Is the M9 Worth the cost?
- Thread starter lencap
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 104
- Views 11K
Paul Luscher
Well-known
Nusson, I wouldn't condemn the camera out of one bad experience. No camera is perfect, not even a Leica (believe it or not), and there will be individual cases of manufacturing flaws.
And I'll agree that the electronics aren't up to the level of the latest Japanese cameras. But frankly, shooting a Leica is not really about the latest technology. In a lot of ways, it's about what I call minimalism-- going back to shooting with the least amount of technology getting in the way. Doing the work yourself. Just like they did in the old days.
And I like that. I love what my DSLRs can so, but in some ways it doesn't feel like I'm really photographing when I'm using them. I just point and they do all the work. I look at using a Leica as the photographic equivalent of working out. Using a Leica FORCES you to use those photographic muscles, so to speak, keeps you sharp and keeps you fit.
For me, it's a pleasure to take out the Leica after using my DSLRs, and shoot the way I did when I first started.
Gotta admit, the LCD is not that big an issue for me. I never had that many issues when I shot JPEG, and frankly the DNGs I get out of it are killer sharp.
Just my two cents....
And I'll agree that the electronics aren't up to the level of the latest Japanese cameras. But frankly, shooting a Leica is not really about the latest technology. In a lot of ways, it's about what I call minimalism-- going back to shooting with the least amount of technology getting in the way. Doing the work yourself. Just like they did in the old days.
And I like that. I love what my DSLRs can so, but in some ways it doesn't feel like I'm really photographing when I'm using them. I just point and they do all the work. I look at using a Leica as the photographic equivalent of working out. Using a Leica FORCES you to use those photographic muscles, so to speak, keeps you sharp and keeps you fit.
For me, it's a pleasure to take out the Leica after using my DSLRs, and shoot the way I did when I first started.
Gotta admit, the LCD is not that big an issue for me. I never had that many issues when I shot JPEG, and frankly the DNGs I get out of it are killer sharp.
Just my two cents....
ederek
Well-known
erdnusscn - sorry to hear about your bad experience.
It is true, that if you zoom in on the LCD, the image will not be as sharp as what you see on the computer or in print. The camera does not render 1:1 on the LCD when zoomed in. I cannot say if that is an "LCD issue", or a design choice to limit the time lag or power consumption when rendering an image if you want/need to chimp.
Dynamic Histogram
For critical exposure situations, I do like the LCD and associated histogram behavior. I think it is unique in the digital world. The histogram shows a curve for what is displayed. When you zoom in, and then pan, the histogram continuously re-calculates.
A example situation where this is helpful is shooting a show, where perhaps the performer or their face is the key element in the scene to expose properly, and you don't have a spot meter. Take a shot, zoom in on the face and view the histogram for clipping. Works very well. You will have to understand that the performers face will be more sharp than what youre seeing, but getting exposure correct is a higher priority for me.
The LX3 is a great little camera, I have one as well. Never noticed superior jpegs. Sometimes the LX3 is a better choice if some fill flash is absolutely required.
Yeah, no kidding. Those lenses are tiny too. And you look like a 'photog' everywhere you go.. 🙄
Good luck w/ your quest!
It is true, that if you zoom in on the LCD, the image will not be as sharp as what you see on the computer or in print. The camera does not render 1:1 on the LCD when zoomed in. I cannot say if that is an "LCD issue", or a design choice to limit the time lag or power consumption when rendering an image if you want/need to chimp.
Dynamic Histogram
For critical exposure situations, I do like the LCD and associated histogram behavior. I think it is unique in the digital world. The histogram shows a curve for what is displayed. When you zoom in, and then pan, the histogram continuously re-calculates.
A example situation where this is helpful is shooting a show, where perhaps the performer or their face is the key element in the scene to expose properly, and you don't have a spot meter. Take a shot, zoom in on the face and view the histogram for clipping. Works very well. You will have to understand that the performers face will be more sharp than what youre seeing, but getting exposure correct is a higher priority for me.
The LX3 is a great little camera, I have one as well. Never noticed superior jpegs. Sometimes the LX3 is a better choice if some fill flash is absolutely required.
Yeah, no kidding. Those lenses are tiny too. And you look like a 'photog' everywhere you go.. 🙄
Good luck w/ your quest!
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
No - do your own web search.
user237428934
User deletion pending
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Well said, sir.
jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
I have 5 Canon's I use and an M9. Just like above, use what works. There are times when I can't get done what I need to with the M9 and times when a big SLR is too invasive and spoils the flow. They are tools.
As to the original question. Really, there is only one person who can answer that, and you probably already know the answer.
As to the original question. Really, there is only one person who can answer that, and you probably already know the answer.
Last edited:
ramosa
B&W
I'm not sure why jpeg output would matter if you plan to use raw images for your processing. 😉 Heck, because I plan to use the DNGs, I have my M8 set to NOT generate jpegs.
ramosa
B&W
Interesting review ... especially on a Canon-friendly site.
MrDan
Member
I'm not as good as a photographer as he is and i'm not a good writer in general, but i use Nikon for most of my work and i'm considering to switch to all Leica. Take it for what its worth.
MikeCassidy
Leica M3
M9 and Filter
M9 and Filter
I will probably buy a M9 by Christmas [my Christmas present]; I have question though. I most of life I have shot a M3 using Tri-X with a yellow filter protecting my lens. My only experience with a digital camera is a Canon G11 I bought to explore digital and color cheaply; so what filter are people using to protect their glass?
M9 and Filter
I will probably buy a M9 by Christmas [my Christmas present]; I have question though. I most of life I have shot a M3 using Tri-X with a yellow filter protecting my lens. My only experience with a digital camera is a Canon G11 I bought to explore digital and color cheaply; so what filter are people using to protect their glass?
Steve_F
Well-known
My Nikon & Leica glass are protected using B+W for both and also Nikon L37c on a couple of Nikkors.
For example about 12 years ago I bought a Nikon 300/4 AF. Spent a silly amount on an 82mm Nikon L37c. When I bought my Nikon 80-200 2.8 I bought a B+W 77mm. As for my Leica glass, all B+W.
Steve.
For example about 12 years ago I bought a Nikon 300/4 AF. Spent a silly amount on an 82mm Nikon L37c. When I bought my Nikon 80-200 2.8 I bought a B+W 77mm. As for my Leica glass, all B+W.
Steve.
Last edited:
MIkhail
Well-known
No camera in a world worth so much, especially digital camera which is obsolete after few years (no matter how you look at it). But hey, if you have 7K to drop on something you want- more power to you.
maenju
Member
so how many of us (including the OP) are photojournalists working in combat situations?
along the same lines, it might be interesting to note that Kamber is by now using the M9 as his main(?) camera (see http://vimeo.com/14393531 and http://blog.leica-camera.com/interview/an-interview-with-michael-kamber-of-the-new-york-times/), and incidentally it is also the M9 we're talking about in this thread, not the M8.
that being said, the extra expenses over the M8 are really something to ponder on. personally, I'm so happy with the M8 that precisely because of that, I plan to get an M9 at SOME point (hoping for used prices in the 3k€/3.5k$ range once a M10 has been announced). i would like to keep the M8 though and use it as a second body, since I think the two would complement each other quite well due to the different crop factors.
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian
Established
I have a friend that used his M8 in combat situations for two years in Iraq, and now uses an M9 in Afghanistan.
Works for him.
For professional use, I've spent over $25K buying a digital camera. That was cheap compared to having one made. Having one made was closer to $1M.
Works for him.
For professional use, I've spent over $25K buying a digital camera. That was cheap compared to having one made. Having one made was closer to $1M.
Last edited by a moderator:
bwcolor
Veteran
The first video made me think that these cameras should be weather sealed.
maenju
Member
Hehe, yep, was thinking the same when watching it -- interesting that they left it in the video, since it's coming from Leica actually. Anyway, there is probably no one would disagree with that...
lencap
Established
Thanks again for all the comments and replies. If I try to honestly digest all of the comments it boils down to desire versus need. I don't need a camera like the M9, but if I want it and can afford it, then it is worth it to me.
Anything else is trying to rationalize an emotional decision. Thanks for helping me clarify. I certainly admire the technical qualities of the M9, but I have to think long and hard on how much of a want the camera truly represents.
That, coupled with used M7 prices which are a third of the M9 make it hard to dismiss the film alternatives. For the price of the M9 I can get a mint used M7, and at a full compliment of lenses. Hard to ignore that.
Anything else is trying to rationalize an emotional decision. Thanks for helping me clarify. I certainly admire the technical qualities of the M9, but I have to think long and hard on how much of a want the camera truly represents.
That, coupled with used M7 prices which are a third of the M9 make it hard to dismiss the film alternatives. For the price of the M9 I can get a mint used M7, and at a full compliment of lenses. Hard to ignore that.
jcrutcher
Veteran
I've used canon dslr's for several years. I currently own a 50d, ids mark 2 and a mark 3. 6 months ago I got hooked on Leica and now own several including the m9. I use the Leica's 75% of the time.. I think it's a perfect combo to have both. Use depends on what and where I shoot which I do for pure fun not professional. It took me a few months to justify the m9 but I'm glad I pulled the trigger. If you ask one thing that has helped me it's this.
Since I'm an amateur I got lazy with the canon stuff, I just held the button down. The leica has taught me more about photography than any class or book. The m9 is no different than leica film other than digital ( I turn the instant preview off so I spend more time getting a good shot the first time).
That's my 2 cents worth. Jim
Since I'm an amateur I got lazy with the canon stuff, I just held the button down. The leica has taught me more about photography than any class or book. The m9 is no different than leica film other than digital ( I turn the instant preview off so I spend more time getting a good shot the first time).
That's my 2 cents worth. Jim
Similar threads
