lencap
Established
First, a thank you for this forum. I joined years ago asking for advice and that led me to a M7, which I'll discuss in a minute. Without the encouragement and fine advice I received on this site I would never have taken the plunge.
I've read many posts on this forum about the M9 and other models, but I remain undecided. I'm a high end camera novice, but I still own a Nikon FM2. The problem is that the camera is pretty large with the lens attached and even though the telephoto provides a lot of reach the camera is too heavy to take with me everywhere.
I just reached age 60 and have a young grandson. Since his birth I've been using a variety of digital cameras to capture his life. As I look at them now in a larger format than a camera viewfinder I realize that they are all flawed - grainy, unclear, poorly imaged, etc. I won't have the chance to take those pictures again - he grows every day.
I sold the M7 after a few months of use. I loved the idea of a Leica, but found the delay of developing pictures and waiting quite a while to see them left too much of a gap between taking the pictures and seeing the result for me to learn much about composing, exposing and framing the shot. That's the same issue I've had with the Nikon. I've read several books, but there is nothing like hands on experience, and that takes time.
I went to the local dealer and discussed my desire to try a digital Leica and my history with the M7. He was friendly and suggested several options, including film based Leicas if cost was the overriding factor. He thought that he could find a used M8 in $2,200 - $2,500 range. I was interested and asked him to let me know what he finds.
The more I think about it the less certain I am that I made the right decision by considering the M8. I've read about the M8 controversy and without commenting on it ,that isn't my biggest issue. The issue is that eventually I'll want a full frame digital camera. So the real issue is the lens kit and cost.
With the 1.33 adjustment factor for the M8 I'm not comfortable with my lens choices. From what I've read the new Leica Elmarit lens line offers very fine value, but the M8 seems to be best at lower ISO settings and I'm not sure that the Elmarit lens options have enough low light speed to mate well with the M8. I realize that there are "better" Leica lens choices, but at my level of skill they would be overkill. Used is an option, but I've had pretty bad experiences with used Nikon lenses over the years.
To get a 35/50/90 lens kit equivalent for the M8 the closest I can come is the Elmarit 28mm, 35 and 50 lenses. They would convert to 37/47/67. And that is the problem. For me the 28/35/50 isn't a wide enough focal length spread. I'm not really sure I'd use the 67 equivalent at all, and the 28/35 converted to the M8 factor only allows a spread of 37/47 - way too tight. Moving to the 35/50 converts to 47/67 - a bit odd from my experience and not at all consistent with my prior shooting experience. The 75 is probably a better options, that gives me a 100 equivalent.
So saving a lot of money on the used M8 results in an investment of over $3K in Elmarit 28/35 lenses that may not have enough speed for the M8. If I spend the extra money up front on the M9, I can at least get a conventional 35/50 lens selection and have a bit better choice of focal lengths.
It seems to me that one choice is to get the M8 with the Elmarit 35/f2.8. If i find that that works for me, great. If not, I can resell the M8 and recycle the 35mm lens for the M9. I also believe that with the M9 I can raise my ISO setting to 640 or so, and at that setting the Elmarit f/2.8 lens may be all I need. The problem with that solution is that my grandson will keep growing and by the time I get everything sorted out the whole reason for getting the camera may be passed.
I can go Canon 5D or a similar Nikon, but the size of their lens options is a major problem for me. I want the ability to take candid shots easily. That, to me, is what Leica was built to accomplish.
So, for those of you who have had experience with Leica M8/9, what do you think? Is the M9 worth $7K versus a used M8 at $2,400? All digital cameras depreciate, and I realize Leica is no exception, but a full frame sensor with the ability to use all Leica lenses is a pretty impressive piece of gear. I would guess the M9 falls to $3,500 in 5 years at which point the M8 will be $1,000-$1,500. So the real difference is about $2,000-$2,500, not meaningless, but not as significant as the initial price suggests.
By the way, the extra money I save for the M8 will go into a college fund - a far better investment than any camera, even a Leica.
Thank you in advance; your comments are welcome.
I've read many posts on this forum about the M9 and other models, but I remain undecided. I'm a high end camera novice, but I still own a Nikon FM2. The problem is that the camera is pretty large with the lens attached and even though the telephoto provides a lot of reach the camera is too heavy to take with me everywhere.
I just reached age 60 and have a young grandson. Since his birth I've been using a variety of digital cameras to capture his life. As I look at them now in a larger format than a camera viewfinder I realize that they are all flawed - grainy, unclear, poorly imaged, etc. I won't have the chance to take those pictures again - he grows every day.
I sold the M7 after a few months of use. I loved the idea of a Leica, but found the delay of developing pictures and waiting quite a while to see them left too much of a gap between taking the pictures and seeing the result for me to learn much about composing, exposing and framing the shot. That's the same issue I've had with the Nikon. I've read several books, but there is nothing like hands on experience, and that takes time.
