Leica M9... Legendary vs Nothing

[bambamphoto]

I drool over an M9 but when I really consider it...it's an exorbitant amount of money for what it is. They squezzed a FF sensor into the same box that they've been making since my Dad was in diapers. The technological innovation over the M8 is not even a new sensor, just a larger one. So they needed to figure out how to make microlenses alter the path of steeply angular light. So what?

The m9 is so expensive and delicate that it can't be treated as a go anywhere, do anything workhorse like the film M's could. Want to shoot in rain? Ah, no. They weather sealed the S2 but not the M9. WTF?

I will stick to analog RF photography for now until my frustration subsides and I sell a kidney to buy a digital M.

 

[bambamphoto]

Uncle Bill, well stated.

 

[Nikkor AIS]

Im one of those guys with a couple of D3 and a 5D2 for video. And yes I make some money with my camera's . But I still love photography and would do it if I never made another dime.
And I still shoot film with my F3T, F2, FM2 , F4s and most recently a Lecia M3 with 35 1.4 Summilux😀.
The introduction of M9 was the reason I finally bought a lecia after more than 20 years of shooting. I wanted to get my feet wet in the rangefinder before dropping 10 grand on a M9(CAN). And since the M3 was my first Leica I ever wanted, i started there. However, Im having so much fun shooting with the M3 that Im already looking for a M6. My local camera store has no idea when I can even buy a M9. So Im not sweating it. Shooting with a rangefinder is a blast. Will I give up my D3 and my nikkor's from 8mm-800 mm. Not. But I will work my ass off so I can afford a couple of M9 and some more lecia glass. These are just really sweet camera's (m series) and they have inspired me.

Just for the record I admit to chimping on a regular bases. I usually shoot in aperture priority and will admit that matrix metering can be fooled.
In my world there is room for more than one camera, and media(film, digital).

One thing I will say is that digital seems cheaper until you factor in all the computers, hard drives, soft wear and back up for storage. And time sitting in front of the screen.

Im finishing a three year book project and shot pretty heavy sometimes 200-500 capture's a day, as of late. But rarely shoot more than a couple of rolls of film in a day since getting my D3's. However since getting my Lecia I noticed that Im doubled my number of frames I shoot with film. The rangefinder is just such a joy to use it easy to take more picture's.
Even the Voitlander 15 4.5 gives my 14-24 a run for it's money.

It's great that Leica has released such a great Digital camera and I cant wait to get a M9 when they become available from my local camera store. Im not sure if will ever be considered a classic. I do intend on taking some classic images. And for me that's good enough.

Gregory

 

[Vince Lupo]

I've just put my name on a list for an M9, and I've sold a few vintage Leica pieces to pay for it. This camera will be the perfect complement to my D700 and will really open up the commercial and personal possibilities. The nice thing is that this camera will allow you to use both contemporary and vintage lenses. I think this camera makes entire sense, though of course I wish it was about $3000 cheaper!

I now have all my money for an M9 - now I'm just waiting for them to be delivered to my dealer!

As far as the price of the camera goes, I've spent at least this much money (or more) on vintage cameras that end up sitting around more than they are used. It seemed to make more sense at this point to take that money invested in the vintage cameras and shift it to the M9. And, as Roger mentioned, Leica has guaranteed 20 year support for it, not to mention the potential for sensor upgrade down the road. That works for me.

 

[Ted2001]

As an old Kodachrome (and later Velvia) shooter, I think the new digital bodies represent an unbelievable bargain. Whether I shot with Nikon F3HP or Contax G2 (I couldn't afford the M-6) depended on whether I was using long lenses and macro (Nikon) or not. I've now moved to digital Nikon and am happy as a pig in () with my 60/105/200 macros and longer lenses on the way. I now want a digital rangefinder. I would prefer one that used my Contax lenses, but if I had the money I'd get the M-9 now. The reason I mentioned the Kodachrome is that I shoot 100-200 shots per day when my garden is in bloom and have always averaged about a roll or two of film per day. At the $15 it costs for high-end processed transparencies that's almost $5,500 for 365 36 exposure rolls.

 

[beyond]

Hi from Malaysia. Tested out the M9 the other day during the premier launch. Didn't really like it. But a few of my friends did ordered some units.

 

[Alberti]

The thing that worries me about future didgital M's is the price ... well that's a lie actually because I probably won't be buying! 😛

From M8 to M9 we had a 45% increase in price ... admittedly the new camera has a full frame sensor so part of it is obviously justified. Any potential M10 though, whatever it's improvements may be, is likely to be close to $10000.00 ... is there a point where even Leica's most loyal customers say "enough is enough" ... I have to wonder?

Yep, too much, and Leica does not adhere to the 'pricepoint' in the market they traditionall have, the price hop could have been 15% (5x3% inflation) not 45%, because the cost of electronic components goes down all the time and the FF sensor might now cost as much as the crop sensor 5 years ago.
Referring the price to the M8.2 with the sapphire (expensive) glass plate (and the upgrades) is ridiculous of course. I think they were losing money on that. 😛
The pricing now will attract competitors.
alberti

 

[Pickett Wilson]

I really don't think there is a point where Leica's customers will say enough is enough. Once you go to digital, you can get equal or better image quality from much cheaper cameras. So the typical Leica customer either must have specifically a digital rangefinder camera (because that is what they want to shoot) or is buying bling. In either case, money can't make any difference. You either pay the price or go home.

 

[MikeCassidy]

I love film; Tri-X dev'ed in Rodinal

I love film; Tri-X dev'ed in Rodinal

BUT I am considering, very much considering, buying the new M9; film developer paper and darkrooms are becoming to hard to access.

 

[MikeCassidy]

well maybe but

well maybe but

I really don't think there is a point where Leica's customers will say enough is enough. Once you go to digital, you can get equal or better image quality from much cheaper cameras. So the typical Leica customer either must have specifically a digital rangefinder camera (because that is what they want to shoot) or is buying bling. In either case, money can't make any difference. You either pay the price or go home.

Yeh but I have 4 leica lenses so it may actually be cheaper for to go M9

 

[jaapv]

True, the only concern for me on the M9, exists in my M8.

I can't totally rely on it like I do my Canon 1D's, especially in semi/extreme weather situations. Also scared about dropping it, but not my Canon which has survived everything.

Well I have been bashing my M9 for five weeks now through Mozambique, Malawi and Kenia,( which makes me inelegible for the poll btw🙁) and the only thing that happened was that the RF went out of adjustment through vibration in light aircraft and Landrovers on non-existent roads. That would have happened to any film M as well. So I am happy. Having dropped both the M8 and various SLR cameras of several brands in the past, I can testify that the M8 will still be in one piece albeit in need of repair where most SLRs - including Leica R cameras- would have been nuts and bolts strewn over the landscape. And yes- the weather sealing on Canon is a positive feature.

 

[jaapv]

I really don't think there is a point where Leica's customers will say enough is enough. Once you go to digital, you can get equal or better image quality from much cheaper cameras. So the typical Leica customer either must have specifically a digital rangefinder camera (because that is what they want to shoot) or is buying bling. In either case, money can't make any difference. You either pay the price or go home.

It all depends on the lens - in the past the playing field was level as well- we all bought the same film....

 

[Richard Marks]

Well I have been bashing my M9 for five weeks now through Mozambique, Malawi and Kenia,( which makes me inelegible for the poll btw🙁) and the only thing that happened was that the RF went out of adjustment through vibration in light aircraft and Landrovers on non-existent roads. That would have happened to any film M as well. So I am happy. Having dropped both the M8 and various SLR cameras of several brands in the past, I can testify that the M8 will still be in one piece albeit in need of repair where most SLRs - including Leica R cameras- would have been nuts and bolts strewn over the landscape. And yes- the weather sealing on Canon is a positive feature.

Dear Jaap
You may recall the casing of my M8 shattered after relatively minor trauma.(ill not bore you with posting the horrific pictures again) but I do not share your experience. There is still the same problem with the base plate design carried onto the M9. The real issue is not so much damage but having to return the camera to Germany for repairs. I really do not wish to invest further extensive funds without UK based service/ repairs.
Hope you had a good trip.
Richard

 

[jaapv]

I remember, Richard. Still, we had a small series of these fractures, and after that nothing. It seems the casing is strong enough, although I agree it looks flimsy, but it appears to me that there must have been a few cameras with casting flaws around.

 

[ulrikft]

I remember, Richard. Still, we had a small series of these fractures, and after that nothing. It seems the casing is strong enough, although I agree it looks flimsy, but it appears to me that there must have been a few cameras with casting flaws around.

I have to say that the d700 is.. dead solid. It feels and acts pretty much like a solid piece of magnesium. I think I would trust the d700 more than a m8/9 if it came to body rigidity alone. That said, I have only used the d700 extensively, not the two other cameras.

 

[Richard Marks]

I remember, Richard. Still, we had a small series of these fractures, and after that nothing. It seems the casing is strong enough, although I agree it looks flimsy, but it appears to me that there must have been a few cameras with casting flaws around.

The base plate slot is still not as good as on the film cameras. I can not understand why they changed this. I really would not be happy mounting this design on a tripod with a heavy lens. All that is holding the body onto the base plate is a tiny bar of metal about 1mm thick. I do not think it can take much punishment.

Richard

 

[jsrockit]

In the 1930s Leica brought out the 1 (interchangeable lenses instead of fixed) followed by II (rangefinder) followed by III (slow speeds from 1-1/20 as well as 1/20-1/500) followed by IIIa (top speed 1/1000) followed by IIIb (viewfinder and rangefinder closer together).

In other words we're seeing exactly the same marketing strategy as in the 1930s: incremental improvements.

I don't think you can compare those improvements in the 30s... which were basically all innovations for the 35mm camera... to those happening in 2000-2010.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I don't think you can compare those improvements in the 30s... which were basically all innovations for the 35mm camera... to those happening in 2000-2010.

Eh? Why not?

The Contax introduced 1/1000 in 1933 (Leica's 1/1000 was 1935) and had the combined range/viewfinder well over a decade before the Leica: moving the windows for separate rangefinder and viewfinder closer together was hardly an innovation.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Richard Marks]

Eh? Why not?

The Contax introduced 1/1000 in 1933 (Leica's 1/1000 was 1935) and had the combined range/viewfinder well over a decade before the Leica: moving the windows for separate rangefinder and viewfinder closer together was hardly an innovation.

Cheers,

R.

Dear Roger

I think it is just that we have become accustomed to a much more rapid rate of advancement of electronic goods. Fine tuning a mechanical camera is OK and Leica are used to this type of development. Things move a lot faster in terms of electronics unfortunately. It is difficult for me to see anything electronic as having legendary status because the next wave of products simply displace the previous. The other issue is that image quality even from relatively inexpensive cameras is now very good and it has to be something extra ordinary to make a really big impact.

Is the Nikon D1x legendary? We thought so at the time and could not imagine better. Not close to a Nikon F as legends go though.

Richard

 

[N.delaRua]

I think if you are thinking of buying a camera that may be considered "legendary" down the road, than just stick to buying lens and forget camera bodies.

I never understood what makes a camera legendary... it just a light box with a shutter. There are various things that increase your ability to use that camera with ease, but those are different for different "legends."

The F system was great for its adaptability and overall build quality. The M's were the miniature option with great optics and speed that allow one to stay inconspicious.

I guess my point is that Camera bodies are less important than the system they are part of... The M system is legendary for a million different reason, but I would argue mostly for the lens.

Digital bodies will never be legendary because if that was true than the first 486 pentium computer would still be legendary today, and it isn't. Technology does not care about what is currently in the market because that is old news...

However, I still do not think that makes the M9 a marketing ploy. Leica has to stay relavent to exist. A full frame digital M makes them moderately relevant at best, but it does a lot more to futher their image for the next generation. I am willing to bet it takes great pictures (and it does from the examples I see). So who cares if it will be legendary..... the only thing that kills it for the majority of Leicaphiles is the PRICE!

Go read the Pop Photo review of the Leica M9; Half the article is spent explaining how to focus a rangefinder, and there is a caption that illustrates what a aperature ring is!!!! When a hobbist photography magazine has to explain to its reader what a aperature ring is and how a ranfinder focuses that is a pure example of how and why Leica must make digital products to survive. That review shows how irelevant a manual focus RF, AE priority, full frame digital camera is realtive to the current digital market.

They cannot surivie as a fringe company producing the best lens in the world if they are going to just hang on the side of some fashionable model/rockstar/doctor. Prime Example Leica M7 hermes! WHO CARES! That is a such a irrelevant product to 99.9% of the world.