A way towards the m9 ?

[robert blu]

Preamble: I'm happy user of an m7 (0.58), and a Bessa R as RF, plus other various film cameras. I make both, B&W and color with hybrid workflow.
My wife shoots SRL. We have no digital cameras. I like scanning but I do not like de-dusting the good frames with PS, it takes a lot of time.

Fact: sometimes I would like to have the benefits of a digital camera (variable iso, possibility to print pictures without the need to arrive at the end of the film etc). This brought me to think that I need (GAS?) a digital camera beside the m7. Or to have an m9. But I 'm not sure that the digital workflow will be good for me . Probably yes, but...

Proposal: looking at various possibility I decided that camera like canon G...or Nikon P 7000 are good but the viewfinder is not what I'm looking for. So my (leica) dealer show me the x1. I know the let's call negative point about it, fixed lens (but 70% of times I have the 35 on the m7), slow autofocus (but it is possible I can live with it thinking the kind of photo I take). But it is a small camera (size is important for me) and there is a real viewfinder. The idea is to buy that with the agreement that if I like the "all digital way of life" I can trade the x1 for an m9 without loosing too much money.

What could happen next:
a - I'm happy with the x1 beside the m7 and do not feel the need of an m9.
b - I'm enthusiast of all digital and trade the camera for the m9.
c - I'm not happy with x1 and can trade it versus some other Leica material (lense etc) or I can re-sell it.

I'm just curious if anyone made a similar experience, to get an m9 via a x1 as less expensive camera (intermediate step). I do not think about the m8 or 8.2 because I like to shoot wide angles.

I know it is me who has to take the decision , just curious about possible comments rom more experienced users.
regards
robert

 

[monochromejrnl]

How is the X1 better than the Gseries or P7000 from a viewfinder point of view?

Like the other two, the X1 is a digital liveview P&S (but with a large APS-C censor), slow autofocus and a great (non-interchangeable lens).

It is nothing like the M8/M8.2 or M9 and you should not be fooled by your dealer into believing that just because it has a red Leica dot on it that the are.

There really isn't anything in the digital realm that closely approximates the workflow process of a digital M other than a RD-1/S.

My suggestion is to GF-1 or NEX - (the latter if you don't care to use an external VF - the G series has a hot shoe that you can fit a ext. VF to). These options cost a less than 50% of the X1 are newer cameras and unless you plan to use a tripod and print larger than 16x20 on a regular basis you might not see that much of a difference in your prints. Both the GF-1 and NEX offer the option to use your beloved Leica glass on them at a relatively low cost (for the adapters) - as well as hundreds if not thousands of other lenses.

Alternatively, save your clams and just buy a M9, no point in wasting a few hundred dollars towards an X1 only to not be satisfied because what you really want is a digital M7.

I'd buy a M9 to compliment my M3 and lenses but unfortunately I can't afford it. Instead I use a GF-1 with the superb Panasonic 20/1.7 (equivalent to 40mm). I'm able to make extremely high quality platinum/palladium prints from GF-1 files (even in JPEG mode if exposed properly - easily up to 8x10 contact prints).

Good luck.

 

[Austerby]

I stepped from an M7 to an M8 and am thinking of stepping back, so to speak. I recognise though that a decent digital camera is a useful thing to have in many ways, so if I did that I'd have a need to get something like an X1.

However, my needs from a digital camera are different from a Leica M - such as pocketablity, point-and-shoot simplicity, built-in flash etc. as I'd use it in different places: photos at parties, social events, making records of things such as work on the garden, car repairs, boat maintenance etc. Where the simplicity and quick results are useful.

I can see an X1 being a prime candidate for those situations, as would many of the products of different manufacturers.

I'd recommend you think carefully about what you want out of a digital camera before choosing the model - let your requirements dictate your choice.

 

[Rogier]

What about the Fuji x100 ?

 

[Roger Hicks]

Dear Robert,

Quite honestly, if you're happy with a film M, the only digital camera you're likely to be happy with is an M, too. An M9, at that. The M8 with 24/25/28 isn't QUITE full frame with 35. In fact, Frances and I shoot mostly 50 (=67) on M8.

