50 1.0 re-release??!!?

airfrogusmc wrote in post #10161411
The M9 is actually about the same price as the 1DsMkIII when the MkIII was first released.

Actually I would say maybe Hasselblad would be the Ferrari and Leica M is really not a sports camera so really apples and oranges so if you take say the 200 2L, 300 2.8 and 400 2.8 canon then had very little that can really run with those great Leica M lenses. And Leica was cool enough to their loyal customers to design a camera that can use their great old lenses. And the fact those old lenses were so darn good that they are able to still out resolve most of the Canon and Nikon glass at comparable F/Ls.

And as far as computers go I prefer my Mac not by a little but by a lot over PC.

The M9 doesn't use an AA filter over it's sensor whereas the Canon dSLRs do. This is a significant handicap for lens comparisons since no Leica M to EOS adapters exist (and are not likely to be developed due to the physical conditions of a dSLR mirror box vs. a rangefinder)

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #10163661
Well, since we're arguing semantics, the M9 certainly is "cheap" but the S2 certainly fits the Ferrari metaphor (I meant Ferrari because they're excruciatingly expensive, and also have a limited number per year as Leica is claimed to have; MF cameras would not be comparable to a supercar based on performance). Yes, Leica is "nice enough", but unless you're spend 30 large, you are getting AF which was the mainly, if not only, reason for the EF line.

You have a PC. You own a Mac. A PC = personal computer. And you never addressed why you like your Mac.

You know what I mean.


I no longer have error messages like hung app. Lets just say a ton less problems and that being just one. Oh and the whole virus thing. You know about that also.

Poe wrote in post #10165627
The M9 doesn't use an AA filter over it's sensor whereas the Canon dSLRs do. This is a significant handicap for lens comparisons since no Leica M to EOS adapters exist (and are not likely to be developed due to the physical conditions of a dSLR mirror box vs. a rangefinder)

Another reason to want an M9.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #10166772
Another reason to want an M9.

Unless you enjoy images free of color artifacts, jaggy lines and moire - which is what an AA filter fixes.

I think it is funny people talk about the AA filter like it is something Canon puts in their cameras to cripple them. They do serve a purpose.

tkbslc wrote in post #10167128
Unless you enjoy images free of color artifacts, jaggy lines and moire - which is what an AA filter fixes.

I think it is funny people talk about the AA filter like it is something Canon puts in their cameras to cripple them. They do serve a purpose.

Have you seen the reviews or seen images that have been taken with the M9? Or better yet have shot with one? Canon is not the end all in photography.

Heres a shock for ya. There might even be some cameras other, dare I say, better for different applications that a Canon

I love my 5Dc but and I've shot a good deal with both the 1DsMkII the 1DsMkIII the 5DII and all good cameras but for me if the M9 is a much better fit and if it was available when I went digital we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Did you actually read my post? It was about AA filters only, not brand love.

tkbslc wrote in post #10167219
Did you actually read my post? It was about AA filters only, not brand love.

Again have you read the reviews, seen the images or better yet shot with an M9? I gotta tell ya I found it way more impressive that the 1DsMkIII. Definitely fits my style of shooting better and I actually like the ease of operation and just about everything about the M9 better.

tkbslc wrote in post #10167128
Unless you enjoy images free of color artifacts, jaggy lines and moire - which is what an AA filter fixes.

I think it is funny people talk about the AA filter like it is something Canon puts in their cameras to cripple them. They do serve a purpose.

It depends on the spatial frequency of the object your photographing.

I've seen some fairly recently forum user linked video from the either the 5D2 or the 7D--someone's kid playing piano. The black piano keys moired like crazy. I expected better on this aspect since the AA filter is designed (or should have been) to block that kind of phenomenon. You can find plenty of examples of moire and color artifacts in TDP's images for their ISO 12233 tool, all coming from Canon cameras. Part of me thinks if you're going to half-ass the job, don't do it at all and let someone who can do it, do it. Not to say that the Leica M9 isn't infallable, but I think reviewers such as the guy over at LL has put the M9 through it's paces, but hasn't reported back that his images are significantly crippled by the lack of an AA filter.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #10166754
You know what I mean.

I don't want to assume anything; you know what they say when people assume...

I no longer have error messages like hung app. Lets just say a ton less problems and that being just one. Oh and the whole virus thing. You know about that also.

Maybe your Windows machines were like that, but the only problem on mine is a hardware problem stemming from dust blocking the airflow to my processor - hardly a software problem. I've also never had a virus because I don't click on every link that I see. I'd imagine most viruses people bring on themselves and not by a virus arbitrary infecting ones computer while the using is operating an arbitrary program.

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #10167904
I don't want to assume anything; you know what they say when people assume...


Maybe your Windows machines were like that, but the only problem on mine is a hardware problem stemming from dust blocking the airflow to my processor - hardly a software problem. I've also never had a virus because I don't click on every link that I see. I'd imagine most viruses people bring on themselves and not by a virus arbitrary infecting ones computer while the using is operating an arbitrary program.

I just can't understand why people get there panties all in a bunch wen someone prefers something over what the masses prefer. I could care less that you prefer building your own computers or that you think Canon is the end all. Great rock on but for me and what I do I have found Mac to be far more stable.


In fact a good friend (IT director worked his way up and is a computer guru) that had built my last two computers before I went Mac was the one that recommended that I switch. I did and have had a ton less problems. And when I say PC I mean all others besides Mac. But you know that.

