fireblade
Vincenzo.
No, not interested......Fuji will have their FF XP1 next year 
...and if it was the new R-D2 for about $3000? very interested.
...and if it was the new R-D2 for about $3000? very interested.
jordanstarr
J.R.Starr
...well, if you're bulk rolling Tri-x, about 2333 rolls of 36 exposure plus 1 12 exposure. By the time you shoot it all, the M9M will be worth as much as your empty canisters.
In all seriousness though, you could be an M6, a good 35mm negative scanner and still have enough left over for 1500+ rolls and all the chemicals you'd need to develop it. I shoot about a 4-10 rolls a month, so even on the high end of things, I can shoot film for 12.5 years for the price of the M9M...and that camera will be obsolete in that amount of time or selling for less than the M6. Even if you throw in a used 28mm or 35mm summicron into the mix, I'd still have a killer kit (that won't depreciate in value) and film for at least 6 years.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
When making the comparison between continuing to shoot black and white film and ponying up the cash for the MM there's one hell of a difference IMO. Maybe a couple of thousand rolls of Tri-X will equate to the price of the MM but you don't have to put that money up front with film ... you buy it as you need it over whatever period it will take you to use it. That's a very different scenario to paying $7000 up front for something that is going to decrease in value substantially over the same period!
BobYIL
Well-known
I hold a different perspective for these:
I love film B&W, the way it renders, the aesthetics it provides with relatively low processing efforts. What I get with digital B&W is more sharpness, eventually higher ISO speed however all these at the cost of rendering, tonalities... For me it's not a cost factor at all, the end result is the goal and I do not need much resolution as the most impressive B&W prints for me including those I have seen in exhibitions and museums were rarely larger than 30x40cm (maybe a few.) And still my MF film camera is ready to "complement" my Leicas in case of need.
However there is the other side of the coin: I know even the new M9M with the Summicron Aspherical would not suffice to duplicate the tones I get from a modest 35mm film camera.. No way... I love to use digital for color, but not for B&W.. And once again I considered the same question with the announce of "The Essentials" if I would be offered by Leica to be granted with the latest digital for free in return of switching to digital B&W totally. Thank you very much.. I know what is the essential for me.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Two thousand rolls of Tri-X would mean shooting ten rolls per week over four years ... and in any camera (35mm) you want to use it in. I like black and white and I'm comfortable with it in the digital form but wouldn't want to be restricted to one camera. Currently I do black and white conversions from my D700 and my RD-1s that I'm quite happy with ... selling both of those would get me less than half way to the price of an M9-M.
To me it's a lot of money for a camera with such limited options!
To me it's a lot of money for a camera with such limited options!
sig
Well-known
No matter how you compare it or what you compare it against, it is not cheap. I will not get it, no way I would spend so much money.
BobYIL
Well-known
If you have a D700 and an RD-1s (assuming you already have M-lenses too) how about buying a film Leica to go with them to enjoy both worlds instead of thinking about the M9-M?
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I confess to owning an M2 ... though it hasn't had much use since I developed a preference for metered bodies.
cosmonaut
Well-known
Well I guess Leica is couldn't just add a few art filters in their firmware they had to make a whole new camera. Is this a B&W sensor only or just some firmware trickery. If its not a whole new sensor this is just smoke and mirrors and nothing that couldn't be done in Lightroom.
I can't ever recall being disappointed with something Leica has done but a truly puzzled by this. I wonder what they would do if someone hacked their firmware and just added it to the plain old M9?
I can't ever recall being disappointed with something Leica has done but a truly puzzled by this. I wonder what they would do if someone hacked their firmware and just added it to the plain old M9?
thegman
Veteran
It's cool, I like it, but I would not buy it. Even if I shot digital, I like colour too much. I do like the idea though, no Bayer filter, and it's *different*, not just another me-too product a Canikon or whatever.
I admire Leica for doing it, it looks very nice, but I would not buy one. If I was to spend that much on a camera, I'd want several, not just one. I do get why people would want one though, it's so "single minded" in what it does.
I admire Leica for doing it, it looks very nice, but I would not buy one. If I was to spend that much on a camera, I'd want several, not just one. I do get why people would want one though, it's so "single minded" in what it does.
--s
Well-known
while the m8 never tempted me (hate the cropping with my beloved 35 summicron), i instantly got hooked on the m9 and bought me a 2nd-hand one.
now i´m completely happy shooting the m9 for colour pics. for digital work it´s the wonderful feeling of dealing with a photographic tool instead of a picture taking computer.
for b & w i prefer film in my mp and hang around in my wet dark room, it´s just the real thing. no need at all for the m9m. a nice cam, but no temptation.....
now i´m completely happy shooting the m9 for colour pics. for digital work it´s the wonderful feeling of dealing with a photographic tool instead of a picture taking computer.
for b & w i prefer film in my mp and hang around in my wet dark room, it´s just the real thing. no need at all for the m9m. a nice cam, but no temptation.....
dave lackey
Veteran
My Opinion Only...YMMV
My Opinion Only...YMMV
How many days can I expect to live given my present age? A few thousand? One?
This is one of those questions and realizations of which I am acutely aware every single waking moment. That is why I don't care what something costs anymore. Materialism is temporary only and not really that important in the grand scheme of things. But, being human in this contemporary world, we all seem to have our desires. Guilty as charged. And broke.
I would rather purchase one thing I really do desire rather than a substitute at a lower price or, indeed, 10 items from Wal-mart because it is cheaper. It (the object of my shallow desire) can purchased used at a cheaper price, traded for, saved for, and even sacrificed for. Doesn't matter if it is what I want, but it does matter if I buy something only because it is cheaper.
Those things I can never afford? No worries. That's called life but I do not begrudge anyone for driving a Rolls Royce. Or wearing a Rolex. Or owning a very nice collectible. Or having a huge house. Or anything else. Again, that is just life.
The M9-M, or M-M, or whatever the actual name is... would be a wonderful tool for me in the future. It would be a business expense, not a personal purchase but it will still require sacrifice. I may not be up to that much sacrifice if I decide to get one down the road, so I enjoy life anyway.
I do not stress over trivial things like "expensive items that only rich fools buy" or feel like Leica is screwing me over because I can't afford it. If I can't afford it, tough s**t Dave! It is my own fault for not making the money to buy it in the first place! Or not willing to sacrifice other things. Either way it is my problem not someone else's.
For me, that is personal accountability, not blame.
Everyone has their own preferences and that is a good thing. The point is to enjoy life as it is too damned short.
My Opinion Only...YMMV
How many days can I expect to live given my present age? A few thousand? One?
This is one of those questions and realizations of which I am acutely aware every single waking moment. That is why I don't care what something costs anymore. Materialism is temporary only and not really that important in the grand scheme of things. But, being human in this contemporary world, we all seem to have our desires. Guilty as charged.
And broke.I would rather purchase one thing I really do desire rather than a substitute at a lower price or, indeed, 10 items from Wal-mart because it is cheaper. It (the object of my shallow desire) can purchased used at a cheaper price, traded for, saved for, and even sacrificed for. Doesn't matter if it is what I want, but it does matter if I buy something only because it is cheaper.
Those things I can never afford? No worries. That's called life but I do not begrudge anyone for driving a Rolls Royce. Or wearing a Rolex. Or owning a very nice collectible. Or having a huge house. Or anything else. Again, that is just life.
The M9-M, or M-M, or whatever the actual name is... would be a wonderful tool for me in the future. It would be a business expense, not a personal purchase but it will still require sacrifice. I may not be up to that much sacrifice if I decide to get one down the road, so I enjoy life anyway.
I do not stress over trivial things like "expensive items that only rich fools buy" or feel like Leica is screwing me over because I can't afford it. If I can't afford it, tough s**t Dave! It is my own fault for not making the money to buy it in the first place! Or not willing to sacrifice other things. Either way it is my problem not someone else's.
For me, that is personal accountability, not blame.
Everyone has their own preferences and that is a good thing. The point is to enjoy life as it is too damned short.
braver
Well-known
I think it's wonderful it exists, but it has also shown to me that digital will not provide the look I want in b&w, even if the camera was made purely for b&w. If film stops being an option, perhaps then.
What I hope is that other brands start trying to make a more simple camera now that Leica has become somewhat succesful. A black and white only Nikon FM4D for instance. Then again, I wouldn't buy that either: it's got nowhere to put the Tri-X.
What I hope is that other brands start trying to make a more simple camera now that Leica has become somewhat succesful. A black and white only Nikon FM4D for instance. Then again, I wouldn't buy that either: it's got nowhere to put the Tri-X.
dave lackey
Veteran
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
One thing that is obvious with this camera is that it's target market will be very narrow focus ... it's not going to be many people's first Leica which I suspect the M9 has been to some extent.
I also can't see any other manufacturer taking this dedicated black and white route!
I also can't see any other manufacturer taking this dedicated black and white route!
dave lackey
Veteran
Agreed...it will probably be a second body to something like the M8 or M9. I am still awaiting the images yet to be posted as it is quite a different animal from what I have seen.
The market is certainly going to be narrow. But then again, Leica products are already a narrow market. I certainly hope it does well and continues to add to Leica's recently-found prosperity.:angel:
Now where did I put that M3 again, in the bag? Heresy!
MCTuomey
Veteran
the potential of the M9M, especially with a lens like the new APO Summicron, to produce large (40x60) BW prints that match those made from medium format in detail and tonality has been observed by those who've been privileged to work with pre-production models. no doubt there will be some photographers who'll find the economics, turnaround, and ease of use associated with a M9M workflow more advantageous than MF film processing and scanning.
those of us accustomed to making 8x10 prints and the occasional 16x20 from our scanned 135 negatives were/are not the likely ultimate target market of the Leica designers.
those of us accustomed to making 8x10 prints and the occasional 16x20 from our scanned 135 negatives were/are not the likely ultimate target market of the Leica designers.
braver
Well-known
As in making pictures and selling them?
I bet it can be done cost effectively, but it's like a niche within a niche within a niche. Not for your run of the mill photog but perhaps more like one of those in the high dollar wedding market? I've seen an article about someone who uses just an M9 and a Noctilux, there must be more like that.What I think they've done is create something new to sell to some that already have an M9 (two perhaps) and a full set of lenses. What'd be interesting is if Photokina brings something that they can sell to those that are not yet buying the current offerings. However, the way other brands do it is stripping features and selling that at a lower price. The M9 however has almost no features to strip. Well color stills, but oddly enough stripping that feature only made it more expensive! (tongue firmly in cheek there
)
zauhar
Veteran
Dave, I fully agree with your observation about price not being an issue. If you use something daily, and more importantly, love it, it is not expensive.
That said, the images I have seen from the m9m look underwhelming. I would not want to shell out that kind of money and not be overjoyed (my old film leicas make me happy for a fraction of the price).
But I want to ask here - do the best film negatives (in the sense of usable information) look best to the eye? I have noticed that my negatives that have broader histograms in ps (and presumably more range) sometimes look washed-out, which is the same criticism I have seen of the raw output of the m9m.
So does the m9m have a handicap - in being too good?
Randy
That said, the images I have seen from the m9m look underwhelming. I would not want to shell out that kind of money and not be overjoyed (my old film leicas make me happy for a fraction of the price).
But I want to ask here - do the best film negatives (in the sense of usable information) look best to the eye? I have noticed that my negatives that have broader histograms in ps (and presumably more range) sometimes look washed-out, which is the same criticism I have seen of the raw output of the m9m.
So does the m9m have a handicap - in being too good?
Randy
fotomeow
name under my name
Before I blather, just want to acknowledge that there are good arguments for and against the M9M. Leica has always operated on a level of uniqueness, but didn't seem to promote the prestige factor AS MUCH until digital came out, and the prices jumped up to the stratosphere, which it seems where we are with the M9M.
The cool factor is off the charts for me, and would grab one in a heartbeat if I could afford it. However, being a M9p owner, hearing the whizz-clunk-bang of the shutter makes me cringe. And it will be no different with the M9M: an M9 copy without color filters. I love the uniqueness of this M9M camera, but detest leica for "pulling a fast one" on us, with this kind of "bait and switch" mentality.
that said, the reason I would be willing to pay 1/3 price for the M9M is that the ISO goes from 2500 to 10k (+2 stops) and I can get a reasonably priced CV 50/1.1 or a 35/1.2 (+1 or +1/2 stop faster than my Lux's): so that I can shoot in lower light without carrying a flash around, without severely underexposed fotos, or without severe hand-shake on 2 second foots in low light.
The bottom line for me: i would be willing to pay $5k for the M9M WITH a CV 50/1.1 or CV 35/1.2 (new or used). thats my breaking point, and we all have one.
The cool factor is off the charts for me, and would grab one in a heartbeat if I could afford it. However, being a M9p owner, hearing the whizz-clunk-bang of the shutter makes me cringe. And it will be no different with the M9M: an M9 copy without color filters. I love the uniqueness of this M9M camera, but detest leica for "pulling a fast one" on us, with this kind of "bait and switch" mentality.
that said, the reason I would be willing to pay 1/3 price for the M9M is that the ISO goes from 2500 to 10k (+2 stops) and I can get a reasonably priced CV 50/1.1 or a 35/1.2 (+1 or +1/2 stop faster than my Lux's): so that I can shoot in lower light without carrying a flash around, without severely underexposed fotos, or without severe hand-shake on 2 second foots in low light.
The bottom line for me: i would be willing to pay $5k for the M9M WITH a CV 50/1.1 or CV 35/1.2 (new or used). thats my breaking point, and we all have one.