Is the M9 price falling with the stock market?

[Skiff]

You need 16MP for a 30x40cm print at 300dpi with no cropping, so I think a 12MP Nikon D3 would come up short even for most photographers. Of course, as I said, if you only post to the web, almost anything will do.

I have done so much direct comparisons with big prints from different film and digital cameras. MP count is much much overrated.
Using an excellent lens, having a really sharp picture and good color (or BW) are the most important things.
I've made excellent 50x75cm prints from 12 MP.

30x40cm prints from the D3(s) are made with about 240dpi.
From a normal viewing distance you can't see a significant difference to 30x40cm 300dpi prints from the D5.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I'd say if you are satisfied with the output of you 12MP cameras, then by all means continue to use them.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I`m not taking about turning night into day... I am talking about making a lower noise image at the same ISO.

To me it is little bit more complicated,
I use M-E ISO 2500 let's say for Halloween walking in the neighborhood.
With J-3 @1.5 it comes clean enough, Or it is subway and I'm using ISO 2500 and f2.8.
Or it is velodrome and I need 1/500, ISO 2500 comes again. Or it is this submarine in Manhattan and I have Orion-15 f5.6 attached. In all of these real life and taken situations I have no issues with M-E ISO 2500.
I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen.
Not a problem.
Even more complicated part is what I'm finding high ISO cameras not so pleasing as low ISO cameras. For example, to me nothing renders like Canon 5D with ISO1600 as real max. I updated to 5D MKII for more ISO and it is not as pleasing on ISO 1600 and below.
It is dual side sword, I think.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen. Not a problem.

No surprise there.

I'm printing from it on Letter size and Even more complicated part is what I'm finding high ISO cameras not so pleasing as low ISO cameras. For example, to me nothing renders like Canon 5D with ISO1600 as real max. I updated to 5D MKII for more ISO and it is not as pleasing on ISO 1600 and below.It is dual side sword, I think.

I think different people have different senses of what is "pleasing". Sounds like you prefer the rendering of a CCD sensor to that of a CMOS sensor. You like the 5D and the M-E. That's fine, but what works for you might not work for someone else.

 

[jsrockit]

I have done so much direct comparisons with big prints from different film and digital cameras. MP count is much much overrated.
Using an excellent lens, having a really sharp picture and good color (or BW) are the most important things.
I've made excellent 50x75cm prints from 12 MP.

I agree... I`ve done 20x30" or 50x75cm prints with 12mp as well... they are ok as long as you don`t get too close. However, with the latest 42mp sensors, one can print 100x150cm and have the same ok experience. It always depends on the photographer, gallery, or museum`s needs, but we`ve all seen huge prints and we`ve all seen small prints. It really depends on the space that they are displayed in if it is needed or not. I`ve seen the whole wall used as a print in museums... from bad 35mm negatives! It was still impactful.

 

[jsrockit]

To me it is little bit more complicated,
I use M-E ISO 2500 let's say for Halloween walking in the neighborhood.
With J-3 @1.5 it comes clean enough, Or it is subway and I'm using ISO 2500 and f2.8.
Or it is velodrome and I need 1/500, ISO 2500 comes again. Or it is this submarine in Manhattan and I have Orion-15 f5.6 attached. In all of these real life and taken situations I have no issues with M-E ISO 2500.
I'm printing from it on Letter size and looking at it on 21 inch screen.
Not a problem.

We expect things to look a lot different then... letter size might be ok and a small screen, obviously the same... the M9 at 2500 was a disaster IMO. These days, ISO 3200 on CMOS can be pretty clean with decent dynamic range. Sorry, but the M9 doesn`t have the best latitude at ISO 160 even. I`ve used both. It`s cool though... use what works for you. It`s all subjective.

 

[Beemermark]

" Is the M9 price falling with the stock market?"

I wish. The M9 was introduced in September 2009. The Dow was at ~9700. Today the Dow closed at 25017.

 

[Rob-F]

Oh, yes, that was the original topic, wasn't it? Good point: maybe it isn't the stock market, just that digital cameras lose value as newer ones come out.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

We expect things to look a lot different then... letter size might be ok and a small screen, obviously the same... the M9 at 2500 was a disaster IMO. These days, ISO 3200 on CMOS can be pretty clean with decent dynamic range. Sorry, but the M9 doesn`t have the best latitude at ISO 160 even. I`ve used both. It`s cool though... use what works for you. It`s all subjective.

I'm coming from ISO400 @3200 film in M4-2 perspective. I have letter sized prints from these negatives and I like them.
M-E ISO 2500 obviously lacks pixel details on 1:1 viewing. Yet, I can't classify it as the noise, but grain.

Latitude is the term I would use for how much ISO160 could be pushed. And M-E files have good latitude for it.
The thing you are criticizing is dynamic range. Just like in audio, high end equipment gives more in the low to high frequencies , the modern cameras gives more within frame. More gradations. M-E ISO160 is not high dynamic image. It is just like digitized slide.

Back to real life, in my family and among people who is using my photography all of talks like these are totally irrelevant. Nobody cares as long as image is in focus and exposed well.
M-E does it better and it doesn't feel too digital 🙂.
And nobody need huge prints among us, we are not mansion people...

But obviously, M-E and M4-2 is not the high end combo for forums dwellers, even at RFF...

 

[Archlich]

The corrosion issue drives rarity - the M9 with new sensor count far less than usual ones, thanks to Leica's highly efficient exchange program - and rarity plus the CCD image quality myth (which somehow neutralizes the digital decay by arguing the older being better) drives the price.

High prices are justified by paying customers. So in the end it's the number people with disposable income out there determines whether the bloated price could stay.

 

[shawn]

The thing you are criticizing is dynamic range. Just like in audio, high end equipment gives more in the low to high frequencies , the modern cameras gives more within frame. More gradations. M-E ISO160 is not high dynamic image. It is just like digitized slide.

Dynamic range in audio equipment is Signal to Noise ratio, not frequency response. The loudest peak compared to the quietest sound not lost in noise. Dynamic range in cameras is also signal to noise ratio. Those with lower dynamic range have more noise in the signal. Those with lower dynamic range have poorer high ISO performance as the two are linked.

Latitude is just another term for dynamic range. The difference between the brightest bright (not clipped) and the darkest dark that isn't lost in the noise. At ISO 160 the M9 has a PDR of 8.67. At ISO 2546 it is 4.82. An APSC Fuji X-Pro 2 has more dynamic range than that at ISO 10,000. The M10 at ISO12,800, Nikon Z6 has more at ISO16,000.

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#FujiFilm X-Pro2,Leica M9,Nikon Z 6

Shawn

 

[colker]

I agree... I`ve done 20x30" or 50x75cm prints with 12mp as well... they are ok as long as you don`t get too close. However, with the latest 42mp sensors, one can print 100x150cm and have the same ok experience. It always depends on the photographer, gallery, or museum`s needs, but we`ve all seen huge prints and we`ve all seen small prints. It really depends on the space that they are displayed in if it is needed or not. I`ve seen the whole wall used as a print in museums... from bad 35mm negatives! It was still impactful.

I print 100x70cm most of the time and my camera is a D700. It´s doable but far from what a 120 neg can give me. Otoh i just did a 2 day job shooting ballet w/ a Sony @7... I had to do w/ their lightning and it was dark. Dancers were running around like crazy. I set my aperture at 8, speed at 250 and fired away. My lens was a small zoom so i had to crop a lot. Camera is 16mp or 20mp and i was working at 4000 iso... i didn´t even know what i was doing cause the menu on that Sony is so miserable... but the results blew my mind. My D700 will never shoot in the dark like the Sony did. Usually, high iso was the achilles heel of digital but these new sensors ime reinvent photography at low light. It´s a miracle.

 

[Guth]

The price of M9 has been hovering around $3500 for some time.

I've recently found the price of M9 at $2500. 😱 Like this one.

https://ebay.to/2OOSqpk

Is the falling market hurting Leica lovers?

I cannot speak to the technology differences between various digital cameras but I did not get the sense that's what this thread was about. From my perspective such a pricing trend would seem like a positive one for anyone out there who has been wanting to use a M9 to make photographs with but who has not yet been able to afford one.

 

[colker]

I cannot speak to the technology differences between various digital cameras but I did not get the sense that's what this thread was about. From my perspective such a pricing trend would seem like a positive one for anyone out there who has been wanting to use a M9 to make photographs with but who has not yet been able to afford one.

A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.

 

[ptpdprinter]

I print 100x70cm most of the time and my camera is a D700. It´s doable but far from what a 120 neg can give me. Otoh i just did a 2 day job shooting ballet w/ a Sony @7... I had to do w/ their lightning and it was dark. Dancers were running around like crazy. I set my aperture at 8, speed at 250 and fired away. My lens was a small zoom so i had to crop a lot. Camera is 16mp or 20mp and i was working at 4000 iso... i didn´t even know what i was doing cause the menu on that Sony is so miserable... but the results blew my mind. My D700 will never shoot in the dark like the Sony did. Usually, high iso was the achilles heel of digital but these new sensors ime reinvent photography at low light. It´s a miracle.

The Nikon D700 is 12MP and the Sony A7 is 24MP. For your print size, I expect it was a considerable step up in quality.

 

[colker]

The Nikon D700 is 12MP and the Sony A7 is 24MP. For your print size, I expect it was a considerable step up in quality.

Otoh i didn´t like dealing w/ that camera. I could get used but nikons and Fujis give me a solid vibe and the sony doesn´t.

 

[Guth]

A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.

From my perspective the bottom line is that people like what they like. Whether someone considers certain cameras to be "better" by way of core technologies, specs, looks, etc. doesn't really matter. Everyone's preferences are different. That's why we all like different things. Some people might prefer a Leica M9 over other cameras for whatever reason and if they can pick one up for cheaper than a year ago then more power to them. I myself have never even seen a M9.

 

[colker]

From my perspective the bottom line is that people like what they like. Whether someone considers certain cameras to be "better" by way of core technologies, specs, looks, etc. doesn't really matter. Everyone's preferences are different. That's why we all like different things. Some people might prefer a Leica M9 over other cameras for whatever reason and if they can pick one up for cheaper than a year ago then more power to them. I myself have never even seen a M9.

It´s not "better" but better.

Just like Leica lenses are better and not "better".

 

[Ste_S]

One in ten thousand photographers makes a print larger than 30x40cm? I never realized I was in such an elite group. Most of the prints I see are at least that large.

I think the 1 in 10,000 figure is being generous to be honest. Majority of photography is done with phones, shared to social media and not printed. Hobbyist photographers stuff mostly lives on their hard drive, sometimes is shared to social media and is rarely printed.

The majority of people who do print mostly print 6x4", 7x5" or A4, as most people don't have inkjets that can print anything larger than that.

If you're printing at A3 or larger regularly you're in a very small group.

 

[jaapv]

A Fuji xpro2 is a much better camera than a Leica M9 because the x has more advanced technology which gives a much better image quality and it costs almost half the price, new.

I understand one may prefer the ergonomics of a Leica M9 but you are buying lesser image quality. That does not mean you will produce lesser pictures.. a good picture is more than image quality.

A Leica M9 costs nothing new. It was discontinued years ago. Although we can debate your doubtful statement about image quality - many M9 users prefer the way a ccd sensor renders-, it is rather silly to compare new prices and technology of cameras that are several generations apart.