So its great that you love your Canons. I love my 5Ds. I also love Deardorffs, Hasselblads, Mamiyas, and I really like Leica rangefinders and that you love your NON APPLE computer but for what do the Mac I have now is perfect.

Oh and the last virus we got on our non mac was in an e-mail my wife got from supposedly a friend.

airfrogusmc wrote in post #10167993
I just can't understand why people get there panties all in a bunch wen someone prefers something over what the masses prefer. I could care less that you prefer building your own computers or that you think Canon is the end all. Great rock on but for me and what I do I have found Mac to be far more stable.

It's not that I don't like Mac - I'd rather have a Mac, but it's not good enough to justify its 100% price hike - but it's the tone of many Mac users that Windows computers are festered with viruses and continually crash. Mine don't; maybe it's just me or my computer.

In fact a good friend (IT director worked his way up and is a computer guru) that had built my last two computers before I went Mac was the one that recommended that I switch. I did and have had a ton less problems. And when I say PC I mean all others besides Mac. But you know that.

Fair enough, I'm sure he has good technical reasons to have you switch over.

Who says I don't like cameras without the word "Canon" on them? I never said that. I stated several times on this forum that I want to buy many difference cameras, but don't have the capital as many here to facilitate that. I also never said that I love my "NON APPLE" computer (I need a new processor because the old one can't even run PS without overheating), but many people who praise their Mac(s) give very vague answers as to why; I'm a pretty opened minded analytical person, so I like answers more specific than: It runs better.

That's exactly what I was trying to say: don't open up every link, email, website, ect. that someone sends you. You didn't get that virus by chance, but rather, opening an email (which also begs the question: would it have infected a Mac?).

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #10168110
It's not that I don't like Mac - I'd rather have a Mac, but it's not good enough to justify its 100% price hike - but it's the tone of many Mac users that Windows computers are festered with viruses and continually crash. Mine don't; maybe it's just me or my computer.


Fair enough, I'm sure he has good technical reasons to have you switch over.


Who says I don't like cameras without the word "Canon" on them? I never said that. I stated several times on this forum that I want to buy many difference cameras, but don't have the capital as many here to facilitate that. I also never said that I love my "NON APPLE" computer (I need a new processor because the old one can't even run PS without overheating), but many people who praise their Mac(s) give very vague answers as to why; I'm a pretty opened minded analytical person, so I like answers more specific than: It runs better.


That's exactly what I was trying to say: don't open up every link, email, website, ect. that someone sends you. You didn't get that virus by chance, but rather, opening an email (which also begs the question: would it have infected a Mac?).

Probably not.

Then explain why any time someone posts something saying they prefer something other than say Canon or Windows, folks come out of the woodwork trying to say they're either an elitist or they try to make them look like they don't know what they're talking about.

I can do things like open hundreds of images in PS raw and correct all the images in large folders with no crashes. NONE, and that would have sent my non apple into a tail spin.

But the big selling point for me was my previously mentioned buddy telling me thousands of computers in the system of the very large corporation he works for, they have virtually no problems with the Macs in the system (the creative departments are all mac) compared to the Dells they have for all of their other departments. He said they just don't see the % of problems with mac that they experience with the others.

So rock on with your stuff. You've found stuff that works for you and thats cool with me. I would never argue for hours on end for some unknown reason that you should think and work the way I do and that the stuff I choose would be the right choice for you or try and show that you must be wrong for your choices. I've had all different kinds of gear and computers over the years and I'm pretty pleased with what I have. So give my intelligence the same respect. I'm not exactly new to this game.

But I have found for me that the Mac is a better choice and I will probably be picking up an M 9 sometimes this year if business continues to be as strong as it has. Doesn't mean I don't like my Canon stuff. Though if the M9 would have been available when I went digital we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Back to the OP. Ya never know. The reason why Canon stopped making the 50 1.0L was leaded glass issues. They've had a 55 1.2 aspherical since the 1970s and later the 50 1.2L FD.

It will be interesting to see if they do bring it back tough I do doubt it.

tkbslc wrote in post #10167128
Unless you enjoy images free of color artifacts, jaggy lines and moire - which is what an AA filter fixes.

I think it is funny people talk about the AA filter like it is something Canon puts in their cameras to cripple them. They do serve a purpose.

AA filter is not the only solution to fix the Moiré effect. I have no positive or negative feeling against Canon or Nikon using it over the sensor. They must have their very own AA algorithms to do down-sampling on the very fine (if not ultra fine as in the case of Leica glass) optical image source produced by their fine glasses.

But the fact is that AA filter simply cuts resolution across the entire image (as opposed to just the edges of fine pattern that produce Moiré). Leica glass' resolution is simply too good to be cut in any way. That's why they apply AA-like algorithm by the DSP chip. Again I have no positive or negative feeling against it.

When Canon goes to 30+ or 40+ mega pixels one day, they might take out the AA filter (or at least a much less aggressive AA algorithm). Many MF digital backs do not have AA filter but many pros are using them to shoot fine fabric and architectural patterns. I am sure they care about Moiré.

They are just the way they are. They are just different strategies for similar problem.

So it's an overstatement to say camera w/o AA filter will produce images "of color artifacts, jaggy lines and moire."

nphsbuckeye wrote in post #10158310
I would love to have a medium format dSLR without the size of a Hassy or Mamiya, but I don't have that kind of cash, yet. But, Leica is a (if not the) Ferrari of the photography world.

I´ve tried the new H4D a few weeks ago and it´s not as big as I expected. Moreover when I buy something expensive, I want it to be big because it looks more professional and it draws attention of people