First UK full Leica M9 test

[Damien_Demolder]

Just to let y'all know that Barney's Leica M9 test will be out this week - issue dated 24th October. Subscribers will get it on Saturday, and it will be in-store Tuesday 20th.

It will be the first UK test - and a bleedin' good one it is too. PLUS - you get two AP Anniversary Leica M9 tokens.

And...that's Barney Britton, btw, not Barney Allen (Northern Nikon)

[parisian]

And...that's Barney Britton, btw, not Barney Allen (Northern Nikon)

Damn, that was so close to hooking him.
This camera is going to be more dissected than a 'Waking the dead' autopsy.
Why is it that one of the smallest makers gets so much attention?

[Clive]

And...that's Barney Britton, btw, not Barney Allen (Northern Nikon)

Damn, that was so close to hooking him.
This camera is going to be more dissected than a 'Waking the dead' autopsy.
Why is it that one of the smallest makers gets so much attention?

'Cos it's Leica, and different.

Well, having read Barney's review (and congratulations, Barney, on a searching report), I would say there are no surprises. Basically, it is what it is, and it isn't what it isn't. But for those with deep pockets and who may choose to go the Leica idiosyncratic way, then I don't think they will be disappointed. Nice to see the shots of York and North Yorkshire

[barney britton]

Thanks! I did most of the shooting during a week at home in NY, but unfortunately there wasn't room for all of the images I took of the dales, moors, and various churches and stately homes that I visited.

Apologies, by the way, for the glaring typo on page 50. 'overwrite' has become 'overwright' for some reason.

Thanks everyone - and by the way, the M9 test is the last test I will write for AP. After three years I depart at the end of this month for pastures new. I'll still pop up on here from time to time though, if only to keep Mark company

[Clive]

Good on you, Barney. You will be missed!

[Mark_Norton]

I haven't seen Barney's review but hope to track down a copy of AP this week. I have an M9, am somewhat ho-hum about it and see it as a stop-gap product built down to a price with evident cost-cutting - easy-to-scratch plastic screen cover, no top panel LCD display, low-rent painted finish, how long before that wears?

If he makes comment about the viewfinder, I've long argued for a better one - it is after all the USP of the camera and Leica should reinvent and update the concept instead of dishing up the same dreary old vintage time after time.

The finder has a sweet spot around 35 - 50mm - go wider and you need an auxiliary finder, go longer and you need a focus magnifier. Fully 7 of the M lenses Leica makes are wider than the M9 finder can cope with and 5 of them need the magnifier.

I had hoped that Leica would provide us with a variable magnification finder with built in diopter and much improved eye comfort. Sadly it was not to be.

[Learning]

On any up market camera whether Leica or my own choice Nikon I would hope that there was a rotatable eye cup that could either accept simple 'dioptre' correction lenses to be purchased ex stock or prescription lenses at a fair cost. On a £4000+ camera, fair cost could be a realistic profitable figure. Even four times the cost of a pair of spectacle lenses with a cylindrical correction would still be good value to a user who really wants one.

[Wheelu]

A fair and balanced review I thought. Sorry to hear that you are moving on Barney, but best of luck with your new adventure.

[TimF]

The finder has a sweet spot around 35 - 50mm - go wider and you need an auxiliary finder, go longer and you need a focus magnifier. Fully 7 of the M lenses Leica makes are wider than the M9 finder can cope with and 5 of them need the magnifier.

Can't say I've ever had a problem focusing any of the lenses I've used on M cameras, ranging from 21mm through to 90mm (never owned a 135mm), but that's an individual thing based greatly on one's eyesight - and mine is far from perfect.

That includes such as the 75mm Summilux, 90mm Summicron (on film), and Canon 50mm f/1.2 (though admittedly my copy of that is so soft it's difficult to tell what is supposed to be the focal point at times!)

I'd agree that the M9 is still a work in progress, and it's likely we won't see what is really possible until Leica's Maestro engine is incorporated and a new better sensor. Despite that, I was still very impressed with what I saw when I had a brief play at Ivor's a few weeks back.

[Barney]

And...that's Barney Britton, btw, not Barney Allen (Northern Nikon)

Yes, my review is far more exclusive. I won't tell just anyone what I think, only those who buy me a drink!

[Tooslow]

I came away with the impression that Barney was being ENORMOUSLY tactful. I wonder what he would have written if the same camera were served up with a different badge on it? I was left feeling that "Leica" is a brand like "Rolls Royce" or one of the many ultra expensive watch brands (but not the arrivistes of course). That is, it purports to be "the best" but the reality is that the engineering and ideas are largely old fashioned and a Casio will keep better time (we're on watches here, not cars).

I am most certainly not knocking Leica. I can't wait to see what the new SLR is like, it could be breath taking. I'm sure the price will be. But why not? They have the name and they know they can price accordingly. And if people want to buy one one, go ahead, it's your money. But I can't help thinking of the emperor and his new clothes.

I do hope the Leica enthusiasts can educate me. I'm not trying to put the cat among the pigeons but it does seem rather inevitable.

JH

[Malcolm_Stewart]

Hasn't Barney now moved on?

[parisian]

I think that the M9 will knock the socks off other machines - within a limited range of available lenses. From 21mm to 90mm it will be unbeatable for image quality - within a limited ISO range.
In a way they have simply taken the film model and available film sensitivities and converted them to digital.
This is a safe approach and one which will endear them to their usual customer base. What it will not do is challenge the lens range or ISO capability of the Canon or Nikon models in the same price range. As a rangefinder it never could of course (except for the ISO) and perhaps therein lies the rub. More and more cameras from the mainstream competition are setting out as 'do it all' machines. Insane ISO levels and lenses from very extreme wide to very extreme telephoto. Add on the video capability and Leica is indeed looking to be left behind.
However, the majority of photographs are taken within the narrow range mastered by Leica and in light where you can at least see the subject fairly well. On that basis they have a winner.
There will be cries on here that I haven't recognised the huge numbers of people who use the extremes of lens or ISO capability on a regular basis but 'on here' is less than 1% of the UK photographic population. The vast majority will do as I suggest and work very happily within the restrictions mentioned - not out of some pig headed approach but simply because it suits their style and needs.

[earleygallery]

A fair review I think (I've not seen an M9 myself) and it's important to remember that ultimately it is a platform for the Leica M lenses, so it's right that Leica have kept to the traditional M formula as many users will be shooting with their film M's too.

[Clive]

"Leica is indeed looking left behind"

Well, I have picked this quotation out of context, Peter, but only to point out that for 40 years or so Leica has been 'left behind'. I do think, on reading the experiences of some who have used it, that there are problems with the viewfinder's capabilities. But Leica lovers will enjoy the lenses' excellence and the continuing rangefinder experience.

Apart from wealthy amateurs, the big crunch is whether the pros en masse will use it. The costs are significantly greater than those that Canon and Nikon entail, together with the 'restrictions' of rangefinder photography. I have learned to use the D3 in the brightest of sunshine at ISOs of 800 and well above. And unless I want restricted depth of field I can achieve unbelievable depth of field handheld with the crispness of very high shutter speeds which would have been impossible before. I'm sure if its an either/or situation very few who have experienced this would choose to forgo it.

But if its an SLR + Rangefinder situation then its a different matter altogether. Unless, perhaps, Leica brings out an M10 with greater ISO capability. Not forgetting that the mechanics of a Leica rangefinder could always give 2 stops advantage over an SLR.

[parisian]

