Sad day for me - my M9 died

David Hughes said:
Trouble is we only learn about the dud ones. There might be thousands out there unaffected. Leica could do a little more to reassure us...


Regards, David
Click to expand...

Pretty much every single M9/M-E has failed.
I don't know of anyone who has/had an M9 that did NOT fail. That's why no-one will touch an M9 on the used mkt unless it is documented to have the latest sensor in it.
And that only protects against sensor corrosion failure.
 
Huss said:
M9 is not slim. It’s a chunky thing.
Click to expand...

As a user of both the M9 and Leica M film cameras, I can say the reports of its chunkiness are exaggerated. OK, it's a little thicker, front to back, than an M2. But this is only really noticed during fondling, not when shooting. If I go from my M2 or other film M bodies to the M9, the difference is not a problem. It simply feels like an M9 is supposed to feel. I wouldn't buy an M10 just because it's the same thickness as my M2!
 
M9 is a unique camera with its CCD sensor. But personally I think it's better to get an M10 instead of paying $1700 to replace a sensor. I bought my M10 in 2017, and I never regret it. It helps me to capture so many enjoyable moments without failing me. Its user experience is way better than M9.

By the way, my experience with Leica digital is so far, so good. I bought a second-hand M9 in 2010 and 2014. I send them to Leica NJ in 2013 and 2017. The staff in Leica NJ accepted the camera without asking a receipt or warranty card. They replaced the latest sensor for me and also replaced the leather at the same time for free. I will keep my M9 as a backup camera with M10.
 
I prefer RPN, too. I'm stocked up: I have an HP-11, two HP 41c, and another HP I can't remember the number of. I keep meaning to add an HP-12.
 
KEVIN-XU 愛 forever;2942558 said:
They replaced the latest sensor for me and also replaced the leather at the same time for free. I will keep my M9 as a backup camera with M10.
Click to expand...

They have to replace the leather as they have to remove the old one and cannot reuse it.
 
Beemermark said:
Now I have to worry about my 1972 HP-21 calculator with RPN failing. If that fails I'll have to drop back to my slide rule. (nobody makes a calculator anymore with RPN).
Click to expand...

Probably no need to worry. Plenty of 70s electronics are still working. HPs were mostly built to a quality over price and they still seem to be plentiful in working order. They do actually still make new RPN calculators too - I have a 35S that's not very old and still made.
 
I really like the M9 handling. Besides the thickness, Leica M9 button and menu are so easy to use. I played with my friend's M240 and I couldn't get used to the button layout. M10 is pretty easy to use too.

Another thing i now realized why the M10 never felt good when I played with it at Leica Paris and Leica Washington DC, it didn't have black paint , my M9 has a classic black paint and over time, the patina showed up nicely, I felt good every time I used it. :) :)

Rob-F said:
As a user of both the M9 and Leica M film cameras, I can say the reports of its chunkiness are exaggerated. OK, it's a little thicker, front to back, than an M2. But this is only really noticed during fondling, not when shooting. If I go from my M2 or other film M bodies to the M9, the difference is not a problem. It simply feels like an M9 is supposed to feel. I wouldn't buy an M10 just because it's the same thickness as my M2!
Click to expand...
 
If you shoot Leica for the RF focusing/viewing experience then I guess a person is stuck with what they build. But if just to use Leica glass then the OP could get a used, LN full frame Sony mirrorless with a M adapter for less than $1K.
Maybe that would be a viable option to resume use of the lenses, even if eventually they purchase another M digital.
 
IME, don't underestimate your ability to get used to using newer things and make them your own, whether it be moving from Leica M9 to something else, Apple Mac to Windows or what have you. A good raw file should actually look flat and "blah" right out of the camera, but if your ideal is to use images exactly as they come out of the camera with no further processing, try shooting JPEG instead.
 
KEVIN-XU 愛 forever;2942558 said:
M9 is a unique camera with its CCD sensor. But personally I think it's better to get an M10 instead of paying $1700 to replace a sensor..... I will keep my M9 as a backup camera with M10.
Click to expand...

:rolleyes:

Some of us not doing this well to be able keep 3000K USD camera just as backup.
If my M-E will need another service, I still have bunch of under 200$ cameras as backup. :) Like 12800 ISO capable Canon and 3200 ISO capable Olympus.

BTW, from recent reported troubles I have seen, M9 might be not good solution as backup. I have seen some reports about M9 not been in use, pooled after months on the shelf and ... crapping out.
 
Not only the M9 breaks. In December the shutter of my MP broke. Leica/Wetzlar charged me 974 Euro and 15 Cent for the repair. I am cured of the Leica virus for now.
 
I still have my HP calculators from business school. They do keep on kicking.

That said, I maintain, all electronics are ultimately doomed.

Those are from an era where things had to work more than they had to be tiny. Fitting an entire full-frame CCD processing computer into an M size body was a lot to ask at the time, and you can tell that they weren't as adept at it as they are today.
 
all electronics are eventually doomed due to obsolete, not systematically doomed like Leica M9. I just gave a way my Canon 20D to a friend who continuously makes great photos like I did when 20D first came out (2004)

What I am about to ask Leica is to explain why how the corrosion sensor related to the total failure of the sensors like mine.

I can live with corrosion since it doesn't affect my photos at f2.8 or bellow, but the sensor failed completely rendering the camera totally useless.
 
I had an M9 when they first came out, yes, the colors were nice but nothing I could not replicate in minor adjustments in post. I now use an M10-P which is by far the best digital M I have ever used, great files, super quiet and the right size.

I would not touch an M9 at this point, not worth the risk and with so many great used M10's on the market, it's a no brainier, much better camera at any price.
 
Hello KM,

M10 is one of the possibility that I would consider. However, flickr photos of M10 is hard to tell if they are heavily processed or not.

The reason I asked RFF opinion because i think RFF members don't process their photos heavily . Do you have any photos of M10 that you like to show me how the skin tone looks like?

Appreciate your help.

KM-25 said:
I had an M9 when they first came out, yes, the colors were nice but nothing I could not replicate in minor adjustments in post. I now use an M10-P which is by far the best digital M I have ever used, great files, super quiet and the right size.

I would not touch an M9 at this point, not worth the risk and with so many great used M10's on the market, it's a no brainier, much better camera at any price.
Click to expand...
 
I am actively using an M8 (once repaired) and an M9 (its third sensor in place). Both cameras work fine now. I am not fooling myself to believe that either M I own will last for another ten years. Therefore, I have been scouting the market for an additional digital M or SL or SL2. I am getting more and more inclined to look for an M10. The M8 shows a vertical white line when shooting at ISO 1000 or higher. The M9 "is hanging in there".
 
At least I still have my M3 with a M6J range finder installed to use with my 35mm cron. Still take great B&W photos. :) .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom