A Day at the Matterhorn Mountain in Zermatt Switzerland with the M9 and NEX-5!

April 12, 2011 Featured, Just for fun, Leica, Photo Trips, Sony, Travel 70

In Zermatt Switzerland with the Leica M9 and NEX-5

By Steve Huff

WOW. That’s about all I can say right now. In the past 4 weeks I have been all over South America, spent a few days in Mexico City, MX, flew to Cape Town South Africa after sitting in the very cool Terminal 5 in Londons Heathrow Airport for a few hours. Then yesterday I flew in a freaking helicopter to Zermatt Switzerland, home of the Matterhorn Mountain! Yea, like the one at Disneyland but this is the real deal. Being on the road with Seal as tour photographer sure has its perks. Sure, it is exhausting at times, but days like this make it all worthwhile.

When we left Cape Town we were all just BEAT. Jet lagged out of our minds from the previous journey, many of us just dragged our feet at the airport..

Marcus Brown, Seals Bass player. Here he is after a day and a half with no sleep…waiting to board the plane to Geneva from South Africa which ended up being a 15 hour journey.

Once we landed in Geneva it was a three hour van ride to Zermatt for the band and crew but I was lucky enough to hitch a ride in the helicopter with Seal, his manager Ric, and a few others. My 1st time and it was really interesting. It’s an all different experience than flying in an airplane obviously..almost like you are hanging by a wire and being pulled along. I brought along the Leica M9 and 28 Elmarit and the NEX-5 and 16mm lens for the ride.

Getting ready to board…NEX-5 and 16mm

Me and Mike (Security) in the Helicopter…NEX-5 and 16mm

from the window as we flew over the mountains…Leica M9 and 28 Elmarit

Ric, taken with the NEX-5 and 16mm

–

Upon landing in Zermatt I headed straight for my room and relaxed a bit with lunch and some TV. I couldn’t call back home as it was still the middle of the night in Arizona so I waited for the rest of the crew to arrive, along with my bags. Once the gang all arrived we headed out for a walk around town for some sightseeing, some beer and some dinner. Everyone seemed to gather at this bar called the “Hexan Bar”. There was a cool vibe going on and we had some beer, pizza and I ordered some of the guys a round of Absinth, which they (almost) made the proper way with water and sugar.

Absinth being prepared – M9 and 35 Cron, ISO 2500

Mark and Marcus hanging out…M9, 35 Cron, F2, ISO 2500

After a few drinks and with our bellies full we all went back to our rooms for some much needed rest. We had a big day ahead of us as a few of us were heading up to the Matterhorn Mountain to take some pictures. Seal went up to Ski but since I never had a pair of skis on in my entire life, I decided to play it safe and just do some sight-seeing.

Left to right – Mike, McBob, Marcus, Sid and Chris with the Matterhorn behind them in the distance. M9 and 50 Noctilux ASPH

–

Sid – NEX-5 and 16mm

–

Planning out our route…NEX-5 and 16

–

On the lift headed for the Mountain, which took just under an hour to get to – NEX-5 and 16mm

–

Me and Sid on the lift having a blast. NEX-5 and 16mm

–

The little NEX with the 16mm is great for small spaces

–

Marcus as we approach the mountain – M9 and 50 Noctilux ASPH

–

–

M9 and 50 Noct…The M9 files look much less digital with more DR (to my eye) than the ones from the NEX.

–

and another from the M9 and 50 Noct – WOW…this is what the Nocti was meant for. This was inside the glacier and it was extremely cold and the air was very thin. Some of us had a hard time catching our breath.

