M9 review

Started Feb 21, 2012 | Discussions thread
Peter Herth Regular Member • Posts: 498
Re: A lacking review...

Faintandfuzzy wrote:

Peter Herth wrote:

Faintandfuzzy wrote:

what you mean to a see is an impartial review, without the camera fondling....that will focus on the actual image quality of the camera.

The problem is, it did not focus on the actual image quality of the camera. As mentioned by posters before, the JPEG output of the M9 is certainly not its best side, so unless you use DNG, you will not get "the actual image quality" of the camera. Add to that that some of the shots were just bad. One claimed "just the eyes were in focus" but they were not. Yes, you can justify the claim that the manual focus system lets you lose shots, but usually I get much better quality than this.

They did use DNG to review the camera as well. In other words, the JPG engine is garbage....that's fine. But they did use raw files.

As written above, in the review page they mostly did not use DNG in the comparison.

Another nitpit: they complained about the weight of the lens... they used the crome version of the Summilux which is about 100g heavier than the black one (brass vs. aluminium).


Well, this cuts 25% of the weight, not making the lens a featherweight, still its important to mention for those who do not know.


Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow