Vics
Veteran
Keep the M9, because you already have it and presumably like it, and because you like to shoot color.
willie_901
Veteran
Anybody voting for the 2nd choice, getting the Fuji products too? No?
Looks like Fuji still has a long way to go before it can really find a place in our heart close to the Leica...
Why bother to vote for #2? Fuji will never, ever be acceptable to some. This is entirely normal, reasonable and speaks to the diversity of human experience and thought which I celebrate.
back alley
IMAGES
i can easily carry on without a leica in my life...
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Close.
I sold my Leica M's (went from three bodies to none in 8 weeks time) but still have my early Leica II, and a 10-year younger brother came to join due to a trade when I recently sold my M-mount lenses.
What keeps me away from Leica is the Ricoh GXR-M though
I'm in the slow process of compiling a second kit of body-Mount module-EVF, just to make sure I can shoot these little miracles for many years to comebenlees
Well-known
Your OM-D is plenty good enough for 13x17 prints. What exactly is wrong with it? And you have an M9? Sounds like you are covered.
thegman
Veteran
I still have a Leica (IIIf), and if I continue to shoot 35mm, I think it'll be with a Leica. However, I do certainly find myself moving more and more to medium and even towards large format, so Leica cannot accompany me there.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
LOL. That was way back when it was rumoured that Leica might enter the EVIL market. I am getting the M not for an IQ improvement, not for the higher ISO,-those are a nice bonus- but mainly as a (barely adequate) R solution.
I remember you clearly stated you would keep the M9 and add the Monochrom because you did not care for the type 240. So rationalising the money spent on the Monochrome.
But i admire flexibility. Buy it all. Life is short and the economy needs a boost anyway
Good luck with it Jaap!
srtiwari
Daktari
Obviously, one certainly can. Just as one can live without love
But then, its so much more fun with...
srtiwari
Daktari
If I were to go with Option #1, how much improvement can i expect to see in the Resolution, High ISO IQ, Dynamic range, etc.. ? I am not referring to print output specifically.
I also read somewhere that at lower ISOs, the M9 may have better IQ than the M Typ 240 ??
I also read somewhere that at lower ISOs, the M9 may have better IQ than the M Typ 240 ??
steveniphoto
Well-known
option 6: keep your M9 and lenses and OMD and be happy with them.
what isnt the M9 doing for you that you think the new M or Monochrom can? you have a perfectly competent set up. roll with it.
what isnt the M9 doing for you that you think the new M or Monochrom can? you have a perfectly competent set up. roll with it.
srtiwari
Daktari
That is my question-
Is there enough improvement in tonality/ High ISO performance/ detail etc., to justify-
Loss by selling M9 + Buying MM (about $4000) AND giving up color ??
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Smiley face or no, that is exactly right.
BNLee
Established
Yes, because for some, Fuji is just trying to hitch on Leica's bandwagon, but they are different things, really... They do things for people with different needs.
Joe, yes, people can easily live on without a Leica, but they are just so... special to many of us...
To Subhash, one thing for sure, if the improvements are really so good for you to justify the switch to other cameras, you would have taken the plunge already and the need for having the newest gear would have been cured (GAS), but you have held on till now, so it is quite obvious that what you have is good enough.
So just stick to your gear and live on! Then again, it is all advice you are seeing here, as I said, you would be buying the gear you want anytime soon if you feel the need to regardless of what we say.semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
One could say the same about Canon or Nikon or Contax film rangefinders. Or one could say the same about Leica SLRs following Nikon's lead. The M3 was a revolutionary camera, but nearly everything that Leica has done to the M's since the M3 has been either cosmetic or derived from innovations made by other companies.
A reasonable argument could be made that Fuji incorporated more significant and original ideas into the X-Pro1 than Leica incorporated into M camera bodies -- film or digital -- from the M3 to the M240 inclusive.
Since the M3, Leica's investment and innovation has really been in glass, not in the M cameras.
srtiwari
Daktari
or you have missed the point of it all. No one is being asked to decide anything. Since one of these cameras is relatively new, and one not even available, I'm interested in what people believe their differences to be. What Zi actually do will depend on many other things.lewis44
Well-known
M9 + Silver Efex Pro
segedi
RFicianado
I'd say that creating a full frame digital rangefinder was a heck of an innovation.
And one can argue the cost vs features but after having tried a GXR with M mount and a NEX 5n with adapter, both with EVFs, neither can replicate the true rangefinder experience. Ultimately that is what is most important to me.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I agree completely: if the optical RF is what does it for you, a TTL electronic camera of whatever description simply isn't that.
Seems many folks simply don't want to credit Leica for all the incremental and innovation work they've done in the past 60 years. There's been a lot of it, even if the cameras look very similar. Most of the best of the work is simply not all that visible in the consumer "eature feature" race. It's the kind of long term development of an already solid concept.
G
