Buying an M9 in 2021?

[jmonat7]

The M9 is still a great camera if you can deal with the limitations but I personally think it is overpriced in the current market. The colors are good, not great, there is also definitely a punch to the M9 photos but it's not anything that can't be achieved in post nowadays.

1. The first 2 batches of sensor replacements are still prone to corrosion because Leica just replaced the corroded sensors with a new version of the same sensor which are still prone to corrosion. Anything from 2015 and onwards are the new corrosion free sensors and are designated CCD ID 15 for 2015 and CCD ID 16 for 2016.

2. Yes. The rendition of the M9 is due to the CCD sensor and color science from Kodak, not the sensor glass corrosion. The replaced sensors render the exact same as the original sensors.

3. Don't buy an original sensor M9. It is just not worth it. Most M9's on the used market have replaced sensors and are only marginally more than an original sensor. If someone is selling an original sensor M9, know that it either has corrosion or will develop corrosion. It is not a random event, it will occur due to the way they designed the original sensors.

4. If you want an M9 but want more malleable files, better battery life, higher LCD resolution, but don't want to double the cost to get an M10, get an M262. I don't know why they are overlooked so often. The M262 is basically the updated version of an M9 in terms of simplicity and function. The M10 is great but the M262 is also great and is much cheaper.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

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

I bought the M9 10 years ago now, the M Monochrom in Dec 2012. Both have the new sensors and electronics in them. They came back from Leica "like new". They are the last of the CCD cameras made. The CCD and "offset microlens array" in them are uniquely suited for vintage RF lenses. I'll be very sad when the day comes they are "just paperweights". I was sad when my Xerox 820-II 4MHz Z80a CP/m computer blew out two years ago. Almost made it to 40years old.

The color rendition of the M9 with replaced sensor is very close to the original, but not exact. The new sensor uses different dye in the color filter array and the BG55 cover glass has a different transmission from the S8612 cover glass that it replaced.

 

[Archlich]

Current price of the M9 is driven by scarcity of copies with replaced CCD. As someone that fail to build affinity with the CCD magic, I don't think it's worth the hassle.

Meanwhile the M240 is the best bang for the buck in the digital M land. It's the first digital M without major issues and has been very reliable for the past 9 years.

 

[james.liam]

Current price of the M9 is driven by scarcity of copies with replaced CCD. As someone that fail to build affinity with the CCD magic, I don't think it's worth the hassle.

Meanwhile the M240 is the best bang for the buck in the digital M land. It's the first digital M without major issues and has been very reliable for the past 9 years.

Most M9 cameras had their sensors replaced so they aren't really "rare". Attrition takes its toll, no doubt. M240 is indeed the best value, perhaps the M262 for purists. But prices for the M10 have come down greatly since the arrival of the M10R. Didn't care for the way the M240 felt in-hand.

 

[Godfrey]

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.

You got it, Raid, couldn't agree more... I still occasionally use my Olympus E-1, despite it being 18 years old and an antique, because I really like using it and I like also the superb photos it can make. Seems to still be solid as a rock when it comes to working too. 🙂

G

 

[Godfrey]

Most M9 cameras had their sensors replaced so they aren't really "rare". Attrition takes its toll, no doubt. M240 is indeed the best value, perhaps the M262 for purists. But prices for the M10 have come down greatly since the arrival of the M10R. Didn't care for the way the M240 felt in-hand.

That's interesting ... I don't recall the M-P240 feeling any different from the M9 and only a modest bit different from the M-D 262 due to the latter's lack of LCD and half the buttons. 🙂

G

 

[james.liam]

Felt chunky. At the time, my primarily camera was an M6 so the size difference was pronounced to me. The M9M I ultimately bought just sat more comfortably in my hands, though a noisy little beotch.

 

[zoar]

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.

It looks great even degraded!

 

[zoar]

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.

I think M9s go for about $2,500 with the newer sensor these days (early 2021).

 

[zoar]

I bought the M9 10 years ago now, the M Monochrom in Dec 2012. Both have the new sensors and electronics in them. They came back from Leica "like new". They are the last of the CCD cameras made. The CCD and "offset microlens array" in them are uniquely suited for vintage RF lenses. I'll be very sad when the day comes they are "just paperweights". I was sad when my Xerox 820-II 4MHz Z80a CP/m computer blew out two years ago. Almost made it to 40years old.

The color rendition of the M9 with replaced sensor is very close to the original, but not exact. The new sensor uses different dye in the color filter array and the BG55 cover glass has a different transmission from the S8612 cover glass that it replaced.

Thanks, Brian -- does the newer sensor deliver the deep reds, blues, greens that have that punch? Also, you mentioned that the M9 vs M240 test had lossy (M9) vs lossless (M240) files. Did that cause any issues in the results?

 

[zoar]

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.

Thanks, Ko.Fe. What issues does the M10 have?

 

[zoar]

It's interesting that the M262 (now around $3K) was originally cheaper than the M240, but now is more expensive on the used market.

 

[Archlich]

It's interesting that the M262 (now around $3K) was originally cheaper than the M240, but now is more expensive on the used market.

Although the M262 was initially priced significantly "cheaper" than a brand new M240, it (like many other "E" cameras from Leica) was just a cut more expensive than a used M240 at the time, so that even non-purists can opt for it over a used M240 just for the warranty. In a word - it's a camera priced to compete against the used market. It had less room for depreciation than the M240 to begin with, and its current going price reflects this initial pricing strategy.

People at Wetzlar certainly had been doing researches well.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Thanks, Brian -- does the newer sensor deliver the deep reds, blues, greens that have that punch? Also, you mentioned that the M9 vs M240 test had lossy (M9) vs lossless (M240) files. Did that cause any issues in the results?

Compressed DNG in the M9 is the same as the M8- 8bits per color are stored, color banding is created at higher ISO, smooth transitions are lost at all settings. It is a truly bad way to compress images.

The color rendition between the old and new sensor: Pictures are affected more by choice of lenses than it is between the old and new sensor. It is close, but not exact.

With the new sensor on the M9,





And Blue.



Burgundy. My Sister had a Mustang like this, in this color.



Fire-Engine Red.



Straight exports to jpeg using LR6.
The M9 is my favorite Digital camera of all time. I see no need to replace it until it stops working and cannot be repaired anymore.

At ISO 1250, cavern tour.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Thanks, Ko.Fe. What issues does the M10 have?

Get to LUF and read M10 sub forum. Too many for such expensive camera and to list it here.

 

[David Hughes]

I have and like my M9 and use a variety of lenses on it from Leica, CZ and KMZ. It seems to like them and I like being able to use odd M39 screw thread lenses on it before trying them with a film camera.

As for rendering, I don't know what the rest of you do but after the first few days use of any camera I fiddle around with the settings to get what i like and leave it at that. FWIW I haven't had to change much on the M9 usually just what Leica lens in the menu suits the odd lenses I use. And sometimes I forget and wonder why I bothered in the first place...

Regards, David

 

[zoar]

I got an M10 but kept using my M9.

Raid: did you find that you couldn't quite get the M9 look with the M10 -- or maybe that wasn't a consideration? I don't know if it's a matter of increasing color saturation. I'm new to digital, so I'm not conversant in the methods.

 

[zoar]

Felt chunky. At the time, my primarily camera was an M6 so the size difference was pronounced to me. The M9M I ultimately bought just sat more comfortably in my hands, though a noisy little beotch.

...kinda noisy for street photography? 🙂 I guess the discreet mode can help, but the recocking has to happen at some point.

 

[zoar]

Compressed DNG in the M9 is the same as the M8- 8bits per color are stored, color banding is created at higher ISO, smooth transitions are lost at all settings. It is a truly bad way to compress images.

The color rendition between the old and new sensor: Pictures are affected more by choice of lenses than it is between the old and new sensor. It is close, but not exact.

With the new sensor on the M9,





And Blue.



Burgundy. My Sister had a Mustang like this, in this color.



Fire-Engine Red.



Straight exports to jpeg using LR6.
The M9 is my favorite Digital camera of all time. I see no need to replace it until it stops working and cannot be repaired anymore.

At ISO 1250, cavern tour.

Thanks for sharing! So re: the comparison, it wasn't (red) apples to (red) apples? 😉

 

[Archiver]

The sensor of my M9 was replaced in 2017, and I haven't noticed any significant changes in colour. My Lightroom presets work just the same. With good lenses (or heck, any lenses) the M9 produces a unique and high quality image that I'm hard pressed to find in current cameras. I find myself wanting to replicate M9 colour and look in other cameras, and not doing very well.


Is it worth it to buy a M9 now? Get one with a sensor replaced from 2017 onwards. Anything else is going to look like it's got smallpox within a few years, if it doesn't already. Make sure your intended uses don't require more than ISO 1600 or super clean images, unless you're happy to push exposure and deal with loss of dynamic range and use a lot of noise reduction.



I've never used a M240, M10 or similar, so I can't comment about useability or look of the images. I can say that I love the look that the M9 produces, and I shoot with it almost every time I go out, especially since I got the Zeiss Distagon 35. What a lens.


M9 - Masked Man by Archiver, on Flickr


M9 - Two May Enter by Archiver, on Flickr


M9 - Relaxing with Cascade by Archiver, on Flickr