M9 - buyer remorse? (currently looking to get one)

B

brokencivilian

Established
Local time
10:21 PM
Joined
Mar 13, 2011
Messages
153
Has anyone purchased an M9 and felt like it was a bad decision? I don't own one, not yet. But I am seriously looking into one and would like to here opinions on them from people that have them.

I know people say that it's really up to what you shoot or whatever, but I don't care too much about that. I want the best. I am always dissapointed with my digital nikon and am always happy to shoot one of my M6's - however, I find film workflow and fee's a little on the long side. I would rather have a digital file. As long as it is amazing.
 
Nope! If you like shooting film M-bodies, you will love the M9. The only thing that is a little annoying is purely in it's digital genes, the electronic shutter sound, and the LCD resolution. In terms of the sound, if you've ever shot an M8, you will understand. It's got a kind of click, and then mechanical electronic shutter reset. It's not terribly loud, but much louder than film M's. The LCD is not the best and images that look bad on your LCD might will probably look way better than the LCD can show you. To me, these things are very minor, and the camera itself is beautifully made, and shoots incredible RAW files. I have shot some of my favorite photos with the M9, not only because I love shooting the RF platform, but the files it is able to produce are incredible. If you want the best digital RF, the M9 is where it's at. Full frame is fantastic if you've got other M-lenses, which I assume you might, so I'd say go for it and don't look back. Obviously, the price is high, but the camera is just a joy to shoot and IMO, a great purchase.

Feel free to check out my Flickr pages, if interested in my own shots with this camera. It is truly a gem when not wanting to always shoot film.

Hope this helps,

Jordan

Flickr:

http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=25136202@N08&q=m9
 
What I am planning to do is trade or sell my m6's and lease an m9 (or p) from a local shop, paying the monthly fees.. hoping to get them down to where its like paying for a phone ie (100-200 a month)

and eventually picking up an m3 as well for film.

I only have one lens.. but I don't need another! (50mm summicron v4)


It's just a huge decision and trying to find everything out first!
 
I'm an amateur as well, and picked up my M9 @ 28 years old. I don't think it's a poor choice, but obviously it is a lot of money. However, if sort of trading out the cost of film (your M6's), you may actually be getting an M9 at reasonable cost, seeing as you won't be buying/processing film for awhile. My guess is that you'll love the M9, but you'll have to get used to the digital body style of the M9 (no winding crank, LCD, different shutter, menus, etc.) It's a great camera for anyone willing to shell out the cash. I managed to save up enough to get hold of one and haven't regretted it yet.

Best of luck, and enjoy the camera if you decide to take the plunge!
 
Sounds like you are stretching your budget to get it. You are talking to a lot of different folks on here, of all different ages and budgets and careers. Professionals can write it off or justify it because it will pay back in paid gigs. Do you plan to get paid work from it? pleasure/business or both?

I think if you are 22 and are on a payment plan for an m9 already, you might have serious GAS and should just rethink it. Is the aversion to the 8.2 the crop factor? and do you have a fair amount of M-glass where you can sell your nikon gear and really transition without further investment in lenses?
EDIT: Oh i see you only have one lens

I'm not too much older than you btw, so maybe some wiser folk will weigh in.

That being said, everything i've read from M9 users is pure joy. havent read many buyer's remorse threads. But anyone who breaks the bank or buys something they cannot afford will have buyers remorse, but it wont be due to a bad product. . .
 
huntjump said:
Sounds like you are stretching your budget to get it. You are talking to a lot of different folks on here, of all different ages and budgets and careers. Professionals can write it off or justify it because it will pay back in paid gigs. Do you plan to get paid work from it?

I think if you are 22 and are on a payment plan for an m9 already, you might have serious GAS and should just rethink it. I'm not too much older than you btw, so maybe some wiser folk will weigh in.

That being said, everything i've read from M9 users is pure joy. havent read many buyer's remorse threads
Click to expand...

I do plan on getting paid work from it. As well I have looked over my buget and I can fit it in. Would cost about the same as my phone. As well, the more i trade or sell I can get those payments less. I plan to pay (cash or trade) about have before I agree to the lease.

The way I see it as well is, if i get this. I can resell in 3 years for a sizable chunk of change still. But if i went to nikon (again) I would sell for about nothing in 3 years.
 
One last question. What are the terms of the "lease" for the m9? If you miss a payment, do they take the camera back? Is it just like a cellphone with penalties, late fees etc...? If you put say, $2000 (20 months at $100) and then belly up, they get the camera and you basically rented the camera, correct? What is the shop valuing the m9 it is leasing you at and is it brand new?

I guess my only advice is just be careful in whatever you write up (contract) wise in case you have a bad month or two where $100/200 needs to divert to something other than an m9.


Oh and you only have one 50mm lens. I'd bet you an m9 you can't stay content with just that 1 50mm, but maybe you have better self control then most here. So plan to spend MOST of your money in glass ;)
 
huntjump said:
One last question. What are the terms of the "lease" for the m9? If you miss a payment, do they take the camera back? Is it just like a cellphone with penalties, late fees etc...? If you put say, $2000 (20 months at $100) and then belly up, they get the camera and you basically rented the camera, correct? What is the shop valuing the m9 it is leasing you at and is it brand new?

I guess my only advice is just be careful in whatever you write up (contract) wise in case you have a bad month or two where $100/200 needs to divert to something other than an m9.
Click to expand...

I'm not too sure, I still have to call them and talk to them more indebt. I have been emailing them though. I believe it is a flexible lease though. But I can't say for sure.
 