At least that's my take. But you may of course react differently.

Or there's always semi-vapourware, the X100. If you're in no hurry, and don't want interchangeable lenses, and don't mind autofocus, wait and see.

Cheers,

R.

 

[back alley]

don't get too hung up on the crop factor...with using an rd1 i thought it would be something dreadful to have to get used to but in truth...not so much.
i would be very happy with an m8/m8.2...re. crop factor anyway.

if you like using rangefinders with m mount lenses the choices are severe...i like my little panasonic g1 and will sometimes add the adapter and use an m mount lens on it...but it's not the same experience at all. i will take a hard look at the x100 when it arrives on the scene but...well, who knows what that will ultimately feel like.

 

[berlincontemporary]

This brought me to think that I need (GAS?) a digital camera beside the m7. Or to have an m9.

My guess is that it will not help you take one more meaningful shot. But a lot more shots total for sure.

 

[250swb]

We have no digital cameras.

That sums things up. Buy a Canon S95 and have fun with a digital camera that gives great images (really very good), doesn't cost a fortune, learn some software in doing so, and then decide if the digital learning curve is worth it for you with a Leica M9 (don't phaff around with M8's).

And it is a steep learning curve if you have never had any digital camera, or even a recent one. But it could only be months before you know if you want to get the benefit of your Leica lenses with a FF digital body, and the Canon won't be wasted because its still a great pocketable P&S.

Steve

 

[raid]

Hello Robert,
I use mainly film cameras, such as the M6 and M3, plus other film cameras. I have no digital cameras except a Lumix DMC FZ5 with a Leica super zoom and max aperture 2.8-3.3. I was forced to mainly use the Lumix last summer when my Bessa R broke down during a 4 week Egypt trip. I very much liked the digital images from the $300 camera.

Maybe you could try such a small investment first.

The lens is equivalent to a 36mm-433mm, with image stabilizer, allowing handheld sharp images at 433mm.

 

[NickTrop]

Raid - you seem like a dyed in the wool film shooter. I'm a recent convert as far as small format is concerned. I just started getting too backlogged with undeveloped rolls of film and I really started to hate scanning. I'm very happy with my relatively inexpensive Nikon D5000 set-up w/ fixrd 35/f1.8. The FvD debate I now find silly in small format. Results are comparable, it's faster, more convenient. Truth be told it's a better tool for ambient light work. Clean images and 1000 iso = 1000 iso, not exaggerated claims on the box. Also - you can shoot color in such situations - high speed, low light, without issue. Just use manual white balance. Small format - digital. Film for medium format (of which now I am not in possession of such a camera...) Since you prefer rangefinders, it would seem to me that you would be the perfect candidate for the Fuji X100! It uses the focal length comparable to what you prefer, it's rangefinder-y. It has "Raid" written all over it. 50-50% if you get the right camera, you will recongnize the advantages and not go back in small format. Betchya.

 

[Keith]

don't get too hung up on the crop factor...with using an rd1 i thought it would be something dreadful to have to get used to but in truth...not so much.
i would be very happy with an m8/m8.2...re. crop factor anyway.

if you like using rangefinders with m mount lenses the choices are severe...i like my little panasonic g1 and will sometimes add the adapter and use an m mount lens on it...but it's not the same experience at all. i will take a hard look at the x100 when it arrives on the scene but...well, who knows what that will ultimately feel like.

The crop factor is a huge issue though if you want to shoot wide and fast. The Op mentioned being an habitual 35mm shooter which requires 25mm or thereabouts on the M8. I tried using my 25mm Biogon on my M8 in less than ideal light and soon realised I was wasting my time allowing for the M8's poor high ISO performance. For daylight shooting no problems of course!

As for Robert ... I reckon spend the money and get the M9 if you can afford it!


I've finally worked out a way I can get an M9 next year ... I'm just waiting for my replica pistol and balaclava to arrive in the mail. 😀

 

[back alley]

The crop factor is a huge issue though if you want to shoot wide and fast. The Op mentioned being an habitual 35mm shooter which requires 25mm or thereabouts on the M8. I tried using my 25mm Biogon on my M8 in less than ideal light and soon realised I was wasting my time allowing for the M8's poor high ISO performance. For daylight shooting no problems of course!

As for Robert ... I reckon spend the money and get the M9 if you can afford it!


I've finally worked out a way I can get an M9 next year ... I'm just waiting for my replica pistol and balaclava to arrive in the mail. 😀

there is the cv 12 and 15 for really wide.
the zm 21 and 25 are fabulous lenses...i shoot with an rd1 and images look great up to 1600...more speed than i normally need.

 

[Mister E]

If you're considering an X1 wait for the X100.

 

[jaapv]

What about the Fuji x100 ?

Well,for one thing, there won't be one in the shop for quite a few months...

 

[shadowfox]

Olympus E-P2 + 40/1.7 Panasonic lens covers my digital needs.
And I'm saving for Olympus 9-18mm lens.

 

[robert blu]

Thanks to you all for comments and suggestions. I'll think about it. To be honest what really surprised me of the X! was the view finder, bright, large and visible even with my spectacles. Thinking of a small preliminar investment as raid suggest, I gave a look also at the D-lux 5 (or the "very" similar panasonic) but the electronic viewfinder is too small for me, I do not like it. Another opportunity as shadowfox suggest could be an Olympus Pen with viewfinder and the 17 (FOV 34) lens. But I had no opportunity to see/test it. Next opportunity is to buy a DSLR for my wife (like the nikon 5000 or 7000) and evaluate how the digital word is for me. Eventually I could buy a prime lens for this camera, I think there is a 24mm F 1,4 G. Of course I'm aware of the rumors about the Fuji X100, which have to be considered as well. But no sure when ti will arrive on the market. Much to think about ! Grazie again for comments. Keep you informed !
robert
PS I read in this german Forum that in Germany it is possible to rent cameras leica the m9 or the x1. Maybe a short vacation there and a real test could help me. Unfortunately this service is not available in Italy.

 

[berlincontemporary]

relatively inexpensive Nikon D5000 set-up w/ fixrd 35/f1.8.

Put the image quality aside. The question is if someone is happy with a modern mass produced, full-plastic, relatively "unsexy" digital camera or not.

 

[robert blu]

Put the image quality aside. The question is if someone is happy with a modern mass produced, full-plastic, relatively "unsexy" digital camera or not.

@berlincontemporary: I'm afraid my wife would be happy with it!
And I could be more interested in the image quality ! 🙂

Thanks for comments !

robert

 

[Paul Luscher]

Well, for me it was a slow progression. After my film Ms, went to he M8 first...felt I had to face the fact that digital is the future, like it or not, and there was no point in letting my M glass gather dust.

Liked the M8, although from my point of view, it was not the perfect camera. The crop factor, for one thing--didn't like the fact that my 35mm became, for all intents and purposes, a 50mm, for example. Clumsy exposure compensation system, too. Also the IR issue, and the lens coding necessary on my old lenses--expensive, so a fair amount of my old lenses stayed uncoded and in the bag...

So, I bought the M9, justifying it on the basis that....well, it was the 25th anniversary of my first picking up a camera. (Hey, a man needs a good excuse to spend that kind of money....and I'll admit, a lot of my old film stuff--and the M8--went on the block to pay for the M9.)

Of course, that leads to the question of what I'll do when and if the M10 ever comes out...

 

[robert blu]

Well, an update from my side. The best choice had been the m9 no doubt but I did not feel relax to spend this amount of money without having had any digital experience. It is not the image quality but the process itself. For this reason I decided an intermediate step just to play a little in the digital word. Viewfinder, size and image quality brought me to the ... x1 choice. Actually I took less than 50 pictures with it (her?), not yet printed, but I' m satisfied, for what I experienced.
robert