident frequently in handling
>> (showing a model the LCD for example).
>> I think that the choices currently are between the superb Monochrom and 
>> the
>> M (Typ 240).
>> I think that the BW conversions work well and like colour too much for 
>> that
>> to be an option for me though.
>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/154933509
>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman/image/154637276
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers
>> Geoff
>> http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman
>> 
>> 
>> On 24 April 2014 05:56, John McMaster <john at mcmaster.co.nz> wrote:
>> 
>>> A couple of other things in favour of the M (or M(240) as there is no
>>> M10); Liveview/EVF is available for accurate focussing or using SLR 
>>> lenses,
>>> it has greater dynamic range than the M9 and feels nicer to use IMO...
>>> 
>>> john
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> 
>>> If the price is the same (which sounds really weird) then you should
>>> obviously buy the M10 and not the M9. It has better high ISO performance,
>>> more functionality and is still supported by Leica with firmware 
>>> upgrades.
>>> 
>>> But still, I am amazed that any retailer would sell both cameras for the
>>> same price. Either their M9 price is absurdly high or their M10 price is
>>> absurdly low.
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> Nathan
>>> 
>>> Nathan Wajsman
>>> Alicante, Spain
>>> http://www.frozenlight.eu
>>> http://www.greatpix.eu
>>> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
>>> Blog: http://nathansmusings.wordpress.com/
>>> 
>>> On Apr 23, 2014, at 8:01 PM, Roger Hart wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I've been away from the LUG for a bit, but am now interested in
>>>> upgrading from M8 for a full-frame M camera. I'm looking for any
>>>> reasons LUGers might have for not buying an M (besides price). I see
>>>> that my favorite retailer is selling M and M9 bodies at the same
>>>> price. Are they equal cameras? Why buy one over the other? I would
>>>> love to hear some of our residents experts weigh in on the topic.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks in advance. All the best from sunny Michigan.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Roger Hart
>>>> Ann Arbor
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Leica Users Group.
>>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information




-- 
Mark William Rabiner
Photographer
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/




In reply to: Message from lluisripollphotography at gmail.com (Lluis Ripoll) ([Leica] M or M9)