I just recently sold mine after year of use, i'll be completely honest, i was expecting better for $7000, but realized that its $7000 because its Leica not because its worth it.
The M9 is honestly worth $2000.
Don't get me wrong i love Leica, I have an MP, 6-M3's, M6 ttl, 3- IIIf's and many Leica lenses, i love everything i have.
So this is not a bash Leica reply at all, its to answer your question honestly.
Ok, now, the image quality is excellent but i can say i see only slightly better resolution than my Nikon D3, and i think its just because of the increase in pixels, but you have to look very close at 100% to see the difference.
In reality you will never see the difference between a M9 and your D300, (i had one of those also), especially if your viewing on a computer or even printing normal size pictures.
The only reason to buy one is if you must have a full frame sensor to complement your M lenses.
But again i sold mine and i have many M lenses and use them on a Sony Nex for when i want a digital file.
But i realized i love to shoot and develop film way more than taking a digital picture, i shoot 100% for hobby and enjoyment so the M9 did nothing for me.
If you like to zoom in and view your shots after you take them, the M9 has the worst resolution screen on any camera, its terrible. Nothing even close to your D300 for resolution and speed, i was extremely disappointed with that.
As for the internet hype about the M9, when i hear "nothing comes close" or "the M9 colors are awesome" or "theres something about the M9 files"
or "i was blown away when i seen the pictures", all of it is complete BS.
I compared thousands of pictures for a year and can say it is no different than my D3.
The colors every one is seeing are the adjusted raw files every one processes after, as they recommend to shoot raw if you are serious.
After all its just a Kodak sensor in a M body.
I would own one again only if i could rebuy for $1000, but i would be nervous about it failing on me.
I still think its the coolest camera to have for M lenses, its beautiful but way overrated and priced $5000 too high.
Im waiting for my Nex 7 to have for digital, but what im really waiting for is a Sony full frame Nex for my M lenses.
Its a rich mans camera.
 
I agree with some of your comments and disagree with others.

I agree that it's absolutely BS to say that the M9 files are superior. And even if the files were indeed superior, it doesn't help if the photographer using it is not up to par.

But I disagree that it should be a $2,000 camera. You can't comapre it to a NEX and say that it's worth twice as much as the NEX. To me the experience gap between the two cannot be measured in monetary terms. To me the M9 is very cheap at $6,000, because you cannot get the experience with any other digital camera.

R Cutting said:
I just recently sold mine after year of use, i'll be completely honest, i was expecting better for $7000, but realized that its $7000 because its Leica not because its worth it.
The M9 is honestly worth $2000.
Don't get me wrong i love Leica, I have an MP, 6-M3's, M6 ttl, 3- IIIf's and many Leica lenses, i love everything i have.
So this is not a bash Leica reply at all, its to answer your question honestly.
Ok, now, the image quality is excellent but i can say i see only slightly better resolution than my Nikon D3, and i think its just because of the increase in pixels, but you have to look very close at 100% to see the difference.
In reality you will never see the difference between a M9 and your D300, (i had one of those also), especially if your viewing on a computer or even printing normal size pictures.
The only reason to buy one is if you must have a full frame sensor to complement your M lenses.
But again i sold mine and i have many M lenses and use them on a Sony Nex for when i want a digital file.
But i realized i love to shoot and develop film way more than taking a digital picture, i shoot 100% for hobby and enjoyment so the M9 did nothing for me.
If you like to zoom in and view your shots after you take them, the M9 has the worst resolution screen on any camera, its terrible. Nothing even close to your D300 for resolution and speed, i was extremely disappointed with that.
As for the internet hype about the M9, when i hear "nothing comes close" or "the M9 colors are awesome" or "theres something about the M9 files"
or "i was blown away when i seen the pictures", all of it is complete BS.
I compared thousands of pictures for a year and can say it is no different than my D3.
The colors every one is seeing are the adjusted raw files every one processes after, as they recommend to shoot raw if you are serious.
After all its just a Kodak sensor in a M body.
I would own one again only if i could rebuy for $1000, but i would be nervous about it failing on me.
I still think its the coolest camera to have for M lenses, its beautiful but way overrated and priced $5000 too high.
Im waiting for my Nex 7 to have for digital, but what im really waiting for is a Sony full frame Nex for my M lenses.
Its a rich mans camera.
Click to expand...
 
It is true, there are currently no other full frame Rf alternatives, so in this sense it is worth a lot to those who need it.
 
I did alot of side by side comparison shots with my M9 and Nex C3 to see if i could actually see any difference, there is no difference if viewed normally, like you would if you printed them out. (I used Leica lens on Sony also)
 
R Cutting said:
I did alot of side by side comparison shots with my M9 and Nex C3 to see if i could actually see any difference, there is no difference if viewed normally, like you would if you printed them out. (I used Leica lens on Sony also)
Click to expand...

But it's not really about the files or the prints. It's about the shooting experience.
 
A word of financial advice (as I used to be a financial advisor), if you can't afford to buy it with cash, then you can't afford to buy it on credit.

As for getting "nothing" for a Nikon after three years of use, that probably isn't true. You can get a Nikon D800 for less than half the cost of an M9, and the Nikon is a superior camera in every way. A D800 will probably not depreciate at a greater percentage than an M9 over the next three years, though it probably will after 4 or 5.

Don't "lust" after gear. Get what you need when you can afford it. Many pros simply rent what they need for a particular gig (professional photography is not a particularly high-paying career). Relatively few professionals shoot with Leica equipment, partly because of the high price, and partly from it's limitations.

Most Leica shooters are people with higher disposable incomes (money left over after paying all one's expenses). At 22 you are not likely to be one of these, and if you aren't careful with your spending, you may never be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom