kshapero
South Florida Man
Two great cameras, but almost $4500 difference.😱 Can you justify the M9?
M9 vs D700
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 77
- Views 6K
kipkeston
Well-known
Nope but maybe later.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Can you justify buying a camera you don't really want anything like as much, just because it's cheaper?
A camera that's completely different in design philosophy, handling, weight and complexity?
Not a hard choice -- if you want the M9 badly enough.
Cheers,
R.
A camera that's completely different in design philosophy, handling, weight and complexity?
Not a hard choice -- if you want the M9 badly enough.
Cheers,
R.
swoop
Well-known
For the size, photographic style, lenses it uses and quality of images. I say yes.
I thought about switching. to either a Canon or Nikon system. While it would be more cash savvy. It really wouldn't be worth the hassle.
I thought about switching. to either a Canon or Nikon system. While it would be more cash savvy. It really wouldn't be worth the hassle.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I am about halfway there in saving up for the M9.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
dfoo
Well-known
Apple vs. Oranges. Both are fruit. That's about the only similarity. Same with D700 & M9.
Pablito
coco frío
No, the price is obscene, vulgar.
David_Manning
Well-known
D700 is brilliant...but it's a different shooting style. My own opinion is that for digital cameras, it really can't be beat, especially factoring in the entry price. It's SO much faster to shoot well, and much more flexible, than an RF camera.
On the other hand, I love my M6 because it's so compact but has FF depth of field.
I'm not sure I could live with either one exclusively. For me, the D700 for speed and existing light, a film M for RF-style slow, methodical, surreptitious, thoughtful storytelling.
But at the M9's price point, I couldn't justify it...it would have to be much more camera.
My .02
On the other hand, I love my M6 because it's so compact but has FF depth of field.
I'm not sure I could live with either one exclusively. For me, the D700 for speed and existing light, a film M for RF-style slow, methodical, surreptitious, thoughtful storytelling.
But at the M9's price point, I couldn't justify it...it would have to be much more camera.
My .02
Paddy C
Unused film collector
I believe that no matter what might be said, most of us here would love an M9 but just can't justify the cost/afford it.
A camera that expensive, for what I do, is just irresponsible. But I'm not about to buy a D700 just because I can't swing the M9. Sort of like buying a car because you can't afford a boat.
A camera that expensive, for what I do, is just irresponsible. But I'm not about to buy a D700 just because I can't swing the M9. Sort of like buying a car because you can't afford a boat.
dws21uk
Member
My feelings too, I've done a lot of soul searching recently over upgrading the D300 to a D700 or getting a used M8. The D700 won. I have my R2A, and that will last me for quite a while, as I'm sure I'll need to wait a few years before a FF rangefinder becomes as affordable as a D700.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
The end results can be much the same but they are very different cameras ... and I can't afford either! The M9 much less though! 😛
surfer dude
Well-known
I would - could - no more justify parting with the money for the D700 as I would for the M9. They are digital cameras. I have a very nice digital Olympus system that cost me less than the body alone price of even the Nikon.
What is it with people falling over themselves to pay outrageous prices for digital equipment, especially 35mm frame size? These bring new meaning to the term "built-in obsolescence". I am consequently lucky enough to possess some very nice film cameras because people sold them off cheaply to get into the latest digital.
To each his own I guess.
What is it with people falling over themselves to pay outrageous prices for digital equipment, especially 35mm frame size? These bring new meaning to the term "built-in obsolescence". I am consequently lucky enough to possess some very nice film cameras because people sold them off cheaply to get into the latest digital.
To each his own I guess.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
makes PURRfect sense to me
Right now I ONLY shoot Film....
but I think the price of an M9 is absurd in Today's Digital World
which is ever changing
Cheers - helen
gb hill
Veteran
Ditch the FF digital idea & shoot the m-7. You can shoot/dev a whole lot of film for what a FF camera will cost you. By the time you shoot enough film in the m-7 to justify the monies saved for the digital what shape, or how obsolete will the camera be. What will be the resale advantage of the m-7 over the m-9? (electronics only last so long) good reason to buy an MP instead. If you must shoot digital remember you have the Ricoh that takes great photos.
Livesteamer
Well-known
I can justify spending lots of money on M6's because they will last my lifetime. I wonder what the life of an M9 will be. Even a D700 is a lot of money to spend for a camera that may only last a few years. This is especially true for an amateur like me. Joe
Livesteamer
Well-known
I should have added that my M6's, while expensive, can be used and retain their value. What will be the depreciation for digital cameras, both M9 and D700. Joe
Vince Lupo
Whatever
I have a D700 and love using it for most of my commercial work. As well, I've saved up my money for the m9, so now all I'm waiting for is for the darned cameras to show up.
As far as saving for a camera goes, I had to save up for the D700, so it's really no different (granted, I had to save up a lot more for the M9!). Same goes for my flash equipment, new computer, or really any of my equipment upgrades. I use the D700 every day for my business as a commercial photographer, and the M9 will be the perfect complement to the D700's capabilities. And I'll be able to use all the vintage Leica lenses that I have for both commercial and personal purposes, and have also cleaned out some of my vintage cameras that have been sitting in boxes more than they have been used (plus that's what is primarily paying for the camera).
So it really depends, I suppose, on where something like the M9 (or D700 any camera for that matter) would fit into your photographic life. From a commercial standpoint, it works for me and the present system that I have.....but that's just me.
From what I've read, Leica has committed to supporting the M9 for 20 years, and will offer potential sensor upgrades as they come along.
As far as saving for a camera goes, I had to save up for the D700, so it's really no different (granted, I had to save up a lot more for the M9!). Same goes for my flash equipment, new computer, or really any of my equipment upgrades. I use the D700 every day for my business as a commercial photographer, and the M9 will be the perfect complement to the D700's capabilities. And I'll be able to use all the vintage Leica lenses that I have for both commercial and personal purposes, and have also cleaned out some of my vintage cameras that have been sitting in boxes more than they have been used (plus that's what is primarily paying for the camera).
So it really depends, I suppose, on where something like the M9 (or D700 any camera for that matter) would fit into your photographic life. From a commercial standpoint, it works for me and the present system that I have.....but that's just me.
From what I've read, Leica has committed to supporting the M9 for 20 years, and will offer potential sensor upgrades as they come along.
Last edited:
lightshot
Established
In my life the D700 is the better choice based on usage not on price. We need the D700 for photography work, but have little use for an M9. Maybe some day I will try an M9 and save up to buy one, but in the meantime it was an easy choice for me.
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
No, I personally couldn't justify the difference and settled for the D700. I just could not see spending the additional money just to be able to use a FF DRF that may or may not be as good as the D700 is. When I want the RF experience I'll just use the film RFs that I have. If you want it bad enough go for it but I'll live with the Nikon.
Bob
Similar threads