I went to the local dealer and discussed my desire to try a digital Leica and my history with the M7. He was friendly and suggested several options, including film based Leicas if cost was the overriding factor. He thought that he could find a used M8 in $2,200 - $2,500 range. I was interested and asked him to let me know what he finds.
The more I think about it the less certain I am that I made the right decision by considering the M8. I've read about the M8 controversy and without commenting on it ,that isn't my biggest issue. The issue is that eventually I'll want a full frame digital camera. So the real issue is the lens kit and cost.
With the 1.33 adjustment factor for the M8 I'm not comfortable with my lens choices. From what I've read the new Leica Elmarit lens line offers very fine value, but the M8 seems to be best at lower ISO settings and I'm not sure that the Elmarit lens options have enough low light speed to mate well with the M8. I realize that there are "better" Leica lens choices, but at my level of skill they would be overkill. Used is an option, but I've had pretty bad experiences with used Nikon lenses over the years.
To get a 35/50/90 lens kit equivalent for the M8 the closest I can come is the Elmarit 28mm, 35 and 50 lenses. They would convert to 37/47/67. And that is the problem. For me the 28/35/50 isn't a wide enough focal length spread. I'm not really sure I'd use the 67 equivalent at all, and the 28/35 converted to the M8 factor only allows a spread of 37/47 - way too tight. Moving to the 35/50 converts to 47/67 - a bit odd from my experience and not at all consistent with my prior shooting experience. The 75 is probably a better options, that gives me a 100 equivalent.
So saving a lot of money on the used M8 results in an investment of over $3K in Elmarit 28/35 lenses that may not have enough speed for the M8. If I spend the extra money up front on the M9, I can at least get a conventional 35/50 lens selection and have a bit better choice of focal lengths.
It seems to me that one choice is to get the M8 with the Elmarit 35/f2.8. If i find that that works for me, great. If not, I can resell the M8 and recycle the 35mm lens for the M9. I also believe that with the M9 I can raise my ISO setting to 640 or so, and at that setting the Elmarit f/2.8 lens may be all I need. The problem with that solution is that my grandson will keep growing and by the time I get everything sorted out the whole reason for getting the camera may be passed.
I can go Canon 5D or a similar Nikon, but the size of their lens options is a major problem for me. I want the ability to take candid shots easily. That, to me, is what Leica was built to accomplish.
So, for those of you who have had experience with Leica M8/9, what do you think? Is the M9 worth $7K versus a used M8 at $2,400? All digital cameras depreciate, and I realize Leica is no exception, but a full frame sensor with the ability to use all Leica lenses is a pretty impressive piece of gear. I would guess the M9 falls to $3,500 in 5 years at which point the M8 will be $1,000-$1,500. So the real difference is about $2,000-$2,500, not meaningless, but not as significant as the initial price suggests.
By the way, the extra money I save for the M8 will go into a college fund - a far better investment than any camera, even a Leica.
Thank you in advance; your comments are welcome.
Last edited:
hipsterdufus
Photographer?
The answer is that it's subjective.
david.elliott
Well-known
"By the way, the extra money I save for the M8 will go into a college fund - a far better investment than any camera, even a Leica. "
Doesn't that say it all?
Doesn't that say it all?
Vics
Veteran
No, it's not.
> Is the M9 Worth the cost?
The answer is "is it worth the cost to you?"
You would probably get most of the shots that you want with a used M8, for about 1/3 the cost of the M9. If having the best Digital Leica, no crop factor compared with 35mm film, no need for IR cut filters, 18MPixels vs 10.2MPixels, and improved sensor performance is what you need to get photographs of your grandchild- the answer is yes.
My suggestion: get the used M8. You sold the M7 rather quickly. Get the M8, determine if you really want a Digital RF. Buy the 35mm lens for it, and a 50mm lens. If you really like it, you can sell it for close to what was paid for it- and then upgrade to an M9.
The answer is "is it worth the cost to you?"
You would probably get most of the shots that you want with a used M8, for about 1/3 the cost of the M9. If having the best Digital Leica, no crop factor compared with 35mm film, no need for IR cut filters, 18MPixels vs 10.2MPixels, and improved sensor performance is what you need to get photographs of your grandchild- the answer is yes.
My suggestion: get the used M8. You sold the M7 rather quickly. Get the M8, determine if you really want a Digital RF. Buy the 35mm lens for it, and a 50mm lens. If you really like it, you can sell it for close to what was paid for it- and then upgrade to an M9.
kevin m
Veteran
A Canon or Nikon body with a prime lens mounted isn't that big, and it will keep up with moving grandkids better than a film or digital M.
Darshan
Well-known
You gave all the theoretical reasons to get an M9.
Question for you is: if you have the funds, why shouldn't you get the M9? I would get it if I were you...
Question for you is: if you have the funds, why shouldn't you get the M9? I would get it if I were you...
edmelvins
Beardless User
I'd have to agree with this one.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Subjective is an understatement!
Having owned an M8 I would have an M9 no problems because the things that annoyed me about the M8 would be gone ... crop factor, crop factor, crop factor!
I cannot muster the price of the M9 by a long shot now or in the forseeable future ... but if I was close to being able to afford it I'd make sacrifices to go that extra bit and get one! In the meantime my D700 does everything the M9 can do and then some ... so I'm not suffering!
I don't know what your financial situation is but if your close then take the leap of faith and get one because I don't see that there will be any regrets involved.
Having owned an M8 I would have an M9 no problems because the things that annoyed me about the M8 would be gone ... crop factor, crop factor, crop factor!
I cannot muster the price of the M9 by a long shot now or in the forseeable future ... but if I was close to being able to afford it I'd make sacrifices to go that extra bit and get one! In the meantime my D700 does everything the M9 can do and then some ... so I'm not suffering!
I don't know what your financial situation is but if your close then take the leap of faith and get one because I don't see that there will be any regrets involved.
Paddy C
Unused film collector
Allow me to save you oodles of money, and start a good fund for your grandson...
Buy something other than a Leica.
Buy a Pentax K-x. A Panasonic GF1. An Olympus E-PL1. A Panasonic GH1. A Sony A33. Just buy something good that's not a Leica.
The truth is that any of these cameras will do very well up to ISO800 and a couple of them well beyond. They all auto focus allowing you to keep up with your increasingly fast moving grandson. They all offer a far broader range of lens lengths. They allow you to shoot some video (don't rule this out). And any of them, including a selection of lenses, can be had for the price of a single Leica lens.
And the bigger, uglier truth is they will all, in many circumstances, produce images that are on par with the Leicas.
Buy something other than a Leica.
Buy a Pentax K-x. A Panasonic GF1. An Olympus E-PL1. A Panasonic GH1. A Sony A33. Just buy something good that's not a Leica.
The truth is that any of these cameras will do very well up to ISO800 and a couple of them well beyond. They all auto focus allowing you to keep up with your increasingly fast moving grandson. They all offer a far broader range of lens lengths. They allow you to shoot some video (don't rule this out). And any of them, including a selection of lenses, can be had for the price of a single Leica lens.
And the bigger, uglier truth is they will all, in many circumstances, produce images that are on par with the Leicas.
Last edited:
Colin Corneau
Colin Corneau
I can't believe a person who admits he needs more 'hands on experience' and could stand to 'read some books' on the topic...is contemplating spending $10K+ on a camera (singular!).
I mean no offense by that. I just suggest that unless someone is making a living from it, the M9 represents a vanity purchase. If your issue is candid photography of your grandson, you're far better off spending less -- either on a used Leica (you can have fast turnaround on film work...it just takes effort, like anything else worth doing) or on another brand which will allow you to achieve your stated goal.
Any camera system takes effort. If you're set on digital, there are any number of brands, both rangefinder and SLR, which will work fine. Most aren't heavy or oversized, and combined with a small fast prime you'll be in fine shape.
I've had great luck, as a working professional, with a Lumix LX-3 for any candid snaps on my day off. It's even got Leica glass! I would suggest you work on your technique, rather than thinking you can find the answers in gear alone.
I mean no offense by that. I just suggest that unless someone is making a living from it, the M9 represents a vanity purchase. If your issue is candid photography of your grandson, you're far better off spending less -- either on a used Leica (you can have fast turnaround on film work...it just takes effort, like anything else worth doing) or on another brand which will allow you to achieve your stated goal.
Any camera system takes effort. If you're set on digital, there are any number of brands, both rangefinder and SLR, which will work fine. Most aren't heavy or oversized, and combined with a small fast prime you'll be in fine shape.
I've had great luck, as a working professional, with a Lumix LX-3 for any candid snaps on my day off. It's even got Leica glass! I would suggest you work on your technique, rather than thinking you can find the answers in gear alone.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
Sorry, no experience with either the M8 or M9, but one thing you said really jumped out at me. If you find that the weight of the FM2, about 540 grams, is too heavy then an M9 at about 585 grams will not help you much in that department. I am not you so I won't recommend one way or the other. I only know what I would do.
Bob
Bob
bwcolor
Veteran
I didn't buy the M9, but that doesn't mean that you shouldn't. I only shoot photos of my two girls, but seem to find time after working 60+ hrs per week to shoot film and scan. My Bronica RF645 and Mamiya 7ii loaded with Ektar 100, or any one of a number of b&w films gives me grainless 12"x18" photos and they have a much greater three dimensional look than the same sized photos from my 1DMKIII. That said, I decided that the M9 was not the ideal camera for me. I'll consider the M10 and I'm really interested in the Fujifilm X100 in that it looks really promising.. much like politicians look promising before they are sworn into office. I've got to say that there is something really special about medium format film and medium format rangefinders. I can understand not enjoying the scanning workflow. You really need to answer your own question.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Note that I'm heavily committed to film (see my camera list below) but I eventually got a digital for those times when a quick or easy result is needed. I got a Panasonic GF1 which also takes my M-mount lenses with an adaptor, has a crop factor of 2:1, produces good images up to ISO800 and mostly on automatic everything when I have a m4/3 lens attached. It's about the same size as my M6 but not as heavy. The EVF is woeful compared to a Leica or Voigtlander but it's better than peering at the back of the camera.
Everything is a compromise - even the M9 is a compromise when the money is concerned. I think a micro 4/3 camera might well give you most of what you are looking for but in terms of user satisfaction it might be one of those compromises too.
Everything is a compromise - even the M9 is a compromise when the money is concerned. I think a micro 4/3 camera might well give you most of what you are looking for but in terms of user satisfaction it might be one of those compromises too.
The Meaness
Well-known
I don't know that it's a good idea to spend that much money on a camera unless you're 100% certain it will suit your needs significantly (3x) more than any other digital 35mm camera.
Then again, if you have the money you may always be tempted by it's lore, and I suppose you can resell like you did the M7.
So the real questions are: if you go cheaper (M8, FF SLR, etc.) will you still feel the burning need to have and really try an M9? If so, is the 'rental' cost worth it to you, assuming after a few months you realize it isn't something you truly need or even want and resell at a lower price?
Then again, if you have the money you may always be tempted by it's lore, and I suppose you can resell like you did the M7.
So the real questions are: if you go cheaper (M8, FF SLR, etc.) will you still feel the burning need to have and really try an M9? If so, is the 'rental' cost worth it to you, assuming after a few months you realize it isn't something you truly need or even want and resell at a lower price?
Last edited:
MCTuomey
Veteran
Choose whichever camera catches your fancy. The M7 didn't do it for you, so why not try an M9? It's value (or worth) is its price - the market is pretty clear on that point. Whether you spend your money on a trust fund or a nice camera, well, you get to make that decision in the privacy of your camera closet. No one can help you there - some things a person has to do alone.
Colin made a suggestion that makes sense to me. If you're not happy with your pictures, work on your technique, no matter what camera you end up buying. If you're going to rely on a gear change to improve the quality of your pictures rather than skill development, you've probably got your priority misplaced. The M9 can take terrible pictures too, by the way.
Colin made a suggestion that makes sense to me. If you're not happy with your pictures, work on your technique, no matter what camera you end up buying. If you're going to rely on a gear change to improve the quality of your pictures rather than skill development, you've probably got your priority misplaced. The M9 can take terrible pictures too, by the way.
Last edited:
Alpacaman
keen bean
I would advise against an M9 - there are SLRs that can do the job at much less cost. And they photos they give will be more than good enough - and they are replaceable - and plenty of them are small and light. Even a fixed lens point and shoot - a good one like the much anticipated Fuji X100 - sounds like it would fit the bill better. If you must use an RF, then buy the M8.
The college fund is more important that the camera, and in all honesty I do not think that photos of your grandchild will need the sublime quality of an M9, unless they are getting put on the back of a bus.
The college fund is more important that the camera, and in all honesty I do not think that photos of your grandchild will need the sublime quality of an M9, unless they are getting put on the back of a bus.
Harry S.
Well-known
Id go the 5D2 or D700. You'll save a lot of money and have autofocus and stronger high ISO performance. My best friend has a 9month old baby boy and Ive been taking photos of him since he was 2 weeks old. My 5D shots with the 35mm f1.4 lens far exceed the quality of my rangefinder shots in this application.
Rangefinders are great for a lot of different photography types, but SLR's take the cake for kids and sports IMO.
Rangefinders are great for a lot of different photography types, but SLR's take the cake for kids and sports IMO.
mathomas
Well-known
If you have your heart set on a digital M, try a used M8 with a VC 35mm f/1.4. You can live with one lens during this trial period. The VC 35mm is good under a variety of lighting conditions. If you don't like the M8's handling you won't like the M9's. If you don't like the combo at all, sell the body and lens (you won't lose much, if anything, on the M8) and just get something else. If it turns out you like the M8 except for the crop factor, then buy the M9.
You could even rent something like the above (with a better lens, if you like) and have no risk at all.
Someone above mentioned that the M8/9 won't save you much weight. That's true. They save some bulk over an SLR, but not much weight.
You could even rent something like the above (with a better lens, if you like) and have no risk at all.
Someone above mentioned that the M8/9 won't save you much weight. That's true. They save some bulk over an SLR, but not much weight.
Rogier
Rogier Willems
If you have tho ask, you cant afford it...:bang: