Leica Just like that, I'm Leica-less

[Amin]

When I bought a used M8, I had the good fortune that the rangefinder was bang-on perfect with both of my lenses, a Zeiss 35/2.0 and a Voigtlander 28/2.0 Ultron. Absolutely spot on for focus as well as vertical alignment.

Couldn't say the same for my M9. Vertical alignment was slightly off. Luckily, Youxin Ye lives 20 min away from me, and after spending a very pleasant hour at his place, I left with that issue sorted. Unfortunately, focus wasn't quite perfect with two of my lenses (ZM 35/2.0 and CV 35/1.2) and was pretty significantly off with the third (Canon 50/1.4 LTM). I could work around these issues, but I decided to just bite the bullet and send the whole kit off to DAG for focus calibration. I know DAG can take a long time (months) for some work, but he reassured me that for this focus calibration I'm looking at a quick turnaround.

So... my M9 and 3 lenses are en route to Wisconsin, and I am temporarily Leica-less. Will have to live vicariously through the rest of you here. At least my other cameras will get some love in the meanwhile .

 

[Penfan2010]

Hang in there; to your point , you can pay more attention to your other photographic instruments.

 

[Luke]

hmmmmmm.... if an M9 goes missing in Wisconsin, I'm not necessarily the one who intercepted it

 

[Kingsfan]

whew, i thought you were gonna say you sold the M9!

 

[Amin]

whew, i thought you were gonna say you sold the M9!

Not gonna happen!

 

[usayit]

So the M8 was sold for the M9?

 

[Amin]

I sold the M8 and VC 28 shortly after the M9 arrived.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[TraamisVOS]

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat????

 

[TraamisVOS]

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh I thought you sold the M9 to some dude in Wisconsin.

 

[Amin]

Ha ha

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Brian]

Hope it gets back soon! I've been very lucky with my Leica's- have not had to adjust any of the Digital RF's. I adjust a lot of lenses, and found my M9 and Monochrom agree with each other, and about 30+ cameras that I've sent shimmed Jupiters and converted Sonnars to. The M8: it agrees with my Film cameras! So the C-Sonnar that slightly front-focuses on the M9 and M Monochrom, as Zeiss states it will, is perfect on the M8.

 

[flash]

It will be an interesting test to see how hard the M bug has bitten.

Gordon

 

[xdayv]

Things go "really" fast lately...

 

[NJH]

Would be interesting to hear Amin why you upgraded. I have been thinking about it but the price differential is really big. I was also very lucky with my M8, it was the lowest priced one in the UK I had seen for a couple of months but apart from a lot of sensor dust worked perfectly and only 5800 shots on her checking the EXIF. I also really like the 8k shutter and top LCD on the M8 and would definitely miss those on the move up.

 

[Brian]

I kept my M8 after buying the M9. Top shutter speed, and the M8 with IR cut filter produces an image that is sharper than the M9. The thicker IR absorbing filter on the M9 acts as a weak AA filter. At Low-ISO, the m8 produces a very crisp image. Perhaps that is why the monochrome conversions seem better with the M8 than with the M9.

 

[Amin]

Would be interesting to hear Amin why you upgraded. I have been thinking about it but the price differential is really big. I was also very lucky with my M8, it was the lowest priced one in the UK I had seen for a couple of months but apart from a lot of sensor dust worked perfectly and only 5800 shots on her checking the EXIF. I also really like the 8k shutter and top LCD on the M8 and would definitely miss those on the move up.

One reason is that I find that some of the character of lenses comes from the aberrations/imperfections found in the outer part of the image circle which is cropped off on the M8. That could just as easily be seen as an advantage of the M8, but I see it the other way 'round. Plus slightly better low light performance and slightly more shallow DOF possibilities. I do miss the 1/8000s plus the fact that my M8 focused perfectly and my M9 needed calibration. I got lucky with both M8 and M9 bodies being low mileage when I bought them.

 

[usayit]

I kept my M8 after buying the M9. Top shutter speed, and the M8 with IR cut filter produces an image that is sharper than the M9. The thicker IR absorbing filter on the M9 acts as a weak AA filter. At Low-ISO, the m8 produces a very crisp image. Perhaps that is why the monochrome conversions seem better with the M8 than with the M9.

One reason is that I find that some of the character of lenses comes from the aberrations/imperfections found in the outer part of the image circle which is cropped off on the M8.

At the time I purchased my M9, I had an M8 and Epson R-D1. I had intended on selling both but had similar observations as Brian regarding the M8. I also had a quirky kinda love for the R-D1... it produced wonderful images, 1:1 viewfinder, and felt just like I was shooting a film camera. Couldn't justify keeping all three.... So I kept the M8 since it shared the same design/battery as the M9.

Why the M9? Similar reasons as Amin. One of my all time favorite lenses, Noctilux, just didn't seem right on the M8. It was less subtile on my other lenses but really drastic with the Noctilux.

 

[BruPri]

So Amin, is your shutter finger getting twitchy from withdrawal? What is your go-to camera while the M9 is vacationing?

 

[NJH]

Thanks guys, interesting points. I did a bit of pixel peeping madness on a load of shots taken of my house from the front and back as a means of checking if the RF calibration was OK. In between convincing myself that the Zeiss planar has a touch of front focus at intermediate distances and an oddly tilted focus field (slightly front focus on the right of the image it seems) I was stunned to see sharpness right in to the corners indistinguishable from that in the centre. I guess it depends what one is looking for but it seems that many lenses if a new Zeiss planar are anything to go by out resolve the M8s sensor by a long way, I guess this can make the images a bit clinical perhaps compared to the M9?

 

[Amin]

So Amin, is your shutter finger getting twitchy from withdrawal? What is your go-to camera while the M9 is vacationing?

I've been so busy with work I hardly noticed, plus I like all of my cameras . Don (DAG) emailed me yesterday that all my repairs are done and gear is back en route to me, so I'll be picking it up from UPS tomorrow or the next day .

I was stunned to see sharpness right in to the corners indistinguishable from that in the centre. I guess it depends what one is looking for but it seems that many lenses if a new Zeiss planar are anything to go by out resolve the M8s sensor by a long way, I guess this can make the images a bit clinical perhaps compared to the M9?

To me it's not a sharpness thing but more a bokeh thing. Many lenses have round bokeh that gets swirly at the edges, for example, and while some find that swirliness (sp?) distracting or dizzying, I tend to like it. Or other things creep in at the corners - coma, light falloff, etc. All keeps things interesting for me. I know what you mean about the Zeiss - assume you're talking about the 50mm f/2 ZM? Great lens with very even performance across the frame.