Thanks for all the replies - very helpful.
I'm still a bit removed from a final decision. The issue is further clouded by my many decades of SLR use. I've used a FM2 with a 28mm f/2.8 lens, along with a 50mm f/1.4. As I consider that combination I am left wondering what I'll gain by stepping into the digital realm. There is little doubt in my mind that despite the very impressive progress of digital cameras over the last few years, the coming few years will leapfrog whatever we have now. I can't begin to know how/why that will happen, but the new Sony Alph line of cameras may be a preview - no more moving mirror - just a pass through to the digital imager. As others refine that thought process the possibility exists that the next big change will be in camera form - not imaging sensors. Imagine a camera with an Apple like interface instead of knobs and dials. Not like you see it used now on deep digital menus, but morphed into intuitive design, with everything under your fingers just where you want it. Think iPad - a revolution to some, but a refinement of several available technologies to others.
My point isn't that I am a "film shooter", but frankly the pace of digital cameras has me confused and uncertain about the "safety" of my digital investment. APC sensors, 4/3s imagers, 1.33/1.5/1.6 crop factors, DX, FX, etc. It's a zoo. (I have a lot of history with pro camcorders - there is a new format and capture device almost monthly. Using Apple Final Cut the number of formats grows by the week. I fear that same technology push will come to digital cameras, and it makes me cling to film).
Anyway, thanks again for the help and comments - I am still considering things, but for now the cost of a used M8/8.2/9 camera, coupled with the inevitable "next big thing" has me leaning to film - maybe even medium format. I've always remembered taking a few shots with a friend's Hasselblad - I took terrible shots, but I remember how amazed I was looking down into that finder and seeing an incredibly large image staring back at me. It has left a permanent impression, and as I age and my eyesight continues to fade, I question my ability to clearly focus any rangefinder with a 0.72 or smaller magnification. And on the rare instance when I want to shoot a 135mm lens, I am very uncertain that my eyes are up to the task.
The conclusion, for ME, seems to be stick with film - don't quite give up the SLR for ease of focus, and maybe try a newer entry level digital camera to see what the format has to offer (Nikon D3100 (?) with a 35mm f/1.8d lens - $850 or so - less than the cost of a used Leica lens).
The one thing that I've not had a lot of feedback about is the learning curve for digital processing. When shooting video the amount of time spent editing is not insignificant, and the skills needed to do it right require intense effort and time.
Lightroom/Aperture takes me into the darkroom and away from shooting - just like video editing. I'm not sure that I want to take that step, but at least with your comments I've begun to think through the entire workflow, not just pulling the shutter release. At least with film I can outsource "production" to a competent lab. Yep, it's more expensive, but my time is worth something too.
Thanks again to all. I'm still working on it.
