New Samples from the M 240

Started Jan 22, 2013 | Discussions thread
barjohn Senior Member • Posts: 1,197
Re: well Steve huff says that the RX1 with its cmos is = to M9

Mauro.B wrote:

jl123 wrote:

I was reading one of steve's posts on his blog earlier and fond this (basically he's saying that the Sony Rx1 with 24mp cmos is equal in iq even at low iso to the CCD in the M9. So as such it would seem he would think the new M will be likely at good as the CCD M9 as well) I wonder if steve is being fully sincere about the Rx1? Indeed when I tried to put this comment up on his site in reponce to people asking about ccd vs cmos he told me it would stay for moderation and it looks as if it not be posted up to his site: strange man this Huff!

from his comments...

"Steve Huff says:
January 20, 2013 at 10:20 am

"I no longer own an M9 and the fair test would be against the new M, which I will indeed do. The M9 would be about tied at base ISO (with a 35 Lux II would eek out the Sony though) but after that no contest. It would lose in Dynamic Range as well as the Sony is FAR superior in this regard. It would lose in speed because the M9 is manual focus. It would WIN though in sheer pleasure of shooting, feel, and experience. In good light it would be close but i would still be able to pick out what came from what camera. The M9 would have the “M9″ look and the RX1 would have the “RX1 Look”, which is that Zeiss color and pop. M9 would be cooler with the Leica feel. I do feel the RX1 is more capable due to the sensor but the M9 is a classic RF and nothing can beat that experience, and the M9 quality still is amazing and always will be. Bring on the new M..I have HIGH hopes. “"

Steve Huff is very fond of his RX1.

I had the chance to test the rx1 and decided it is not fish nor meat. A fixed 35mm lens puts the camera mainly in the documentary reportage / environmental portraiture territory. But, autofocus is too slow for that (it sometimes locks in over 2 seconds, average is above 1 second) and manual focus is "digitally implemented" (i.e. slow, fiddly and difficult to assess on lcd, with focus peak being too generous).

its files have a quite "digital look", lacking the sharpness and microcontrast that almost any modern M lens is able to pass on to an M9 (or M8), with skin tones having that "polished" look which is a signature of digital photography (particularly from Canon and Sony). I suspect that were the effects of a combination of digital filtration and lens calibration.

The M9 surely is not a high iso machine, myself rarely exceeding 640, but two things I am sure about: (1) using rf of zone focusing, the M9 beats fairly easy the rx1 in both speed and accuracy, and (2) the M9 always fires a shot but the rx1 is "dead" until focus is locked. Be sure to get the shot anyway would make me choose the M9 (or a dslr) over the rx1 anytime.

In the end, if the rx1 was priced below $2000, in my opinion its shortcomings would have been acceptable even if considering that its Zeiss lens will eventually be trashed with the body when "obsoleted" by Sony. And I would potentially buy it.

As it is priced now, its slowness, digital iq, lack of lens flexibility (and "salvageability"), cheap packaging (no charger, low capacity battery), excess of Sony's marketing smartness (no lens hood) - to name a few- make me consider the rx1 more as an expensive toy for rich compact ugraders than an M9 replacement / competitor.

Maybe, if I was a top hit blogger I would had expressed myself differently.



I and many other photographers that own or have owned Leica equipment would have to disagree with your assessment of the RX1 images.  Both incredible detail and micro-contrast are as good as if not better than either M8 or M9.  Your comments about speed when using zone focusing illustrate your lack of knowledge and experience with the camera.  When set to MF and using zone focusing there is no delay in firing the shutter.  The RX1 has the most advanced sensor on the market today short of the D800 and one can only hope the new M comes close but with its top ISO of 6400 I suspect that it won't.  If Leica could have gotten more out of the sensor they wouldn't have limited it to 6400.  AF speed in good light is reasonably quick and in bad light about 1 sec, not 2.  Raw images are razor sharp and JPGs can be easily sharpened in PP.

-- hide signature --

Visit my web gallery at: Photographs/index.html
Comments and critiques welcome.

 barjohn's gear list:barjohn's gear list
Fujifilm X-T20
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow