burancap
Veteran
In light of all the recent sensor news, simple question: would you buy a used M9 today? How about the M9-P, the M-E, or stretch a bit and go for the Monochrom?
Would your plans set aside the time that may be required to have the sensor serviced?
Would your plans set aside the time that may be required to have the sensor serviced?
froyd
Veteran
Yes, but I'm $3000 short, and I've just invested in a better scanner.
YYV_146
Well-known
No. I'd go for an M-P. Or even better, wait for what Leica has to offer next year.
benmacphoto
Well-known
I did get an M9 recently, and no regrets.
I have other cameras so if the camera developed the sensor issue it would be no problem to send it in.
I have other cameras so if the camera developed the sensor issue it would be no problem to send it in.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I already have an M9, and remain content with it, but if I were buyin afresh it would be either an M Monochrom or an M-P.
G
G
Kwesi
Well-known
I currently own an M9-P. If I were to buy a used one today it would have to be a CPO unit or recently serviced by Leica with papers to prove it.
kaiwasoyokaze
Half Frame Goodness
m240's are also falling in price, the cheapest i have found was a lightly used black m240 for 3800 usd.
leica m9's are hovering around 2800-3000 usd at the moment. to me i dont think its worth the hassle to send it off.
i would wait for a m240 based monochrom at the moment if i was in the market for digital M.
leica m9's are hovering around 2800-3000 usd at the moment. to me i dont think its worth the hassle to send it off.
i would wait for a m240 based monochrom at the moment if i was in the market for digital M.
willie_901
Veteran
Only if it was riddled with delamination damage.
This is not an attempt at sarcasm. The price could be rather attractive and eventually the problem will be resolved for once and for all. Once reports come in about upgrade credits, a delaminated M9 might be a great buy for those who aren't interested in the M 240.
This is not an attempt at sarcasm. The price could be rather attractive and eventually the problem will be resolved for once and for all. Once reports come in about upgrade credits, a delaminated M9 might be a great buy for those who aren't interested in the M 240.
thompsonks
Well-known
I'd wait to see what's coming, especially a possible 240 Monochrom. IMO this would be the best use for the 240 sensor. ISO, which is an M240 limitation now, will go up appreciably in a Monochrom version. And those of us who didn't much care for 240 color won't have to worry about that in BW!
Kirk
BTW, Willie, those are imaginatively-composed interiors. Very nice work!
Kirk
BTW, Willie, those are imaginatively-composed interiors. Very nice work!
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
No.
I owned an M9 which I bought new and during the course of my 20 months of ownership, it was away at Leica for service more than in my hands available to shoot. This is before recent issues which have reared their heads. So, absolutely not. If I were given one to use professionally, I would certainly carry a camera as a backup as I have no faith in the reliability of Leica's digital line. In fact, I'd probably just shoot the M9 for a different look but not use for a primary camera on a paid shoot. Along with that, I wouldn't take it along on vacation without a very reliable backup.
On the other hand, my M4 I'd take on a trip anywhere in the world tomorrow if I were called to do so.
Phil Forrest
I owned an M9 which I bought new and during the course of my 20 months of ownership, it was away at Leica for service more than in my hands available to shoot. This is before recent issues which have reared their heads. So, absolutely not. If I were given one to use professionally, I would certainly carry a camera as a backup as I have no faith in the reliability of Leica's digital line. In fact, I'd probably just shoot the M9 for a different look but not use for a primary camera on a paid shoot. Along with that, I wouldn't take it along on vacation without a very reliable backup.
On the other hand, my M4 I'd take on a trip anywhere in the world tomorrow if I were called to do so.
Phil Forrest
rscheffler
Well-known
I agree with Willie. Also, if the price is right, maybe the trade-in value Leica offers for such an M9 against an M240 would more than offset the cost of acquiring it?
Would I get an M9 now? Having owned and used an M9 for four years and having acquired an M240 this year, I'd say one should take a long, hard look at the M240. While image quality (resolution) is not a big difference, and alone is not a reason for picking one over the other, the M240 is a much, much more refined camera in use. At least for my types of uses (such as events/weddings), its greater responsiveness is extremely noticeable and very welcome.
If you're not in a rush, chances are great that in the next 6-9 months we'll see announcement of the M240 replacement, which will further depress M240 resale value. As already noted, M240s can be found for relatively attractive prices. If the difference was only ~$1000 more for an M240, and I could justify it, that is what I'd get. FWIW, the M9 sensor problem is only a minor factor in my line of thinking.
Would I get an M9 now? Having owned and used an M9 for four years and having acquired an M240 this year, I'd say one should take a long, hard look at the M240. While image quality (resolution) is not a big difference, and alone is not a reason for picking one over the other, the M240 is a much, much more refined camera in use. At least for my types of uses (such as events/weddings), its greater responsiveness is extremely noticeable and very welcome.
If you're not in a rush, chances are great that in the next 6-9 months we'll see announcement of the M240 replacement, which will further depress M240 resale value. As already noted, M240s can be found for relatively attractive prices. If the difference was only ~$1000 more for an M240, and I could justify it, that is what I'd get. FWIW, the M9 sensor problem is only a minor factor in my line of thinking.
john neal
fallor ergo sum
Jeff,
I did M9-P and MM - so happy with both. Wish I had got them earlier.
Have had a small issue with the MM going into endless wind-on, but this was rectified free by the factory in 10 days, including transit from UK to Solms and back.
I did M9-P and MM - so happy with both. Wish I had got them earlier.
Have had a small issue with the MM going into endless wind-on, but this was rectified free by the factory in 10 days, including transit from UK to Solms and back.
uhoh7
Veteran
For many of us, in 2014, the M9 with M glass is the best digital still system available.
I would not trade mine for any other digital camera.
Now, if the MM will come down a bit, I might add one of those
I would not trade mine for any other digital camera.
Now, if the MM will come down a bit, I might add one of those
Ronald M
Veteran
Buy camera with known defects. Simply NO NO NO.
There will be no fix. They will simply stuff in the same old bad design sensor. If you don`t believe me, remember how long it took for a solution for R lenses, if you call it a solution.
I would be happy with a M8 sensor at full frame and use the filters on the lens. As I have both cameras, the filters stay on the lens anyway.
There will be no fix. They will simply stuff in the same old bad design sensor. If you don`t believe me, remember how long it took for a solution for R lenses, if you call it a solution.
I would be happy with a M8 sensor at full frame and use the filters on the lens. As I have both cameras, the filters stay on the lens anyway.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
While I have my own opinion on the topic, I think it is irrelevant. What counts most is how you calculate your own cost/pleasure ratio.
An awful lot of people are invested in the game of justifying their purchase choice to other people in order to justify it to themselves. In most cases, that justification has little or nothing to do with photography. Some of the most vocal people on this board have lurched from one camera to another huffing and puffing about the superiority of their choice.
The M9 in 2014 gives, like any other camera, a specific set of constraints and compromises. That includes, unlike many other cameras, the known sensor issue as well as Leica's track record in handling it. Yet the estimation of the value of that issue as a factor of cost/pleasure ratio can really only be decided by the individual.
Most of us really don't need to be concerned about whether or not the tool is state-of-the-art. It's just vanity.
An awful lot of people are invested in the game of justifying their purchase choice to other people in order to justify it to themselves. In most cases, that justification has little or nothing to do with photography. Some of the most vocal people on this board have lurched from one camera to another huffing and puffing about the superiority of their choice.
The M9 in 2014 gives, like any other camera, a specific set of constraints and compromises. That includes, unlike many other cameras, the known sensor issue as well as Leica's track record in handling it. Yet the estimation of the value of that issue as a factor of cost/pleasure ratio can really only be decided by the individual.
Most of us really don't need to be concerned about whether or not the tool is state-of-the-art. It's just vanity.
burancap
Veteran
Thank you all for the many considered thoughts!
Sure, but is that not life? A series of justification seeking exercises strung together?
By the way, I may not necessarily be buying a digital M today or even tomorrow. In this case, I was curious as to what my RFf peers think about spending a fair bit of money on something that is older, possibly in need of service, or may need service in the near future -tempered by Leica's sensor coverage announcement. I don't consider that vanity. I consider that good fiscal sense. The responses seem to have run the gamut and have helped me, and hopefully others, a great deal.
A better question may have been: Is the M9 still relevant in late 2014?
Sure, but is that not life? A series of justification seeking exercises strung together?
By the way, I may not necessarily be buying a digital M today or even tomorrow. In this case, I was curious as to what my RFf peers think about spending a fair bit of money on something that is older, possibly in need of service, or may need service in the near future -tempered by Leica's sensor coverage announcement. I don't consider that vanity. I consider that good fiscal sense. The responses seem to have run the gamut and have helped me, and hopefully others, a great deal.
A better question may have been: Is the M9 still relevant in late 2014?
MCTuomey
Veteran
It takes great pictures, Jeff, if you do your part.
But it does a lot of things not so well or consistently, like avoid sensor problems, write files to card quickly, display files, play nice with batteries (especially the non-OEM ones), make clean files at higher iso, and other things. Things which the M240, I'm told, does measurably better.
Tough question.
But it does a lot of things not so well or consistently, like avoid sensor problems, write files to card quickly, display files, play nice with batteries (especially the non-OEM ones), make clean files at higher iso, and other things. Things which the M240, I'm told, does measurably better.
Tough question.
gbealnz
Well-known
Possibly would have been better, and I'll add my meager contribution.
There are plenty of users and want to be users of the humble M8 out there, so yes I believe an M9 is still relevant today. In my own case I could see it pairing alongside the M6 I use, seamlessly too.
Gary
I wouldn't personally... just because its not the best tool for my photography at the moment. However, if I thought I needed to use a mechanical rangefinder camera, I would.
Pioneer
Veteran
I love my M9, and now my MM as well.
But they probably are not the best choice for true digital afficionados, I don't know. I bought both of them because I love working with rangefinders and they are about the only game in town.
But my Pentax Q (and my Leica Null) get more use, just because they are small enough to go everywhere with me. The digital Leicas are small for full frame cameras but they have become bulky enough that they can't just be dropped in a pocket on the way out the door.
As for reliability? I actually have no complaints. Both of my digital Leicas have worked perfectly since day one. Not one problem to this point, not even with the sensors.
But they probably are not the best choice for true digital afficionados, I don't know. I bought both of them because I love working with rangefinders and they are about the only game in town.
But my Pentax Q (and my Leica Null) get more use, just because they are small enough to go everywhere with me. The digital Leicas are small for full frame cameras but they have become bulky enough that they can't just be dropped in a pocket on the way out the door.
As for reliability? I actually have no complaints. Both of my digital Leicas have worked perfectly since day one. Not one problem to this point, not even with the sensors.