No crazy talk

[Bill Pierce]

When the Noisy Cameras site asked if you could remove one camera from the market, which one, the only camera that got 2 votes and a heated reply was the Leica M9. It seems the M9 drives people crazy.

http://www.1001noisycameras.com/201...camera-from-the-market-which-one-and-why.html

I thought it would be interesting to question Leica users about what they liked and disliked about their digital cameras with the insistence that they answer rationally, that they slow down, think about their own specific experiences and answer only in terms of those.

Here are the “likes” from my friends.

Smaller than a DSLR

Relatively accurate, parallax corrected bright line finder built into the camera

Simple, uncomplicated camera controls

Here are the dislikes

Useful, problem free focal lengths are limited in a variety of ways.

Price becomes a problem for those used to working with more than one body.

Can not stand either the “pro” or “con” Leica cults

Well, my survey was obviously limited. And I would appreciate if you would add to it. But, remember, no crazy talk about how your pictures look like Bresson’s or the camera itself is a work of art.

 

[kbg32]

Those dislikes seem very trivial and have nothing to do with making pictures for most.

"Useful, problem free focal lengths are limited in a variety of ways." - This is a very strange quote....

"Can not stand either the “pro” or “con” Leica cults" - What does this have to do with making pictures....


I can't believe it, but I am about to take the plunge in purchasing one soon.

 

[Keith]

M8 ... my likes:

Small size
Ability to utilise heritage lenses
Good IQ
Simplicity
Ease of focusing


M8 ... my dislikes:

Price
Limited ISO performance
Vague framelines
Shutter sound
Crop factor (though you know what you're getting when you buy it)
The tendency to cause people to behave like religious zealots (it's just a camera)

 

[maggieo]

I've got an M8...

Likes:
Small size.
Works like a camera, not an electronic device.
Excellent image quality.
Uses LTM and M-mount lenses of any era.
Bystanders either don't notice it or are bemused by it- completely non-threatening.
All of the things that are good about rangefinders, combined with the good stuff about digital.

Dislikes:
Noisy shutter.
IQ drops off at ISO 1250 (but as someone used to shooting HP5, not that big of a deal for me).
Right side of the 50mm framelines quite faint on mine.
On switch too easy to put in C or S/T mode.
Shutter release is a bit coarse.

 

[Keith]

I've got an M8...

Likes:
Small size.
Works like a camera, not an electronic device.
Excellent image quality.
Uses LTM and M-mount lenses of any era.
Bystanders either don't notice it or are bemused by it- completely non-threatening.
All of the things that are good about rangefinders, combined with the good stuff about digital.

Dislikes:
Noisy shutter.
IQ drops off at ISO 1250 (but as someone used to shooting HP5, not that big of a deal for me).
Right side of the 50mm framelines quite faint on mine.
On switch too easy to put in C or S/T mode.
Shutter release is a bit coarse.

Interesting about the shutter release Maggie .... there was thread about it a while ago with lots of varied opinions. Mine was pretty rough until it hit around 5000 actuations then it smoothed out considerably.

 

[maggieo]

Well, I'm up around 30,000 and it's still pretty rough, especially compared to my M2, XA or F3hp.

Oh, and to add to my list of dislikes- the dreaded vertical line problem showed up this week, so I guess I'll be shooting film this summer, as the fix requires a trip to Solms. Hey, maybe they'll polish the shutter release for me?

 

[Harry Lime]

Don't have an M9, but I'll chime in anyway...


M9 Likes:

- The M series still is the best tool on the planet for street photography.
- Long time M shooter. Simply prefer them over an SLR for most things.
- Compact. Body and two lenses fit in jacket pockets.
- Unobtrusive. From the front it barely look like a digital camera. For some reason this puts a lot of people at ease.
- Quiet shutter.
- Ergonomics / manual controls. It feels like a camera, not a computer with a lens bolted to the front.
- Manual focus lenses with distance markings for scale focusing.
- Optical viewfinder, that also shows the area visible beyond framelines.
- 1 meter frameline mask. Framing now as accurate as pre-M6 bodies.
- No IR filters needed.
- Full frame sensor
- Image quality may not be cutting edge, but good enough for me. Max iso of 2500 not a big problem for me since I shoot with fast glass (f1.4) and rarely beyond 1600.



M9 Dislikes:

- Price. I could live with all complaints listed here, if the cost was more reasonable. This probably is my single biggest complaint about the camera and the only reason why I don't own one. I would also prefer two bodies, which doesn't help...
- Lack of weathersealing
- High ISO performance beyond 2500 could be better. I would settle for a clean 3200.
- In general digital lacks the dynamic range of film. I want a digital with 12 useable stops. This complaint goes for all digital out there except for MF backs and the now defunct Fuji S5 pro.
- Battery life seems a little low, but at least they are small...
- Won't mount the Summicron-DR (But will take the Rigid)

 

[Roger Hicks]

The idea of wanting to ban the M9 seems weird to me: if you don't like it, don't buy it. So does the focal length argument, unless you want to go over 135mm or are unnaturally fond of big, slow, heavy zooms. After all, Leica offers 16 (via the Tri-Elmar) 18-21-24-28-35-50-75-90-135 and has offered 15 (albeit by Zeiss) 40-73-85-105, while you can get others' Leica-fit lenses in at least 12-15-19-20-25-40-60-100. Also (I think) 80 and 4 inch.

If people think I'm stupid, snobbish, etc., for liking Leicas (any Leicas) well, hey, that's their problem, not mine.

My sole objection is price, but again, hey, that's what an M9 costs: if it's not worth that to you, you're not obliged to buy it, and if you can't afford it, well, I can't afford a Rolls Royce, but I don't think Rolls Royce should make cheaper cars just because I can't afford the ones they do make.

Of course I'd like longer battery life, but as I don't want bigger batteries or a bigger camera, I'll live with that, and sure, I'd like better high ISO performance, but again, it beats film (in colour, anyway) so why complain?

 

[Juan Valdenebro]

I think in the end it's a price thing and nothing else... Some people are basing their critiques to M9 upon DSLRs being "better" for most of their paid/pro assignments, but if M9's price was $2990 I guess the same people would be saying hey, it's a great option too, and I found I can really do most of my job with that small beauty!

Cheers,

Juan

 

[Nikon Bob]

Like Roger, I can't understand why anyone would want to ban an M9. My likes and dislikes of the M9 are similar to Harry's and I don't own one either. I would find having an M9 an interesting option but not as Juan indicates for the price.

Bob

 

[rxmd]

The idea of wanting to ban the M9 seems weird to me: if you don't like it, don't buy it.

And that sort of holds true for every other camera on the planet as well.

What does get on my nerves a little bit is that people continuously have discussions like this one about it. Some people are irrationally supportive, others irrationally against, everybody seems to have a strong opinion. It seems to polarize people more than I'd expect from a mere camera.

It's like the iPad or the Sarah Palin of cameras.

 

[Roger Hicks]

And that sort of holds true for every other camera on the planet as well.

What does get on my nerves a little bit is that people continuously have discussions like this one about it. Some people are irrationally supportive, others irrationally against, everybody seems to have a strong opinion. It seems to polarize people more than I'd expect from a mere camera.

It's like the iPad or the Sarah Palin of cameras.

Irrationally supportive? Maybe some are, but not (I think) many: just those who are trying to justify its price to themselves. Most M9 owners wish it were cheaper, if only so they could buy another without thinking too hard. And most say, well, it's not perfect, but it's pretty damn' good and it's the only 18 MP FF RF in town.

I see more of what I perceive as irrational attacks, but then, I think it's a very fine camera and worth the money to me. The important bit is that I can't imagine trying to ban one of the current monster press DSLRs, merely because I don't want or need one. Or, for that matter, banning ANY camera, no matter how awful I find it. I don't have to buy it either.

I like the Sarah Palin analogy, though.

Cheers,

R.

 

[rxmd]

Irrationally supportive? Maybe some are, but not (I think) many

I wasn't really thinking about owners, they're only a small minority of the participants in the discussion anyway. The only thing one might dislike in some of them is conspicuous consumption. I was referring to the many people who've never taken a picture with one but for whom it's the best thing since sliced bread. I find that irrational.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I wasn't really thinking about owners, they're only a small minority of the participants in the discussion anyway. . . I was referring to the many people who've never taken a picture with one but for whom it's the best thing since sliced bread. I find that irrational.

Hard to argue with that.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Renzsu]

Those people bashing it in that topic seem to feel threatened by it somehow.. as if they feel like the M9 pushes them to justify their own camera..
I couldn't care less what those people think about M cameras, they clearly have never used one or really taken a good look at what they can do. I wish them good luck with whatever they're using, but clearly they just don't get it.

 

[jsrockit]

I think this hammer should be removed from the market because my hammer does everything it does and more at a much cheaper price.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I think this hammer should be removed from the market because my hammer does everything it does and more at a much cheaper price.

Hammer? Bourgeois! Use the heel of your shoe! Or a stone!

Cheers,

R.

 

[Harry Lime]

Hammer? Bourgeois! Use the heel of your shoe! Or a stone!

Cheers,

R.

Or a Nikon F2.
🙄

 

[jan normandale]

No practical discussion of cameras or equipment can discount the issue of price. It is a genuine factor. There was mention elsewhere here at RFF of a Rolling Stone image of Jim Marshall at Woodstock with 5 Leica cameras around his neck.

The reality is pros need to have a back up because they have got to have that insurance when on project. Therefore price is a legitimate market issue. Leica should never forget the object lesson of Sony's Beta video format nor of Ford's Edsel sedan. Failure to pay attention can be fatal for a product line.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I think this hammer should be removed from the market because my hammer does everything it does and more at a much cheaper price.

OTH buying the cheaper hammer that can do everything and more that the expensive one can do could be considered a rational decision in some quarters. Going with the more expensive one and defending it as being not perfect but the only one it it's class could seem a little irrational by the same token. You are correct, banning makes no sense.

Bob