Buying an M9 in 2021?

[zoar]

I've been trying to process the risk in buying an M9 since Leica seems to have stopped swapping sensors and maybe supporting the camera altogether.

Some questions:

1. Is the last replacement sensor (2017 on) the one to look for? Or might this corrode also in a couple of years?

2. Does the non-corrosive sensor produce the same look as the original sensor?

3. I suppose one should consider the cost of sending the camera to one of the optical firms that have stepped up, in lieu of Leica, to correct the problem. Has this worked out well, if you had to do this?

4. Just get an M10?

I did read the CCD vs CMOS (David Farkas) article and the M240 did seem to approximate the M9 look after post processing, so perhaps the flatter (more dynamic?) look of the CMOS isn't inevitable? Or is the M9 (3D) look more than a matter of color-matching? Generally the M9 pictures I see are more persuasive to me than those of the M10.

Thanks for any guidance you can provide.

 

[Fjäll]

I was late to the party and got an M9 about 2 years ago. It's a lovely camera not only to use but to look at as well. The reason why I pulled the trigger was because I got it for a steal. I would personally not fork out the cash they're priced at today. It's an ancient piece of digital technology that is very hard if not impossible to repair. I'd probably look at the M10. I haven't regretted selling the M9.

 

[jsrockit]

The M9 isn’t special enough to buy, with all of its problems, when the M240 is just a little more. Lighting, content, and framing will be more important than any sensor difference.

 

[WJJ3]

I've been trying to process the risk in buying an M9 since Leica seems to have stopped swapping sensors and maybe supporting the camera altogether.

Some questions:

1. Is the last replacement sensor (2017 on) the one to look for? Or might this corrode also in a couple of years?

2. Does the non-corrosive sensor produce the same look as the original sensor?

3. I suppose one should consider the cost of sending the camera to one of the optical firms that have stepped up, in lieu of Leica, to correct the problem. Has this worked out well, if you had to do this?

4. Just get an M10?

I did read the CCD vs CMOS (David Farkas) article and the M240 did seem to approximate the M9 look after post processing, so perhaps the flatter (more dynamic?) look of the CMOS isn't inevitable? Or is the M9 (3D) look more than a matter of color-matching? Generally the M9 pictures I see are more persuasive to me than those of the M10.

Thanks for any guidance you can provide.

From the Leica website when I checked just now:
"[...]defective sensors cannot be replaced. Until further notice, all other repairs on the M9 model generation can still be carried out".

FWIW, the M9 with the latest sensor (16) is a great camera, and I'm thoroughly enjoying mine (thanks Helen!)

Not sure about the differences in the look of the M9 CCD files compared to the files from the CMOS of the later Ms. I almost always shoot raw and make adjustments in post, so not sure if having a CCD or CMOS is better. I will say that the files I get from my M9 have a wonderful amount of highlight and shadow latitude.

 

[WJJ3]

From this afternoon with the M9 and 35mm F2.8 Summaron with goggles. ISO 160, F8, Minor tweaks in ACR.

Riryogan


For the full effect look at the photo on Flickr. For some dumb reason this forum degrades image quality of photos hosted on Flickr.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

If you can get the M9 with the new CCD at a reasonable price, buy it knowing it is 10 years old and if it breaks- might not be repairable. I have 20+ year old DSLRs that still work. The M9 with new sensor is overpriced. The M9 with corroded sensor is overpriced. The latter- several companies will replace the cover glass, a delicate operation. Too delicate to be spending $1500 on a sensor with corrosion. Spending $2500 on an M9 with a new sensor, when the M240 is costing about the same- hard to justify.

If you get one- always shoot uncompressed DNG. The test Farkas did between the M9 and M240: he used lossy compression mode for the M9 and lossless compression for the M240.

 

[swatch]

Yes if you only need rangefinder system and don’t mind it has been outdated in other technical areas.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

2017 and later is safe for good glass. It was the glass corroding not sensor. Leica Camera AG was not replacing glass, nor sensor. But entire board with sensor on it.

Non Leica services are replacing glass only. Replacement sensor Leica Camera AG was ordering is also with different glass.

I don't like colors rendering from this new sensor. I have seen only one comparison with original sensor and third party replacement of glass. I did not liked the color cast in the corners. And WB was completely different.

The difference between CCD and CMOS is very thin. Often it is not visible, but outdated sensor capabilities are shown.

To get M9 sensor look you need to be bellow ISO 640 and from my subjective POV it is better to have Leica lens mounted. And use only uncompressed DNG. Which are huge.

M10... It has same if not more amount of issues reported. The only diffrence with M9 is in avaibillity of parts. And get ready for rip-off pricing.

M-E 220 is much fresher than M9 camera, btw.

 

[Rob-F]

By most reports, the M240 is a better camera. But with that said, I wouldn't trade my M9 for the bigger and bulkier M240. My M9 feels more Leica-like. I might consider an M10, since it is still more Leica-like than the M9; but I'm no hurry. I have the latest sensor and my M9 seems just fine.

 

[raid]

I got an M10 but kept using my M9.

 

[Out to Lunch]

I have quite a few M lenses and my fallback is the Epson R-D1. Would I buy an older Leica rangefinder? No way. Would I buy the M10? Maybe if and when I can sell off gear to compensate for the cost of that purchase.

 

[james.liam]

Coming from an M6 and M9M, having skipped over the corpulent 240, the M10 is the first fully-realized M digital. It embodies the size and silent operation of film M whilst providing higher ISO usability standard in other formats.

Having said that, the cost of the M9 reflects both a 'cult status' for the CCD sensor and the fact that there are few options for use of the full array of M lenses uncompromised by the acute ray angle for WA lenses, other than on an M camera bodies or SL with an adapter. If you're comfortable topping out at ISO 640 and cost is no object, go for it. As close to an unlimited roll of Kodachrome as you'll ever find.

I'm sure you can re-sell it for nearly what you payed out if you find it limiting.

 

[raid]

I also kept my M8. It is a beautiful camera for portraits. I often use a 50mm lens or 35mm lens with it.

 

[jsrockit]

As close to an unlimited roll of Kodachrome as you'll ever find.

This is kind of true...

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I bought my M8 in Jan 2010 for $2500. It was bought new by someone in October 2009. Came with 2 batteries, a half-case, and 2 IR cut filters. 400 clicks on it when bought, looked like new. An M9 and M-E can easily get that much now, has been out of production for years and critical components are no longer available. I'll keep using mine until it will not work anymore.

 

[raid]

Then we have nice looking paperweights, Brian. This is fine with me.

 

[benlees]

If you can afford it get a later M. I'm amazed that price of the M9 didn't crash completely. As mentioned, you can try it and sell it for little lost. The strength of the Leica brand, I'm sure, is studied at various business schools. If you want the 'look' of a CCD you can get an old Nikon for $200. If you need something 'cool' then try the Fujifilm S5 Pro for a bit more- but has the Nikon mount.

 

[Darthfeeble]

All of what is said about the negatives of the M9 are probably valid, but there is just something special about the images that the CCD sensor creates. You have to want that bad enough to take the risks. I have one that has the replacement sensor and I'll not sell it.

 

[Godfrey]

Had the M9 when it was current, but never liked it as much as the later M240 series that I replaced it with or the M-D 262 that was my (so far) all time favorite M, film or digital.

Don't have any digital M at present (replaced with digital CL a few years back, and still happy with that), still have my favorite film M4-2 ... 🙂

I wouldn't buy an M9 now at all, given the variability of the sensor corrosion problems and the cost/difficulty in having the sensor replaced. The later sensor replacements should reliable, but why risk it when the prices are generally not much better than later, more reliable models that actually work better too?

Some day, maybe an M10-M ... LOL!

G

 

[raid]

I sometimes have thoughts about NOT getting a perfect camera or lens. Perfection would imply to me that everything I had that was imperfect would have to get sold then. This would remove the enjoyment factor for me. I would rather use whatever I happen to have.