When deciding on which gear to take to Maui, the Leica M9-P was a given due to its compact size. The real decision was whether to pack to the Leica S2 or the Canon 1Ds Mark II or perhaps neither. Since the Leica S2 kit is prime based, it did not offer much beyond the Leica M9-P other than larger files. The Canon system offered zooms, lens stabilization and zippy auto-focus. Those are obvious benefits that the Leica M9-P does not offer and  good reasons why the Canon kit should go, but I still debated whether it was worth the effort. Obviously I decided to bring the Canon kit, but was it worth it?

During the past year the Canon kit has been downsized to just the 24-105L and 70-300L. The idea was to leverage the Canon system and let it do what is does best - stabilized, auto-focus zooms. The Leica S2 and M9-P address the primes ten ways to Sunday. While the Canon gear may seem like a small kit, it still equates to another camera bag weighing around 12 pounds plus the Gitzo tripod set-up (ie - Gitzo legs, RRS ballhead and a RRS L-Bracket for the 1Ds3).

When traveling 4000 miles from home, it makes good sense to bring known performers with a solid track record. The Canon 1Ds Mark III kit has served me well for five years, and that historical record merits respect. So, the decision to bring or not bring 1Ds Mark III kit is based on more than just weight. The Canon equipment helps me manage the unexpected. If I know locations in advance, the current shooting conditions and lighting - then it is fairly easy to prep a prime based system. But if those variables are unknowns and perhaps even the subject matter is unknown, then a camera with zoom lenses, good ISO, etc., becomes very important.

Since the M-240 has better ISO performance (via a new CMOS sensor) the ability to use SLR lenses via Live View, the Leica M will challenge the 1Ds Mark III’s role. I look at this as a good thing because potentially the M-240 can fully replace the 1Ds Mark III for how I shoot. Using a 300mm prime on the M-240 via an EVF or Live View is a compromise compared to a pro-level dSLR, but I am willing to make that trade-off. I am making a leap of faith that the M-240’s new CMOS sensor will perform well and that Leica has done a good implementing Live View, etc. As we packed for Maui, all these ideas and thoughts were swirling about. I wanted to leave the 1Ds Mark III at home because that would push me to use the Leica M9-P for everything. I need to get into a M-only mindset.

While I wanted to get into M-only mindset, that is not wholly possible with the Leica M9-P. My longest lens on the Leica M9-P is the 90mm Summicron-M ASPO, so the Canon 70-300L quite a bit of use - mostly in the 200-300mm range. So once again the 1Ds Mark III earned its medal, but as I look at the images, I am getting closer, or perhaps more comfortable with the idea of parting with the Canon 1Ds Mark III. The Canon 1Ds Mark III images have their look, just as the Leica M9 images have their look. Is one better than the other? In this case, not so much because everything was shot at base ISO.

In total there were ~700 clicks during the trip, but only ~20 images were processed. Most of the pictures were no different that the pictures taken on previous trips, so if a previous picture looked better, then there was no point in processing the new one. Based on the processed images, I feel the Leica M9 and Canon 1Ds Mark III scored about equally. The Canon colors are more fun, but the Leica images have better content (this is a very subjective call on my part). The average Leica shot needed 1-2 hours of editing, whereas the average Canon shot was edited within 10-20 minutes. In terms of work flow, Canon wins. But again, if judging solely on finished results, it is a tie. And I can’t help but think of the future and using longer lenses on the Leica M. This may be my last trip with the Canon 1Ds Mark III.