Quite right Clive, Leica have been playing 'catch up' for 40 years at least. Perhaps though they never actually joined the game simply adhering to their strong points and not attempting to compete in the mass market. They never could of course, financial restrictions and some wierd management over the years have seen to that.
They do however stick in there and keep surprising us with improvements that we never foresaw. Can you remember the hoohah over the M7 and it's automation or the condemnation of the M5 for miniscule size differences?
To say that Leica listens to it's customers is a genuine truism.
That the M9 will have faults is definite but just as there were faults with the M8, people will learn to develop work-arounds for them and continue to enjoy the 'style' of Leica shooting. It will never be an evryman's camera but, in truth, what is? The one thing we can say is that resale prices will stay higher than any others and that in time an M9-2 or even M10 will be announced to wild applause.
Leica has become that unique thing - an institution - no other maker has come near that status or developed that keen a following. Each of us over the years has traded makers with impunity, trying with each move to improve our capability using the new technologies available. Few of us have stayed loyal but in the main the Leica crew do, they seem able to sit back and really assess what their machines are capable of and work with it. They do not tend to seek the quick fix that other makers provide. Similar thoughts probably kept Rollei going for much longer than the markets expected.
I understand and respect the enthusiasm you have for the high ISO capability of your D3; watching your work over the years I suspect that it has (in the main) been waiting for this innovation to occur and you can now embrace it. I don't think it is quite so true of others. I think there will be a run of 'look what I can do' shots ( a bit like early photoshop when so many aunties ended up with elephants heads) and then they will fall naturally back into their preferred style and the D3 or even D3s will just become another very capable camera.
For me (admitting to low levels of both capability and intelligence) I cannot justify the purchase of another DSLR beyond the D2x which does absolutely everything I want - and more. But that is just me, I cannot speak for others but I can observe their styles and what I observe is the pattern I mentioned above regarding lens length and ISO useage. The competitions I see on here, at club level and within the RPS would all be covered by very narrow parameters at camera level.

[Damien_Demolder]

A fair review I think (I've not seen an M9 myself) and it's important to remember that ultimately it is a platform for the Leica M lenses, so it's right that Leica have kept to the traditional M formula as many users will be shooting with their film M's too.

Welcome to the forum earleygallery. I think you are absolutely right; the link between the film and digital M's is very important - it has to be as seamless a transition as possible.

[TimF]

Quite right Clive, Leica have been playing 'catch up' for 40 years at least. Perhaps though they never actually joined the game simply adhering to their strong points and not attempting to compete in the mass market.

In some ways that's definitely true - in terms of automation, flash control, frame rates, autofocus (if you must) and such things most people seem to regard as the most important; and I'm including the company's SLR line here.

However in others, Leica are the leaders. Lens design is the obvious one people will think of; IMHO only Zeiss come close when it comes to quality across the whole range. Canon and Nikon each have a few superlative optics, rather more very fine ones and a larger number of more nondescript types.

In SLR viewfinders & focusing screens likewise, Leica are (or sadly were now) IMVHO streets ahead of the pack. That in the SL and SL2, dating from the late 60s, has never been bettered for clarity and sheer ease of focusing, though the R8/9 screens come very close.

[parisian]

You are right Tim of course but it is amazing how many folk on here concentrate on those camera attributes before considering the lenses or viewfinder qualities available. Most of the time in the past I have looked at the qualities of the glass first - for my needs at that time - and then worried about which body to hang it on.
Perhaps we have it all wrong and should ensure we have all the added gizmos that modern design can bring and only then check out the lenses available. Maybe we should also begin to spell lens as 'lense' to give us true street credibility.

[TimF]

Somewhat behind the times (a true Leica trait, some might quip!) I've now seen the review.

There's some feeling on the LUF that Barney missed the point a bit, and I would certainly say there's an element of a DSLR user coming for the first time to the rangefinder in there (whether true or not). As he says, the M9 is a standalone in today's market, and really needs to be judged on those terms rather than as compared with DSLRs, particularly the lightweight ones referred to. Any experienced M user (or user of other RF cameras) will tell you that the ethos of rangefinder photography is not the same as using an SLR, despite surface appearances.

The slow formatting speed for cards is a real problem, but it does depend on what cards are used. I have it on good authority that Sandisk Ultra cards are quicker at present than the supposedly faster Extreme variety. This should be fixed in a forthcoming firmware update I'm told. The slow rendering speed is a source of frustration in the company (see Reichmann's lengthy video 'interview" with Stephan Daniel.

Someone here posted elsewhere about the moire issue, but as Barney states, this is a software issue. The problem is not unknown on DSLRs anyway, as are problems like colour fringing, vignetting, artifacting etc etc. Nothing is perfect.