m9 the working mans version?

[emraphoto]

Leicas being made is better than Leicas not being made, but I have also had the same concerns about the direction the company has gone in in terms of its long-term viability (but I know nothing about their business, which I freely admit). Leica is surely still associated with legends of the past and before too very long that connection will begin to wane. You can't trade on past glories forever. I cannot comment on the S2 which appears to have been a genuine effort to nail a niche pro market (whether it worked I dont know), but the M9 is too expensive and lacking in certain areas to take the brand back to where it used to be in terms of reportage. Its is selling like hot cakes, which is great, and I might still buy one, but it would be fantastic if some of the revenue could be put into levering the M line back into viability for a wider selection of reportage shooters. The M10 could eat away at some of the wish list people have for the next camera and lets hope so.

I do not agree with Roger that a the M9's lack of sealing is only an issue for apes. Lots of pros get caught in heavy rain far from cover, or with dust constantly in the air. These are not extreme climates but actually very common for the sort of people John is talking about. I understand that the lenses are not sealed, but if an effort was made to at least seal the bodies as best they could and seal the lens mount/lens interface, a lot of the risk to the body would be averted, dust cut down and the worst you would be looking at would be a CLA on a lens not a total loss on a $7K body... Some sealing is better than none because it reduces risk and this matters by reducing the likelihood we will get stung even if we know it is not a complete 100% solution to a problem.

I don't think Leica could afford to cater to the issues raised during the M8-M9 development era. The film market had shrunk and they were miles behind the market in terms of digital. The M8 was a bridging camera and the M9 is on the first FF digi M ever - a huge leap in itself - and really the starting point for the M platform in the new era. I suspect the M10 will bring far greater versatility and utility to the M and bring it much more in line with what working PJs will need from a camera. The only problem remains price. $14k for two bodies is tough, esp as finances are so tight for many PJs Its the need for a second body that really hammers the camera as a prospect unless it is there to back up a SLR (which kinda defeats the ability to travel genuinely light and tight).

and my friend pretty much covers it here.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Leicas being made is better than Leicas not being made, but I have also had the same concerns about the direction the company has gone in in terms of its long-term viability (but I know nothing about their business, which I freely admit). Leica is surely still associated with legends of the past and before too very long that connection will begin to wane. You can't trade on past glories forever. I cannot comment on the S2 which appears to have been a genuine effort to nail a niche pro market (whether it worked I dont know), but the M9 is too expensive and lacking in certain areas to take the brand back to where it used to be in terms of reportage. Its is selling like hot cakes, which is great, and I might still buy one, but it would be fantastic if some of the revenue could be put into levering the M line back into viability for a wider selection of reportage shooters. The M10 could eat away at some of the wish list people have for the next camera and lets hope so.

I do not agree with Roger that a the M9's lack of sealing is only an issue for apes. Lots of pros get caught in heavy rain far from cover, or with dust constantly in the air. These are not extreme climates but actually very common for the sort of people John is talking about. I understand that the lenses are not sealed, but if an effort was made to at least seal the bodies as best they could and seal the lens mount/lens interface, a lot of the risk to the body would be averted, dust cut down and the worst you would be looking at would be a CLA on a lens not a total loss on a $7K body... Some sealing is better than none because it reduces risk and this matters by reducing the likelihood we will get stung even if we know it is not a complete 100% solution to a problem.

I don't think Leica could afford to cater to the issues raised during the M8-M9 development era. The film market had shrunk and they were miles behind the market in terms of digital. The M8 was a bridging camera and the M9 is on the first FF digi M ever - a huge leap in itself - and really the starting point for the M platform in the new era. I suspect the M10 will bring far greater versatility and utility to the M and bring it much more in line with what working PJs will need from a camera. The only problem remains price. $14k for two bodies is tough, esp as finances are so tight for many PJs Its the need for a second body that really hammers the camera as a prospect unless it is there to back up a SLR (which kinda defeats the ability to travel genuinely light and tight).

My apologies if I overstated the question. To be sure, better sealing would be wonderful, and an unmitigated benefit for everyone, amateur or professional. I'd suggest that rain is a trivial prblem -- it's easy to shelter the camera with your body or otherwise -- but that if it ain't rainproof, it ain't dustproof either, and that isn't trivial.

I was thinking more of the worn-to-the-light-alloy press cameras I've seen. Either the finish is incredibly thin and feeble, or the users are paying no attention to their cameras whatsoever.

Certes, I'd regard 'hardening' an M10 as MUCH more important than improved high ISO performance, and apart from those two, I can't see many ways to improve an M9. A small degree of 'hardening' -- certainly, sealing -- should be possible without increasing the size of the body. After that, demands for a tougher RF mechanism are somewhat given the lie by the use of essentially similar RF mechanisms in the glory days of the 50s and 60s: that's where the gorillas come in.

