THE LEICA M9 AND ITS ROLE

Sun, 5 Dec 2010 13:15:07 -0600

My relationship with the Leica M9 is a tawdry soap opera with a never ending cycle of on-again-off-again motel escapades. It has always been like this, even with the Leica M8 harlot. Each time we reconcile, I have the best of intentions, but digital Leica M’s have a split personality. If the light is right, plus good subject matter - the images can be stunning. But if those elements misalign, the day can go sideways. And after a couple sideways outings I feel betrayed - my indulgent camera made me feel like a chump. Soon we are in a downward spiral, and in this time of need the trusty Canon 1Ds Mark III steps forth - a steady-eddy of sorts. What the Canon lacks in personality, it makes up for in perseverance and dependability. Sure, the Canon is a bit overweight, but we know how that saying goes.
The Leica M is a conundrum. Some of my favorite pictures were taken the Leica M8 and M9. In theory the same pictures could have been taken with the 1Ds Mark III, but the Leica M8 or M9 was the camera in-hand. If I did not have the Leica M8 or M9, the picture probably would not have happened because carrying the 1Ds Mark III is generally a burden. So to say the Canon 1Ds Mark III could do the same is questionable. On the flip side, since I tend to carry the Leica M, it often faces conditions beyond its comfort zone. You could say that I am setting up the Leica M9 for failure. But if it could do just a little more... If the Leica M9 had better high ISO performance and live-view... sigh...
WHEN I LIKE THE LEICA M9
The Leica 50mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH and Leica 35mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH are amazing performers. While I like the Leica M9’s / M8’s compact size, it is really the lenses that keep me coming back. The M images I like most have a strong, central subject; good light with a nice balance of light and dark areas; and fairly shallow DOF. If those variables come together in the right way, mixed in with a little Leica lens magic, the resulting pictures can be terrific. Full-frame plays a role because the reduced DOF works well for my style. And I do my best to keep the Leica M9 at ISO 160 to ensure its best file quality.
For people pictures, these days I look for opportunities where the image is a quasi portrait, but more natural with less posing, an effortless relaxed feel and a greater sense of context. Leica M’s do well at this because the small camera is less intimidating. I can sit and wait for the shot while the subject tends to filter me out. Also, a larger, heavier camera like the Canon 1Ds Mark III is burden to carry everywhere. Thus, the big cameras sit at home and opportunities are missed. Ultimately, it is the Leica M9’s performance-size ratio that I value most. Because the Leica M9 is a small camera, I carry the M and get pictures that I would have otherwise missed. And the M system is essentially a no-compromise set-up in terms sensor size, sensor quality and the lenses.
WHEN I HATE THE LEICA M9
The hardest part of the Leica M9 is overlooking its price tag. When spending this much money, you want a camera that produces results and justifies the financial outlay. The Leica M9 has shortcomings which undermines its value. Its ISO performance is Jekyll and Hyde. Up to ISO 800 is usually okay, but past ISO 800 is a coin toss. If there are alot of dark areas and deep shadows, ISO 1250 can be a mess. Other times the colors and tones effectively mask the noise and file looks surprisingly good. It is difficult to gauge when the Leica M9’s ISO will do a good job or not. It is a craps shoot most of the time.
My next gripe is Leica’s interpretation of the color. Time and time again when shooting landscapes and cityscapes, the Leica M9’s just looks wrong. Technically, the Leica M9’s color balance is too cold, color profiles are too blue and the images lack a natural warmth (in terms of color tones). Sometimes I can rework the colors in C1 and Photoshop, other times not. If bad color and high ISO collide, forget about it. My greatest angst are the color landscapes and cityscapes.
Sometimes I surrender and give in to Leica’s seemingly medication induced colors. At times they are okay in their own quirky way. For landscape shooting the Canon 1Ds Mark III images have more credible color. If upper ISO’s are involved, again the 1Ds Mark III is the clear winner. So while I praise the Leica M9 for its and size and performance, at the same time it can frustrate me with its sub-par ISO, whacky colors and a mind-numbing price tag.
ON-AGAIN, OFF-AGAIN... AND ON-AGAIN
For now the Leica M9 and I have reconciled on a trial basis. Landscape colors have been partially resolved with some custom color profiles (click here). Finding the “balance” between the Leica M9 and Canon 1Ds Mark III is still as elusive as ever, so I dare not say anything about the future - as I will surely eat those words!
The Leica M9 needs all the variables lined up in its favor, and if the light, etc., are good - then the Leica M9 does well. If the variables are less than ideal, then the Leica M9 can be a real bitch! And this is where I respect the 1Ds Mark III. Even if the variables are not perfect, the 1Ds3 manages. In a world of unknowns, the Canon 1Ds Mark III excels.
Since I went on a Leica M9 landscape rant, here are some “just for fun” pictures from the weekend. There was a lot color editing in Capture One and Photoshop and overall the Leica M9 did okay here. What really surprises me is how much ground a 35mm lens can cover. All these pictures were with the Leica 35mm F1.4 Summilux-M ASPH (35mm Summilux review here).