noimmunity
scratch my niche
Ever since the announcement of the M9, I've just taken as inevitable the idea that one day, eventually, I'd be heading towards a FF dRF, with a potential paring-back in my current lens line up. (I'm still shooting film, and will continue to do so...). Based on this logic, I've been patiently eyeing wide angles that would complement FF digital RF. ZM C Biogon 21/4.5 out, Leica Elmar 24 or 21, in.
But now I'm beginning to question that logic.
The price of the M9 and its eventual successors are not, in my case, to be taken lightly. And with a body that expensive, I cannot see how I could possibly allow myself to use it for traipsing about in the wilderness on multi-day backpacking trips. I've taken the M8, but with a body that costs (new) 3x that, the risk is too great.
With the release of the Nex 7 and the GXR M module, there are more and more excellent crop bodies appearing.
I'm beginning to think that it would make a lot more $en$e to keep the M8, for my RF fix, complementing it with something like a Nex or a GXR for excellent high ISO as well as a body that would be great for use in the backcountry.
Lens-wise, this would mean committing to one or two super wide angles, like the ZM 18/4, that would complement the crop factor. (Used to have that ZM 18, got it for a steal, loved it, and foolishly parted with it)...
Two different paths for the years ahead. A big decision. Anybody else (been) in that situation?
But now I'm beginning to question that logic.
The price of the M9 and its eventual successors are not, in my case, to be taken lightly. And with a body that expensive, I cannot see how I could possibly allow myself to use it for traipsing about in the wilderness on multi-day backpacking trips. I've taken the M8, but with a body that costs (new) 3x that, the risk is too great.
With the release of the Nex 7 and the GXR M module, there are more and more excellent crop bodies appearing.
I'm beginning to think that it would make a lot more $en$e to keep the M8, for my RF fix, complementing it with something like a Nex or a GXR for excellent high ISO as well as a body that would be great for use in the backcountry.
Lens-wise, this would mean committing to one or two super wide angles, like the ZM 18/4, that would complement the crop factor. (Used to have that ZM 18, got it for a steal, loved it, and foolishly parted with it)...
Two different paths for the years ahead. A big decision. Anybody else (been) in that situation?
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Understand your point of view, but I looked at it a bit differently when I got my M9. If I'm spending all that money on this camera, I want to get the most use out of it, and use it to its fullest extent. That does include traipsing about in all kinds of situations, and not regard it as some kind of precious jewelry to be squirreled away and only used on special occasions. Now, I still enjoy using my Olympus E-P2 and have actually used it for commercial jobs, but I've never hesitated to use the M9 in a given situation due to its cost. The cost was only really a factor prior to purchasing it, as it took a while to save the money, and yes it is quite a chunk to lay down on something like a camera body. But in the end (for me) it was worth it.
dct
perpetual amateur
I do similar considerations for the future despite the fact I don't own a digital camera for M lenses at the moment. I'm using only film RF but I begin thinking differently when I'm choosing a new M lens. That's because until one year ago I still was dreaming of a FF M9 alternative and that would mean no difference in field of view.
But nowadays, looking at the uprising valuable alternatives with 1.5x crop (NEX/GXR), I suppose my first "digital RF" will be one of Sony or Ricoh. I call them "digital RF" like you, because of the M mount capability and the EVF with focusing support technologies.
This decision had taken place, because I don't see any affordable FF digital RF body at the horizon. And this will of course influence my ongoing M lens acquisitions. I like my full frame FoV with 28 and 50mm (soon a 15mm) with my film RF. If I want a similar FoV with a 1.5x crop camera, I will have to add some lens to achieve a similar FoV with a digital RF. And I have to trust on the body manufacturer to get a native 10mm prime for FF wide angles around 15mm.
It is not my favorised 100 % perfect solution. But, hey: The whole live is around compromises and so may be my hobby too.
But nowadays, looking at the uprising valuable alternatives with 1.5x crop (NEX/GXR), I suppose my first "digital RF" will be one of Sony or Ricoh. I call them "digital RF" like you, because of the M mount capability and the EVF with focusing support technologies.
This decision had taken place, because I don't see any affordable FF digital RF body at the horizon. And this will of course influence my ongoing M lens acquisitions. I like my full frame FoV with 28 and 50mm (soon a 15mm) with my film RF. If I want a similar FoV with a 1.5x crop camera, I will have to add some lens to achieve a similar FoV with a digital RF. And I have to trust on the body manufacturer to get a native 10mm prime for FF wide angles around 15mm.
It is not my favorised 100 % perfect solution. But, hey: The whole live is around compromises and so may be my hobby too.
Last edited:
noimmunity
scratch my niche
That's the way I use cameras, myself.
BUT...
It would be impossible for me to replace the M9 should something happen to it.
Plus, for landscape photography, the RF viewfinder experience really isn't that important to the process of composition. Neither does the RF focusing mechanism bring great advantage.
What IS cool for landscape photography is: no AA filter, excellent colors, and portability.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
btgc
Veteran
If I baby camera or lens, it certainly is one of those for which I paid more than I feel comfortable to loose in a eyesight. But then I don't insure any of them.
Fraser
Well-known
It would be impossible for me to replace the M9 should something happen to it.
That's why you have insurance, I would feel the same way walking about with my m9 without it.
That's why you have insurance, I would feel the same way walking about with my m9 without it.
Last edited:
deerstalkr
Established
I understand your concerns regarding taking an M9 into a harsh environment, and I will not tell you what to do or not to do with your gear. I do try to make the most of my gear, and I try to refrain from treating my gear like a newborn.
I own a NEX-5, it's a fantastic camera that I enjoy shooting with and the ability to mount M lenses and virtually any other lenses I might be interested in makes it much more likeable. Of course, it lacks the Leica feel and experience, but I'm not really complaining; I don't find the NEX-5 to be fulfilling as a Leica substitute, but it is a great camera in its own right. I trust that you will make the right choice for yourself.
I own a NEX-5, it's a fantastic camera that I enjoy shooting with and the ability to mount M lenses and virtually any other lenses I might be interested in makes it much more likeable. Of course, it lacks the Leica feel and experience, but I'm not really complaining; I don't find the NEX-5 to be fulfilling as a Leica substitute, but it is a great camera in its own right. I trust that you will make the right choice for yourself.
sanmich
Veteran
Having only one of your main camera with no backup is always a problem, mainly due to the need of occasional repair.
In the RF realm, I also use two cameras at a time for different FL.
The unique M9 can't solve that (it can partially solve the two cameras loaded with two sorts of film.)
bwcolor
Veteran
Time and the onward march of technology will allow for an M9 quality image in a small package, at a much reduced price. The question is, are you willing to wait and must it be a true full-frame rangefinder?
sepiareverb
genius and moron
I think that if one is always going to worry about the pieces then one isn't going to use them as well. Insurance can be one answer- I have a very reasonable policy that covers all my equipment (lots and lots) no matter what happens to it- stolen, dropped, whatever. One piece or the whole lot. Costs far less than any one of my lenses except for a beater 40/2.0.
wintoid
Back to film
@Fraser - As you're in Scotland, may I ask who you used for insurance? I am not sure how one knows whether an insurer is any good, except by word of mouth referral (and bitter personal experience perhaps).
noimmunity
scratch my niche
There's a growing chorus of the insured, here.
I'm still waiting to see how the Nex 7/GXR M face off goes.
For landscape photography, where I don't need an RF experience but the lack of AA filter is highly desirable (as can be a wide FOV), the GXR has my attention.
I'm still waiting to see how the Nex 7/GXR M face off goes.
For landscape photography, where I don't need an RF experience but the lack of AA filter is highly desirable (as can be a wide FOV), the GXR has my attention.
Fraser
Well-known
Imaging insurance they seem ok been with them for 5 years or so had a couple of claims broken 1dmk11 and a 70-200 paid out no problem.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
That's the way I use cameras, myself.
BUT...
It would be impossible for me to replace the M9 should something happen to it.
Plus, for landscape photography, the RF viewfinder experience really isn't that important to the process of composition. Neither does the RF focusing mechanism bring great advantage.
What IS cool for landscape photography is: no AA filter, excellent colors, and portability.
The remedy is called insurance.. .
I have been skiing with the M9, dragged it through little-travelled parts of Africa, covered it with dust in dry semi-desert, nearly drowned it with a sudden storm on an open boat, and I am of again into Manda Wilderness in Mozambique and Katavi and the Mahale Mountains in Tanzania tomorrow. Looking forward to using my newly acquired Super Elmar 18 for landscapes and reportage.
It has never failed me. It is a tough tool, built for traipsing through the wilderness as you put it. A backpacking hike appears to me to be rather mild use, suitable even for cameras that have become habituated to be treated as precious ornaments..,
Last edited:
dave lackey
Veteran
Me thinks you are dreaming about a new Leica M10 that will be lower priced than an M9. Probably be here sooner than 3 years, too.:angel:
noimmunity
scratch my niche
The sooner the better, but I'm not holding my breath.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Enjoy that SE 18! It's the 24 or the 21 that keep calling me...
alan davus
Well-known
Jon, I know where you are coming from. Last year I drowned my M6ttl whilst crossing a flooded river in New Zealand right at the start of a 13 day hike. The only solace I could take was from it all... at least it wasn't an M9. I love film but I've finally decided to bite the bullet and take a small digital camera (a GF1 with the new pancake zoom). Plus an M body, a couple of lenses and a bag of film would weigh at least twice as much as the GF1. If you go the Nex route let us know how it works out. Cheers, Alan
Vince Lupo
Whatever
And who even says there is going to be an M10 anytime soon? I've been waiting for the Nikon D800 for the past two years, and so far it hasn't arrived (except on the 'rumors' sites, like the M10). Nikon D700 prices are still in the $2700 range new, so that camera has clearly had a degree of longevity to it (and I am very happy with my D700). An M9 replacement might be 5 years out....who knows. And when it finally does come out, are people then going to be saying 'Oh just wait for the M11, then the prices really will come down'?