We'll see when the M10 comes out...

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

An M9 is NOT a quarter of the size of an equivalent Dslr.
regards john

Dear John,

So I exaggerated. But it's almost certainly less than half. Given than an M9 is a bit portly compared with a 'real' (film) Leica, ANYTHING much bigger is too big.

Cheers,

R.

 

[emraphoto]

I think, the historic aura with all those famous figures, having used Leica Ms sells well and high priced in combination with Ostrich and Hermes leatherettes in limited batches.

It is all about a business model, that works, keeps the company running, it's employees in work …

At the moment, it looks, Leica is on the right path, to sustain the business.
We will see, what the future brings. It doesn't look like Leica's strategy is to compete in the paid shooters business with
Canon and Nikon. It is a pretty fast race, to get involved in.

i wouldn't argue that they seem to have pulled their proverbial arse out of the fire. i wouldn't expect them to abandon the luxury direction.

it isn't really about competing with nikon or canon. it's about breathing a bit more life into the M's venerable history. ape like behavior aside, the word on the working crowd street is that the digital M is fragile, unreliable, and poorly supported. this is the exact opposite of what was once espoused on this very forum. changing that reputation might just prove a wise move by the Leica powers that be.

 

[Nikkor AIS]

Edited OO


Sorry about that

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

if i understand this comment correctly it speaks volumes. the name and mythology that has made the m system what it is seems to have taken a back seat to "luxury". in the long run will this sell more cameras than being known as a tough as nails, reliable reportage tool used by some of the greats of our times?

i don't know the answer but have my suspicions.

Leica cameras are suspiciously expensive. And they've been saying much about "the long run" since the early 1900's.

Lexus is quite a mythological figure at the Paris-Dakar. It would speak volumes about someone complaining that it just "doesn't do the job". And shocked. Shocked!

The poor bloke bringing the Italian leather pants over for his scuba-diving was very angry with his purchase when he saw the other guys' wetsuits working far better. Utter shame, those Italian leatheristas.

 

[emraphoto]

street photography and running about as a stringer or on the call for a daily/wire service is a million miles away from what i have in mind when (if i may borrow from R) i think of "hardening" it up.

i am prepping for a trip that involves a month in the sahara and i would love to bring a pair of M8's. with my experience (M8's) and the demands of the trip it just isn't going to happen. so it's film m's or dslr (not likely). that is where i believe the digital M should become a more viable option.

 

[emraphoto]

Leica cameras are suspiciously expensive. And they've been saying much about "the long run" since the early 1900's.

Lexus is quite a mythological figure at the Paris-Dakar. It would speak volumes about someone complaining that it just "doesn't do the job". And shocked. Shocked!

The poor bloke bringing the Italian leather pants over for his scuba-diving was very angry with his purchase when he saw the other guys' wetsuits working far better. Utter shame, those Italian leatheristas.

the implications are beginning to make my head hurt Gabriel. forgive my lack of response as my translator remains asleep.

it does remind me of a Hemingway comment about simplicity of language... a thread for another day.

 

[emraphoto]

Edited OO


Sorry about that

the points were clear my friend.

 

[monochromejrnl]

street photography and running about as a stringer or on the call for a daily/wire service is a million miles away from what i have in mind when (if i may borrow from R) i think of "hardening" it up.

i am prepping for a trip that involves a month in the sahara and i would love to bring a pair of M8's. with my experience (M8's) and the demands of the trip it just isn't going to happen. so it's film m's or dslr (not likely). that is where i believe the digital M should become a more viable option.

zip lock bags and duct tape

 

[emraphoto]

zip lock bags and duct tape

oh yeah. ziplocs are an absolute must in my bag!

 

[ottluuk]

There's also the problem that Leica lenses are horrendously expensive. Let's see - Canon L series vs current Leica equivalents, B&H prices:

85 f1.2L - $2100 vs Leica 90/2 $3700
50 f1.2L - $1540 vs 50 Lux asph $3700
35 f1.4L - $1400 vs 35 Lux asph $5000
24 f1.4L - $1700 vs Leica 24/1.4 $6500
14 f2.8L - $2250 vs Zeiss 15/2.8 $4600

Kinda makes you think when you're about to shoot an angry mob or dive into a dust storm... Sure, the M lenses are smaller and better - but is it really worth the financial risk? Are viewers going to see the difference?

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

There's always Holga.

 

[emraphoto]

There's also the problem that Leica lenses are horrendously expensive. Let's see - Canon L series vs current Leica equivalents, B&H prices:

85 f1.2L - $2100 vs Leica 90/2 $3700
50 f1.2L - $1540 vs 50 Lux asph $3700
35 f1.4L - $1400 vs 35 Lux asph $5000
24 f1.4L - $1700 vs Leica 24/1.4 $6500
14 f2.8L - $2250 vs Zeiss 15/2.8 $4600

Kinda makes you think when you're about to shoot an angry mob or dive into a dust storm... Sure, the M lenses are smaller and better - but is it really worth the financial risk? Are viewers going to see the difference?

well in some circumstances the leica will contribute to a different look but i get your point. unfortunately most bags contain multiples and that could add up to big $ as opposed to just big.

 

[Roger Hicks]

There's always Holga.

Exactly.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ferider]

We should check how many here own at least two M9. That number (minus dentists) will indicate how many truly use the M9 professionally.

i understand the 'luxury association' marketing gig

Unfortunately, the 'luxury association' fits M9 and lens prices, engineering & QA, and support model like a glove. It is the 'professional association' which is pure marketing.

Don't get me wrong - nothing wrong with luxury items and expensive toys. They can also be used to get you from A to B. Even though I commute with them, I would never say, however, that I use my motorcycles professionally.

Roland.

 

[250swb]

Haven't Leica 'M' cameras been used professionally for nearly sixty years now? I just wonder what happened to those old photographers? Have they left any DNA that can be cloned? Its only the 'common sense' strand we need, the bit that makes it clear in peoples heads that Leica M's have never been sealed, yet they just about managed to make some people very famous as photographers working in all sorts of climatic conditions.

This whinging about whats wrong with everything I tend to think comes from the 'considering what I spent' mental state. People just aren't prepared to get on and do something nowadays without removing all possible risk's. So they want their 'investment' (lol) bullet proofed just on the off chance it rains on them. Its a great excuse not to do something and become famous.

Coulda, woulda, gonna,.... if you can't afford a Leica M9 to use, don't blame the Leica M9, look at yourself, you aren't putting the same commitment in that previous generations did. The film Leica wasn't cheap when Robert Frank took it on a low rent road trip around America, the film Leica wasn't cheap when Tim Page spashed around in the mud of Vietnam on his personal mission.

What I'm saying is that its all relative. If you are passionate about doing it, it doesn't matter if an M9 is weather sealed or not, you go and do it. But if you want to talk of doing it what better way than to find fault so nobody can smirk when it doesn't happen

Steve

 

[emraphoto]

There's also the problem that Leica lenses are horrendously expensive. Let's see - Canon L series vs current Leica equivalents, B&H prices:

85 f1.2L - $2100 vs Leica 90/2 $3700
50 f1.2L - $1540 vs 50 Lux asph $3700
35 f1.4L - $1400 vs 35 Lux asph $5000
24 f1.4L - $1700 vs Leica 24/1.4 $6500
14 f2.8L - $2250 vs Zeiss 15/2.8 $4600

Kinda makes you think when you're about to shoot an angry mob or dive into a dust storm... Sure, the M lenses are smaller and better - but is it really worth the financial risk? Are viewers going to see the difference?

to revisit... this is an interesting comment. not only is the $ difference relative, the support and reliability you purchase with the price is a huge factor in my books. caught out in the rain while tooling about pike place doesn't concern me... dust stormsand 100% humidity does. with this in mind the disconnect is a no brainer.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Exactly.

I don't think anybody (or at least most) will get it. Comparing a bottle of Diet Coke with 18-year-old Macallan and saying that it all comes out the same way at the end (in the end...if you know what I mean) completely misses the point of they're friggin' different even though you can pour it in your plastic cup.

Which brings another point of outrage: how come Baccarat glasses are far more expensive than plastic ones? If you drop the plastic glass on the floor, it won't break, but the Baccarat will. For all that money and it breaks?! Who the hell came up with that design? In the end they all hold liquids...why would anybody...I mean...oh the humanity...

 

[ferider]

What I'm saying is that its all relative. If you are passionate about doing it, it doesn't matter if an M9 is weather sealed or not, you go and do it. But if you want to talk of doing it what better way than to find fault so nobody can smirk when it doesn't happen

Steve

I do recommend to spend a little time in the OPs galleries.

Always liked your photography, John.

Which brings another point of outrage: how come Baccarat glasses are far more expensive than plastic ones? If you drop the plastic glass on the floor, it won't break, but the Baccarat will. For all that money and it breaks?! Who the hell came up with that design? In the end they all hold liquids...why would anybody...I mean...oh the humanity...

The OP does not want to take Baccarat glasses to the Sahara, but a rangefinder for professional photography. He can do that with his film Leicas (provided he takes a couple of screw drivers as well ). Not with the M9, even though Leica's marketing would suggest otherwise. As simple as that.