Archiver
Veteran
These threads like this puzzle me.
So, cameras are precision instruments too and should be working perfectly every single day as far as possible (especially for a professional), with backups for those times they don't.
Please explain to me why anyone would abuse photography equipment and NOT take as much care as possible, especially considering the costs these days....Which leads me to ask why an M9 is not considered a pro camera and why anyone would want the camera to be as "tough" as an M3, M4, etc...I suspect they are in most respects.
I think these threads are not so much about 'how much can I slam my M9 until it stops working' and more about 'if there is an emergency situation, how much leeway do I have?'
I have always been of the opinion that you, 'take care of your things and your things will take care of you'. When I was growing up, my friends were always amazed at how new my possessions looked, while theirs were the same age but falling apart.
I baby my M9 because I paid scads of money for it, and I feel that way about objects in general. I'm not afraid to shoot the heck out of my M9, but I take care of it all the same, just like everything else I own. The M9 is a digital camera, and as such is naturally subject to vulnerabilities unknown to mechanical M's. Mind you, I treat my M7 and Zeiss Ikon with the same kind of care.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Because sometimes Dave getting the photo is the priority and the gear comes second ... a strange concept I realise!
It has little to do with gear abuse or otherwise IMO ... people who look after and treasure their tools are to be admired but some really don't care and a lifetime's use is not high on their list of priorities!
It has little to do with gear abuse or otherwise IMO ... people who look after and treasure their tools are to be admired but some really don't care and a lifetime's use is not high on their list of priorities!
dave lackey
Veteran
I can buy that in a small percentage of professionals, those that have their equipment paid for by others or make enough that the cost is not much of a problem. But most folks on RFF are amateurs. Some are rich enough not to care, I suppose, but the younger generation that I know these days consider everything disposable. My kids are that way. My students were all that way.
I use my cameras now for my only income. I cannot miss the "money shot", but I can not afford to get the shot and the gear be damned either.
I reside in the middle of the bell shaped distribution curve that defines how one uses their equipment but I tend more toward the right-hand side where taking care of equipment, whether it be fragile or not, is a priority. But that's just me....
furcafe
Veteran
Agreed, sometimes sh*t just happens no matter how careful & protective of your gear you may be. And the rougher the environment, the more sh*t there is to deal with.
dave lackey
Veteran
Personally, the threads I have seen like this are like mega-pixel measurebation, just speculation and not really related to the fact they are going on safari, going to Iraq as a PJ, or working on a documentary as a professional. Tools are to USE. And I do every single day, but I take care of my gear to minimize wear and tear. I don't sit around and talk about how tough my M3 is...I don't know how tough it is or really care.:angel:
I bought the F5, D2H and D2X for sports photography. Lots of risk there but the tools were tough enough and the day I sold them, they were all as pristine as the day I bought them, minus tens of thousands of actuations, that is... Would I have used an M9? Silly question for a sports photographer where a 300-400mm lens is required. So, sometimes, you just don't use an M9, IMO.
Last edited:
I saw a two day old Nikon D2x require a new LCD after being used once at a wedding. It was on a tripod and someone knocked it over.
One from "Tightsqueeze", Leica M8 in Iraq.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70355737@N00/3020792025/in/set-72157608856065753
at one point his M8 was dropped inside an armored vehicle, onto the metal floor. It was not damaged.
One from "Tightsqueeze", Leica M8 in Iraq.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/70355737@N00/3020792025/in/set-72157608856065753
at one point his M8 was dropped inside an armored vehicle, onto the metal floor. It was not damaged.
jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
I have had the M3 and have the M2 and have for many, many years. I have many cameras. The Canon F1, 1v, D5, D5II, 7D, and the M9 among some that I have. I have weather sealed L lenses. I don't shoot birthday parties though years ago I used to do weddings and special occasions and model photography. With my work I do not want the body size of the bigger Canon cameras as there is no reason in my work to have them. I go to very hostile environments from the Andes Mountains (Bolivia, Chile and Peru), remote areas in China, Tibet, the Southwest US and for the last year, here in Micronesia, which gets the second highest rainfall in the world.
My cameras get a very hard workout and yes, this is professional work. My M9 has accidentally been dropped from the back of my pack to the pavement from the height of 5 feet. I got a sinking feeling as I heard the metal sound. A tiny ding in the bottom metal plate was the result, even though is landed on the base and back of the camera. No alignment problem resulted and it focusses fine (I can adjust focus if needed). My M2 was dropped, about 40 years ago (geez that is a long time) and the entire top plate was out of alignment (fixed by a friend repairman). The battering my M9 has taken is more than what my SLR's go through and it still works without a problem. And what determines a pro camera? The pro does.
nobbylon
Veteran
Very good however the original post was about how tough an M9 is. Saying your Canon's can't do what your M9 can because they are too big has nothing to do with toughness.
I am in no doubt that your pro status qualifies you to call your M9 a pro camera but lets not get into a p@@@ing match. There are a few pro's on here using their M9's to make a living but many more in the photography business using Nikons and Canons. There has to be a reason for this and it's not just that they are a bit cheaper.
Here's a good test for camera companies.
Take your cameras to a nursery school and give them to the kids.
Child A has a D3X with a lens, child B has an M9. Child C has an F5, Child D a Nikon F etc etc. I wonder which would be working after a week of getting used as a hammer, door stop bla bla bla.
Too many of these posts end up with pointless statements of 'my cameras did this and that etc'.
If an M9 suits your purpose then great but really, who cares about world toughness rankings.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
No, no, no. Only Internerds can determine whether a camera is 'professional' or not: just ask 'em. The mere fact that they are actually used by professionals is completely irrelevant.
Cheers,
R.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I think you are on the wrong forum for that question. On this forum we are mainly amateurs - on LUF a sizable percentage is professional.
Given the small number of Leicas sold as opposed to Canikon it is more interesting compare percentages - not many Nikon/Canon users as a percentage are professionals either.
Last edited:
Sparrow
Veteran
Are they the same professionals as those at youarenotaphotographer
jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
What I can say is that from years of experience and hard use when I "had" to have my cameras work and I had to get the shot, I can rely on the M9 by the way it performs, if it is the appropriate camera for the type of work, now that I have seen some of the generic nasty abuse that it can take. I would use the Canon's for Nascar for example but for much of visual anthropology, I like the Leica and it takes all the bouncing around and smacks from hitting things.
Yes, I am not sure percentage wise, there are more Canon professionals than Leica, based on the number of users for each camera and the number of each sold.
Yes, I am not sure percentage wise, there are more Canon professionals than Leica, based on the number of users for each camera and the number of each sold.
furcafe
Veteran
Roger Hicks
Veteran
This is what I was getting at in an earlier post.
Any sane person takes as good care of his kit as possible, BUT
Sometimes it gets banged around, AND
It's mostly only stuff that's used for newspaper and kindred photography that gets seriously knocked around, AT WHICH POINT
Most cameras probably turn out to be tougher than most people give them credit for. Including those who baby their Leicas, or pontificate upon durability without much experience of using cameras in demanding conditions, or, indeed, in some cases, of using Leicas at all.
As for the picture being more important than the kit, a moment's thought will reveal that there must be very few occasions when it makes sense to risk the equipment, unless (a) the picture is worth more than the likely cost of damage and (b) the kit can immediately be replaced.
It's an interesting point about percentages of amateurs and professionals for different brands. Quite possibly there are fewer professional users of bought-new Nikons and Canons than of bought-new Leicas, as a percentagesimply because there are so many new Nikons and Canons sold every year.
Now calculate the percentage of cameras that are more than 20 years old and survive in both amateur and professional use, and I suspect that Leicas win hands down. And I believe that the M9 will be far longer-lived than most of its contemporaries bought in the same year, though almost certainly not as long lived as mechanical Leicas.
Cheers,
R.
Ben Z
Veteran
Mechanical cameras can seem to be working ok, but when you get the film processed, you find out the shutter sounded like it was firing in the higher speeds, but actually it wasn't opening at all. Or it looked and felt like the film transport was advancing completely, but actually you were getting overlapping frames. I've had both happen to me with mechanical Leicas. At least with electronics, the camera usually has the decency to quit functioning entirely, so you know to press your backup into service.