Question about buying a M9 now

If the M9 and 240 had come out at the same time and cost the same, I would choose the M9 for the form factor. The 240 always felt bloated. I imagine I'm not the only in this camp.

This is to say, that for some people the value equation is complicated by a preference for the M9, despite all the limitations that are ascribed to it and which might not be seen as such by all users. Personally, I'd prefer an M9 at $1800 with corrosion-prone screen and $1000 in repairs on the horizon, than a 240 at $3300 --knowing full well that the 240 is a "better" camera.
 
x-ray said:
The new sensors haven't had enough time to prove themselves yet. Also you're buying a camera that has a tiny buffer, poor LCD and has had numerous other problems. In digital years the M9 is ancient.
Click to expand...

If you dislike chimping and machinegunning those two objections are utterly irrelevant. Mine is completely reliable, has been since 2009, but did need a new sensor. And the images are beautiful.
 
brennanphotoguy said:
No, it makes the cheap price worth the bull**** that comes with it. That's what we in the real world like to call "value." The camera is not as good as other cameras in it's class and price range. Hence the recent drop in price due to advancing technology. So therefore, to put up with lower technology you should pay a lower price. You say none of these things are a big deal but when you're paying over $2000 for a piece of digital technology that is approaching 8-9 years old they should be a factor in the purchase price. When you want to rely on an M9 for lets say, weddings, you need to be able to have a camera that you're not constantly changing batteries in or locking up on you causing you to remove the battery and turn it back on. Sometimes you need to check critical focus or open eyes in photos.
Click to expand...

Bang, bang, bang, do no think, but chimp on the monitor until it looks good. Obviously, M9 family is not for it. And I don't think Winogrand or HCB would like M9, either. Their decisive moment required not just one frame often :)

Yet, I have seen and not just once wedding work online with M9 and I know RFF member who is using M-E for work. Don't know why it was chosen for work, but it works for them.
And here is no any other camera in the digital full frame rangefinder class rather than Leica. This is why even older, not FF M8 still costs 1.2K USD.
 
froyd said:
Personally, I'd prefer an M9 at $1800 with corrosion-prone screen and $1000 in repairs on the horizon, than a 240 at $3300 --knowing full well that the 240 is a "better" camera.
Click to expand...

But you are taking a massive risk in trusting that Leica will still perform that repair in the near future. No matter what they say now - again, they already have back pedaled on their support claims for this camera.
And if they still will replace the sensor, you may find that the price is now $1500. $1000 for the sensor, $500 to put it in... And on top of that may be w/o your camera for 6 months.
The one thing that Leica has demonstrated with the M9 series as that we cannot trust them.

That's a whole heap o stuff to consider when dropping $1800 on a 9 year old digital camera.
 
ptpdprinter said:
Particularly since I haven't seen any M9s for $1800.
Click to expand...

This broken one is $1475


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1520128

Personally that's how much I'd pay for one w/ a new sensor.

Get this, mint condition Sony A7Rii cameras - 42mp w/ IBIS and can be adapted to use any lenses - are now $1600. Some with warranties. (don't bother looking on ebay, look on sites like fredmiranda).
Paying $2K + for a time bomb digi camera just because it has the Leica sticker on it is nuts. If it is a Leica film camera? Sure cuz they are awesome and last and can be repaired easily if needed. But throw away digi? Nope.
 
Huss said:
This broken one is $1475


http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1520128

Personally that's how much I'd pay for one w/ a new sensor.

Get this, mint condition Sony A7Rii cameras - 42mp w/ IBIS and can be adapted to use any lenses - are now $1600. Some with warranties. (don't bother looking on ebay, look on sites like fredmiranda).
Paying $2K + for a time bomb digi camera just because it has the Leica sticker on it is nuts. If it is a Leica film camera? Sure cuz they are awesome and last and can be repaired easily if needed. But throw away digi? Nope.
Click to expand...

I think this is the first time Huss and I have 100% agreed on anything together at all. *raises beer from across the internet*
 
Yes. I recently picked up a 1st version Monochrome (M9 era) that I knew had sensor problems and i knew I'd have to get it fixed. I priced it accordingly knowing it was about $1k for the sensor replacement.

andrew00 said:
Hey,
So my question is this: Would you buy an M9 in 2017 that is NOT a new sensor camera? Assuming it does not currently show corrosion.
Click to expand...
 
I would never buy one at this late date that did not have the new sensor. The gap in market prices between new- and old-sensor models seems a lot smaller than it should be, not fully factoring in the cost and opportunity cost of getting the sensor replaced down the line. Any M9 sent for a sensor replacement will be with Leica for a good long time.

I had an M9-P (600g) and now have an M262 (600g), which feels much more M9-like than the M240 does.
 
Just a little point...

Just a little point...

Hi,


As we've been discussing prices, dare I point out that prices go up before Christmas but - after the January sales - go down in mid January. Also all the bills for December's spending will have come home to roost and so on...


Regards, David
 
jaapv said:
If you dislike chimping and machinegunning those two objections are utterly irrelevant. Mine is completely reliable, has been since 2009, but did need a new sensor. And the images are beautiful.
Click to expand...

I make my living as a commercial photographer. I'm not using it for vacation pictures and pictures of my cat and kids.

As a professional my camera has to be ready when I'm ready. Imagine working with an art director and clients and shooting an ad with models and the moment everything in the shot comes together perfect that the camera won't fire because the buffer is full. Then wait and wait and wait then shoot a few more frames and miss the expressions your client was looking for. This is just fine if you're on vacation or photographing your cat but when there's money and reputation riding in it it doesn't work. This isnt machine gunning, i hardly ever shoot in continuous mode with any camera but rather shoot single frame anticipating the action to catch it at its peak. Shooting continuous you most often wind up with tons of unusable frames but timing and anticipating you get a high number of excellent frames. Again the camera has to be ready when I am.

The LCD is primarily for my clients. I always carry laptop on location and have multiple computers in the studio now but In the film days we used Polaroid to confirm with the client the position of components in the shot and check for details that might need tweaked before committing film. Now the LCD serves as a quick proof much like a polaroid. After the client gives the nod on what they see on the LCD I shoot a few test frames to view on the computer before making the actual shots.

Reliability is critical. When you have clients paying major money they're not very forgiving of missed shots or equipment problems. They're not paying you for excuses. Let's say this, the name Leica means nothing to a client. They only want the job executed the way they envisioned. If you don't deliver you can say goodby to a client.

You're a dentist correct? Would you go back to old technology like the slow drills of the 50's? Or do you and your patients prefer the turbine drills of today. The M9 has better image quality when it's working than the D1 Nikon I had in the early 2000's but the LCD and buffer are pretty much the same, Stone Age.

I know your camera is perfect but the M9 I owned was a disaster. I only carried it on a job if I carried one of my Nikons as a backup. It was simply too unreliable.

Now do you want to discuss service or the lack of?
 
I make my living from photography and as much as I like my M9 I never really use it for work, but then again I wouldn't buy any Leica to use for work, maybe thats why I still like the M9 as all it really is used for is high -days and holidays. Some may disagree but using a Leica as a main camera for paid work makes no commercial sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom