Jim Evidon
Jim
M9? Go for it!
M9? Go for it!
Yes the M9 is a better camera not only because of the FF but also because it seems to be put together better. Also the menu on the M9 is ever so much better
than on the M8. I had an M8 and I had it converted to M8.2 . I loved the camera but I prefer my M9 now converted to M9P.
BTW, my M9 was purchased used and they still treated me as an original owner when the sensor issue came up. Turn around time was delayed two weeks
while they awaited a supply of fresh sensors. Total turn around time for me was under one month. But I had other excellent cameras to use during that time.
Turn around time for a new sensor should now be about three weeks which I assume will include a complete CLA of the camera. Not a bad deal.
Sure there can be sensor problems. Not every M9 has shown sensor corrosion, however. Mine had a slight case of the white spots phenomenon,
but Leica replaced the sensor when they had the camera for the M9P upgrade. They have promised to replace sensors free as well as providing sensor cleaning
at no cost to the owner while they look for a permanent fix.
Frankly, I think the answer to your question is a no-brainer. Go for the M9.
You may or may not get sensor corrosion, but if so, then Leica is standing behind their product.
M9? Go for it!
Yes the M9 is a better camera not only because of the FF but also because it seems to be put together better. Also the menu on the M9 is ever so much better
than on the M8. I had an M8 and I had it converted to M8.2 . I loved the camera but I prefer my M9 now converted to M9P.
BTW, my M9 was purchased used and they still treated me as an original owner when the sensor issue came up. Turn around time was delayed two weeks
while they awaited a supply of fresh sensors. Total turn around time for me was under one month. But I had other excellent cameras to use during that time.
Turn around time for a new sensor should now be about three weeks which I assume will include a complete CLA of the camera. Not a bad deal.
Sure there can be sensor problems. Not every M9 has shown sensor corrosion, however. Mine had a slight case of the white spots phenomenon,
but Leica replaced the sensor when they had the camera for the M9P upgrade. They have promised to replace sensors free as well as providing sensor cleaning
at no cost to the owner while they look for a permanent fix.
Frankly, I think the answer to your question is a no-brainer. Go for the M9.
You may or may not get sensor corrosion, but if so, then Leica is standing behind their product.
Last edited:
MCTuomey
Veteran
If you expect CaNikon dSLR reliability, none of them will please you. Today, Leica is standing behind its various digital M issues, offering no/very low cost repairs and, in some cases, upgrade credit. Be prepared to have your camera serviced more than a typical dSLR. (This is the price one pays for using a niche camera, I believe.) So, assuming the above is the case, my digital M algorithm:
(1) If you're good with a 1.3x crop factor, 10mpx, a bit less framing accuracy, get an M8.
(2) If you're good with a 1.3x crop factor, 10mpx, a bit more framing accuracy, get an M8.2.
(3) If you need full frame, 18 mpx, a bit less framing accuracy, get an M9.
No, the M9 is not "that much better" than the M8/8.2. It has more resolution, narrower DOF at a given aperture and distance, subjectively less OOC file crispness, probably one stop or so better high iso performance than the M8/8.2. Think of the M9 as a full-frame, higher resolution extension of the M8. I've had both, liked both, printed large from both, and preferred the M9 only because I could shoot with fewer lenses (sharing them with a film M).
(1) If you're good with a 1.3x crop factor, 10mpx, a bit less framing accuracy, get an M8.
(2) If you're good with a 1.3x crop factor, 10mpx, a bit more framing accuracy, get an M8.2.
(3) If you need full frame, 18 mpx, a bit less framing accuracy, get an M9.
No, the M9 is not "that much better" than the M8/8.2. It has more resolution, narrower DOF at a given aperture and distance, subjectively less OOC file crispness, probably one stop or so better high iso performance than the M8/8.2. Think of the M9 as a full-frame, higher resolution extension of the M8. I've had both, liked both, printed large from both, and preferred the M9 only because I could shoot with fewer lenses (sharing them with a film M).
Spoken by what has to be a "I will get the shot" pro, hats off to ya.