–

But how would the NEX-5 and 16mm do in the same tunnel? I used the twilight mode which works great in low light and helped bring out the mood and color. Not bad…

–

Sid in the Glacier Palace – NEX-5 and 16mm

–

Mike in the Glacier Palace – M9 and Nocti ASPH

–

–

We were tired from the walking, the heavy breathing and also pretty hungry so we decided to head back down to the village for some lunch. I snapped a few more shots along the way…

M9 and Noctilux

–

M9 and Noctilux

–

NEX-5 and 16mm

–

Cloud coverage all day so no really great shot of Matterhorn Mountain…M9/Noctilux ASPH

–

one more…

So far this little Ski town,  Zermatt, has been awesome but for me very hectic. It seems like I have been on the go since I stepped foot off of the helicopter, but hey, I’m not complaining! I have to see and do as much as I can while I am here because who knows if I will ever be here again, right? Tomorrow night is the show where Seal plays the “Zermatt Unplugged” festival and it should be a great night overall. We all leave to head back home at 4AM the night of the show so I’ll soon be back home in AZ and will probably sleep for two days straight 🙂

Some of you have e-mailed me asking for me to post a full size file from the M9 and Nocti (even though this combo has been out for quite a while now). Today I snapped a shot from our cable car as we were heading up the mountain and for some reason, my focus issues that I had with the Noctilux were no longer there today! Maybe the cold Swiss air healed the lens, lol. Anyway, below is a full size image, just click on it to open it up in another window. I love the M9 files and the Dynamic Range which beat out the NEX-5 sensor in my experience of real world shooting.

Also, here is a quick shot that I happened to take with each camera. One with the M9 and one with the NEX. I did not do this to make any kind of comparison but rather so I could have one with more compression (M9 and 50) since the 16 was so wide on the NEX. BUT one thing I notice is how much more richer the M9 files look, and hell, they should be since the camera costs 10X as much but I see many people who do not own an M9 and they say the NEX has better Dynamic Range than the M. Well, from everything I have shot with each camera I can easily say the DR of the M9 exceeds that of the NEX. I’m sure someone will come along telling me the numbers say differently, but I go by real world photos.

This shot was in the sun, taken about 20 seconds apart. First one with the NEX-5 and 16…

and as previously posted..the M9 version shot with the Noctilux

These are pretty much straight out of camera shots here. IMO, the NEX shot looks more digital, has more digital color and the highlights are blown in several areas. The M9 shot is smooth, rich, and it was a much more robust file. Yea, the M9 sensor still rocks. Believe me! For those looking for an M9 in stock, Ken Hansen has some in each color – you can email him here. Also, Dale Photo has them as well. B&H Photo, at the time of this writing is sold out of the M9.

Check back in the next couple of days for the Seal show report in Zermatt as well as some new Daily Inspirations and Guest articles!

Steve

 

[ad#Adsense Blog Sq Embed Image]

 

HELP ME TO KEEP THIS SITE GOING AND GROWING!! IT”S EASY TO HELP OUT!

Remember, anytime you follow my links here and buy from B&H or AMAZON, this helps to keep my site going. If it was not for these links, there would be no way to fund this site, so I thank you in advance if you visit these links. I thank you more if you make a purchase! I have nifty search bars at the upper right of each page so you easily search for something at either store! I currently spend 10-14 hours a day working on this site and the only way that I can pay for it is with your help, so thank you! Currently my traffic has been increasing but my funds to pay for the site has been decreasing, so any help would be GREATLY appreciated!

Even if  you buy baby food, napkins or toothpicks at amazon it helps this site, and you do not pay anything extra by using the links here. Again, you pay nothing extra by using my links, it is just a way to help support this site, so again, I thank you in advance :)

If you enjoyed this article/review, feel free to leave a comment at the bottom of this page and also be sure to join me on twitter or my new facebook fan page! Also, you can subscribe to my feed at my subscribe page HERE and read these posts in your browser or news reader!

Related Articles

70 Comments

  2. Great shots, Steve. Your images remind me of my good old days in Switzerland. I have been checking on your site for several months and always love your view of the world and, of course, the Leica lens. Your review on X1 actually got me to bite the bullet and buy the X1 last year. The X1 becomes my daily companion and performs better after upgraded to firmware 2.0.

    Cheers,
    Chaiporn

  3. @ Frank, an ND filter is not so important if you are shooting a film M 🙂 Try this, shot this weekend at about 1.8 in broad daylight on Portra 160VC (pulled to 50) 🙂 No ND required due to the latitude of film.

    Leica M7
    Summilux 50mm (asph)
    Porta 160VC
    [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Portra 160VC pulled to 50.jpg[/img]

  5. Hi Steve
    Another great series-sounds like you are having a great time on the tour-really enjoying the gig shots-proves it can be done and done superbly without the traditional slr-in the right hands of course!
    I totally agree with you about the M9 and rangefinders generally. There is a simplicity and freedom. The purity of a prime lens, seeing the world unhindered by a focusing screen and free from crazy menus and auto-everything. I still can’t part with my 5d2 but man does it gather dust these days! The M9 is special and yes for most, definitely including me, it is hard to justify the price-but there really is no option. The M8 is fine if you don’t need too wide and can live with the IR problem-great camera. Of course there is film and any film rangefinder too. If you appreciate the benefits of Digital and there are many-then the M9 is it for now. Comparing it to ANY other camera is moot. I love cameras, I have far too many but none quite do it for me like the Leica M9. SLRs are cumbersome beasts in comparison. Always too overloaded with gadgetry and things that get in the way. The smaller cameras generally feel like tech products more than photographic tools. The M9 is just that-a photographic tool. The first day I tried one I thought mm crap screen-my Ricoh blows this away-now I suspect Leica did it on purpose-not for economy, after all a great screen is probably under 30 bucks-but because you just don’t need it. Check composition if you must, possibly glance at the histogram? Get the pleasant surprise later on a real screen-you always will. I almost wish that they put in a mechanical winder to cock the shutter-even quieter and it would save juice and could even be designed to create a small charge-like a Seiko watch! I had hopes the Fuji 100 might be a way for many to get closer to rangefinder digitals and the style of photography albeit slightly different and have yet to try one. I look forward to Steve’s review as I am sure he is keen too. I have one on order but have no idea why-curiosity mostly. I really hope it is great-some reviews are mixed. Anyone here have real world experience?
    Anyway, my first post and I am rambling so sorry to you all. Really enjoy this site and everyone’s input. Steve, great work, amazing photography, insightful reviews. Good stuff. Have fun on the rest of the trip-all the best.

  6. Love the Switzerland! Absolutely love it! I travel often to Zurich (work related, and my wife’s brother lives there) and every single time it’s a blast!

    If you get a chance visit the Glacier garden in Luzerne.

    Cheers
    Vlad

    • I adore it when Steve uses the 16mm on the camera. He has a knack with it. Love the shots here with that 16mm lens!

  8. Hi again Steve
    Just to persuade you to persuade Seal to post his m9’s too (tell him, he promised….)
    Please make some good picture tonight with and without bigger DOF(?)
    best
    Thorkil

  10. You’re right, Kevin. Comparisons here are pointless because Leica advocates will always tell us why Leicas are superior.

    If you provide examples, they will say it’s the “rangefinder experience”. Or, it’s “I prefer the handling of a Leica”. Which somehow gets extrapolated to being the best handling.

    If you demonstrate image shortcomings such as DR or high ISO it’s always the “magic” or “timeless” quality.

    I’ve used an M7 for many years alongside a Nikon FM3a. I’m still waiting for the magic.

  11. Can you folks just quit on this comparison BS… Nex this, M9 that and bloody DR on this and that… Lets not forget why we come to stevehuff.com folks, code talking is becoming rather tardy, coke and cartier? Give me a break!

    Nice shots Steve, regardless of what you shot them with, i could careless… Love the B&W’s.

    • If saying *Nice shots Steve* is all you can contribute with, it`s fine with me. But I think that a bit of little literary confabulation about the subject (cameras, lenses, seeing, shooting, showing, on and off), brightens-up the dark underexposed thoughts on serious shooting business ( somebody may feel hurt, personally I am far from it). The author of “Crap, coke and cartier”

    • Kelvin, no offense but why exactly do we come here to Steve’s site? And do we all come here for the same reason? And since when humor and metaphor became inadmissible ‘code talk’ in human interaction?

      I visit this site for that very reason: interacting with other humans on subjects that I find interesting. Photography is boring if it isn’t part of real life. Gear-talk is boring tenfold. And life itself should be boring beyond belief if it isn’t filled with metaphor, humor and joy.

      I really like some of your pictures, by the way. Especially in ‘architecture’, ‘music’ and ‘places’ sections of your site.

      Cheers,
      Greg

      • Greg, to answer your question, “Steve Huff Photos – Real World Digital Camera and Lens Reviews” not what i think are meaningless comparisons such as between an M9 and Nex.. some seem to go off base about.

        Greg, love your last article here ( My Theatrical Adventure with Leica M9 ) as well, nicely written, your photos were awesome, no camera comparisons. I also enjoyed your Flickr gallery very much… Nice work!

        • Kelvin, personally I don’t like those meaningless comparisons myself but some people do — and it’s all right with me. I don’t read what I don’t like.

          Thanks for your comments on my pictures and article. I am glad you like it. I have some more article ideas and I hope Steve will kindly let me share them with you all.

          Cheers,
          Greg

          • Thanks so much Greg, hope Steve can share more of your articles in the near future, i really enjoyed the last one and learned from it.

            Cheers!

  13. Steve – are you also going to be in Montreux, Switzerland later in July for Seal’s show at the Jazz Fest there?

  14. His Steve
    Just a fantastic bunch of shots you served here Steve! Full of atmosphere (and clear and sharp) and near that marvellous Matterhorn, and Zermatt without cars(!)
    And thumps up for the concert tonight to all of you.
    Best
    Thorkil

  15. Steve. Nice picts of people and mountains that keep your spirit high. The technical aspect of your article and the post-debate that resulted, leaves me confused. Full blow-up of lanscape show real potential of M9 sensor and of Noct. Amazing. But, here I`m thinking about silly discussion about price/quality comparison between M9 and Nex-5 to which you contributed with your comparison shots of 5 nguys. Look, really! On one side full frame pinnacle of digital and optical enginering on other side mass product fitted with usable but qualitylike laughable piece of glass, is like pitting a sumo wrestler against a toddler.( I exaggerate a bit to make a point). Why at least you didn`t put Noct on Nex to give us an idea? (even if there still would be full/cropped disadvantage). I think that in the past you did something in that direction( M8.2 vers. Nex-5 same lense on both). Please, in the future minimize odds. Don`t compare Coke glass with Cartier diamonds. Cheers, Mountain High Chief

    • Stanis, I didn’t get the impression that Steve was trying to compare those two cameras. It’s just the way the discussion turned afterwards. It’s clear and obvious that those are two totally different types of cameras and class of devices. I think it was done more for fun than as any serious test or comparison. I am actually surprised people started comparing them in the comments.

      I totally agree with you: Coke glass and Cartier diamonds (why Cartier, anyway?) can’t be seriously looked upon as competing phenomena.

      Greg

      • Greg, from your instant respo I can see you are nearby site. Coke goes well with Cartier. C to C you see. Beside, boy your throat really dries-up dobble quick when your beloved points her finger at a pebble, in one of Cartie shops, and says – I love that one! They have for such cases a Coke ready. (if you american, if russian champaigne, I guess). By the way, I`ve send you couple of outdated pict from India. Hope you got them. No need to respond to them right away, anyway, by the way. Returning to main topic. Why Cartier? Well Leica did make a Hermes edition of M-odel, didn`t they? Special leather work and the stuff. They threw one of those famous foulards in the deal for free, so the buyer could mop his sweaty front after paying. On other hand we do have Swarowski so for us Slavic people they can be our Answar-o-wski. Oh, my friend, this glitter talk. For us the photocats only glitter that counts are reflections of Champs Elisee by night in our lens.
        p.s. Apropos available light painting and noctilux- here`s one. Cheers Stanis van Street
        [file]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/piant in noct[/file]

        • Greg, I tried to include a pict, didn`t work. I try again
          [file]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/painting by noct[/file]

          • Same thing this time but don’t worry, Stanis, I got it the first time. As I said, I saved it on my computer and added a .jpg extension to the (seemingly) text file.

            Greg

        • Stanis, I thought you meant Cartier-Bresson…

          If my lady will ever point her pretty little finger at one of those diamonds I’ll just buy her a Coke and get it over with. Well, maybe not Coke but orange juice. Coke has those little red bugs in it (carmin dye) and I don’t want to feed my lady with bugs.

          Keep it simple! Leica style!

          Greg

          P.S. Good shot. It doesn’t show in the post but can be downloaded with .jpg extension added to the file name.

          • Greg. One thing more. A litlle selfjustification. Here I am talking about rags and riches while showing picts with Noct. Yes I have one, no it`s not latest Aspheric one. I bought mine some twenty years ago for something like 700 $, used one, miniscule scratches on front and back, a bit dented inner ring of mount. I use it only at full aperture, it`s ok. Not super sharp but like Erwing Puts says, while 50/1,4 etches, this one paints in broad brush stokes. All my Leica are bought used and bit worn, not more then 300$ a piece. But they deliver. As to Coke I meant preindustrial vintage ones. No chemistry. A bientot Stanis

          • Stanis, I am green with envy. Noctilux is my dream lens. I don’t know, maybe the first version is even more appealing to me for it’s unique character. The new one is totally great, no doubt, but it looks a bit too clinical to me.

            Well, Santa, I am kidding, send me any version and I’ll be one happy Santa believer!

            Cheers,
            Greg

        • here it is. Stanis van der Straat
          [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/painted by n-lux.jpg[/img]

  16. Great shots and a fantastic location…but I just don’t see where the M9 is worth 10 times what the NEX is. Especially since the NEX is fitted with the very mediocre…but useful & fun…16/2.8.

    Have a great trip.

    • Of course you will not “see” where the M9 is worth 10X the cost of the NEX because A: It is not… and B: the M9 is worth it to me and others due to the fact that it is a rangefinder camera. It is not an SLR, and the style, function and use is totally different. I believe it will make one a better photographer where a NEX will be more of a point and shoot when used with the 16. The M9 is clearly better than the NEX IMO when it comes to file, sensor, etc BUT you will never see this cost difference in a photo. The M9 is a camera you have to use to really “get” and it’s for those of us who really enjoy the all manual nature, fine lenses and body style of the rangefinder camera.

      I do not feel the M9 is “worth” $7000, but for those who want a digital RF we will pay the price because it is really all that is available. It doesn’t hurt that the M9, when paired with good lenses, is one of the top 2-3 35mm format digital cameras available today in regards to image quality.

      A Nikon D3X is more than a Leica M9 by $1000 but Id take an M9 over a D3X any day and for many reasons. I also do not feel a D3x is worth $8000 but many who own one do.

      Thx for the comment!

      • Maybe the M9 inst worth 10 times as much, but the overall quality of pictures taken with the M9 is evident. The M9 pics have an almost timeless quality that doesn’t hint at being from a digital camera. The color reproduction seems really true to life. The Sony on the other hand seems a little inconsistent in quality. Seems like all Sonys have problems with color. Has anyone else noticed this?

      • Hmmm…I use the NEX-5 in only M mode with rangefinder lenses and shoot only RAW, and I don’t think the M9 makes one any better or worse of a photographer than the NEX-5 will. The M9 is a great camera, and it has incredible detail, but it doesn’t have better DR than the NEX-5. In fact, quite the opposite.

        The M9 certainly is “worth” $7K to you, because there are still cheaper rangefinder options, like the M8 and RD-1. 😉

        • Douglas, I have to disagree with you on the DR issue. I’ve used both cameras enough to draw this conclusion. Again, it’s all subjective and one’s experience and circumstances may differ. For me, like for Steve, the real world experience is more important than numbers on the screen. I trust my own eyes. M9 produces wider DR to me than any other 35mm digital camera, except perhaps Nikon D3x.

          I used to have the R-D1s and I can say it’s a great camera but very outdated by today’s standards. 6MP is painfully small if you try to print your images in any decent size. Besides, the image IQ is noticeably worse and the DR is not as good as Leica’s. And the build quality is incomparable with Leica’s. It’s good and solid but not in the same ballpark. So, I say, R-D1 is no match for an M9. M8 is closer in image IQ but again, no match for an M9. Lower cost is not a determining factor when it comes to photography. Image quality is.

          Photography is an expensive hobby. But soooo much fun!

          Cheers,
          Greg

          • Oh, I certainly agree the M9 is a great camera, and the M8 and RD-1 are no match for it, I was simply pointing out that the M9 is certainly worth $7K to Steve and many others, because they did purchase it, and rightfully so.

            I can’t get on board with the DR thing. There are too many variables, from tone curves, to exposure meter, to scene selection, to RAW converter, etc. In this case, I don’t think the numbers lie, and I’d have to see identical raws with the same lenses (lenses affect DR as well) shooting some targets to be convinced otherwise. Maybe you could send me your M9, and I’ll test it out! lol. 🙂

          • Duoglas, I can’t send you my M9 because I use it every day. But here’s the deal: you buy me a round-trip ticket from Moscow to your city, I come with my M9, we test it thoroughly together, and then I go back home with my M9. It’s a win-win: I won’t have to part with my camera and you’ll get the reliable test results.

            Cheers,
            Greg

          • well when I look at both pictures taken with the Matt behind the group… I can’t say so precisely why, but… the M9 shots are miles ahead of the NEX. Same lens, same conditions, JPG. tone curves, numbers all aside…. it looks miles better so what can you say? I mean to post this after Gregs post, but won’t let me 🙂

      • Steve, I really like your comment here. I feel the same about rangefinder photography. It’s hard to explain to those who haven’t tried it. It just changes your whole way of photographic thinking.

        But it is still the matter of personal preference. Some people may not like it even if they try it. I have a friend who is a great landscape photographer and his system of choice is Hasselblad. When he tried using a friend’s M9 for a week or two he was dissatisfied with it. Interestingly, he said it was the best 35mm digital camera he ever tried and the image IQ was not just the best in the format but actually close to the medium-format quality. He also praised the M9’s DR at basic ISO (he was quite surprised, actually). And this guy really knows what he is talking about: he shoots medium-format all the time, both film and digital. Yet, he didn’t like the M9. He said it didn’t fit his shooting style.

        I guess, you have to be inclined for the classic 35mm documentary all manual way of shooting in order to like rangefinders and in particular, the M9. Some people will never appreciate it because they just don’t like things the old classic way. Like with cars: I hate automatic transmission but many people love it. Same thing here with cameras. Some of us prefer being in control and appreciate simplicity but some of us don’t. And then again, it’s about different way of thinking.

        Recently I had my portfolio shown to one of the top photojournalists in the world. He didn’t know what cameras were used to create those images, nor did he care about it. But he noticed one thing. He asked me if I had changed the system at a certain point. He pointed to my DSLR pictures and said they looked like they were shot by a totally different photographer compared to my RF shots. Again, he didn’t know which were which: he just saw a huge difference in style and thinking. I told him that I switched to RF and he said he thought so. He also mentioned my photography had improved noticeably since my DSLR days. He said my DSLR pictures looked very conventional and ordinary but my RF pictures actually show some individuality, etc. It was very important and encouraging for me to hear.

        So, to me my M9 is surely worth its cost. Not because I got myself a fancier gadget with a cool legend behind it but because it had changed my photographic thinking and style. And this is just the beginning. I can only imagine how it will affect my photography in a longer, say, 10-20 year, time frame.

        Cheers,
        Greg

      • I totally agree with you Steve. I don’t (yet?) own an M9, but have both a NEX-3 and a M8. The used M8 cost me 5x the price of the NEX-3, but the NEX is just not a rangefinder camera, and is nowhere as pleasant to use, even with adapted lenses.

        With regard to sensor intrinsic quality, I’d not be as assertive. I find that, with a good M lens on an adapter, the NEX image quality shines. It may not have the pixel-level sharpness of the M8 (normal), but it will rapidly outperform the M8 (and probably the M9 as well) in the high-ISOs department.

        With regard to the post… you seem to have a great time with Seal… we are all jealous! I was amused to see the helicopter shot at the Geneva airport (“getting ready to board..”). I spent quite some time working on that radar in the background.

    • The law of diminishing returns applies to cameras as well. But to some of us, the next level of performance, (whether this being an extra 5% or 10% is irrelevant), justifies spending the additional $. To me the Nex was on of the most expensive cameras ever, since I have not touched it for the last 6-7 months or so. It was only fun in the first few weeks of ownership.
      But I don’t get tired using my M9. So whilst I wasted hard earned money with the Nex, I certainly did not with the M9. It is this subjective.

      • > To me the Nex was on of the most expensive cameras ever, since I have not touched it for the last 6-7 months or so. It was only fun in the first few weeks of ownership.

        I guess this could apply to me as well. In fact, the Nex was even more expensive in my case as it was the camera that convinced me to buy the real thing, a Leica M.

      • Retow — great angle of view! This is what I feel, too. I don’t feel like I overspent on my M9 because I use it constantly and it gives me what I want. And I just hate it when I sometimes succumb to a GAS attack and buy some not-so-costly but all-so-useless gadget and it just joins the small army of dust collectors in my home.

        Cheers,
        Greg

  17. Wow! The tour life seems hard! All these long flights and so…but that is the price you have to pay for being a rolling stone.

  18. Love your website and your photos… Your posts are a real source of inspiration, thank you. Very cool that you are in my home country – enjoy it!

  20. Love the Matterhorn pics Steve. Its such a cool mountain just like something straight out of a child’s storybook. The top of the glacier is stunning and the building at the top can reflect the mountains amazingly. I have attached a couple I took earlier this year.
    [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/L9994214.jpg[/img]
    [img]http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/L9994220.jpg[/img]

  21. Great, shots Steve. Looks like a wonderful trip!

    As for DR differences, you’re likely just looking at metering differences, not DR differences. If you expose each camera with similar histograms, and then raise shadows in post, you should see around a .5 EV advantage in shadow detail with the NEX at base ISO, and slightly more as the ISO increases. I think the M9 just happens to jive with your particular work flow better…assuming you shoot RAW. I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if the M9’s jpegs are killing the NEX-5’s jpegs.

    Using auto modes with NEX tends to overexpose a bit compared to my other cameras, which can lead one into believing there is less highlight range. I just shoot in M mode myself with the NEX, and use the histogram as a guide, so it isn’t an issue for me, but you could just dial in some negative exposure comp to deal with it.

  23. Working at my desk with stacks of paper in front of me, this makes me envious. Location and M9-wise… enjoy the trip!

  25. Zermatt is such a great place. Went boarding there a couple of seasons ago, very photogenic place. Expensive too! Great shots Steve. Makes me want to go back!

    • Yea, it IS expensive but basically a ski resort town. Loads of over priced shopping, food, bars but thats the price you pay to vacation here. It is gorgeous!

  27. Wonderful shots from the most beautiful ski resort in the world. And since you don’t want start skiing, try snowboarding, it’s a lot of fun.

    • Well, too late as the show is tomorrow and we leave hours later for home. Maybe next time as it would be cool to come here again one day before I die 🙂

      • Steve, make sure you go there many days before you die. When you’re 100 years old and are going to die the next day it ain’t gonna be much fun out there in the mountains.

        This is my weird way to wish you a very happy 100 years of beautiful life.

        Thanks for the pictures. I love the Helli shot of the mountains. Sony Nex may not be the perfect camera for this kind of photography but that shot looks great!

        Cheers,
        Greg

  28. Hi Steve!

    Lovely shots…and so much different from the shots in South America/Africa.

    Looks more familiar to me (Austria just east of Switzerland).

    😉

Comments are closed.