Well, who doesn’t want things to be easier as they get older? Perhaps they enjoy film but can’t have a darkroom? The switch to digital is a mainstream switch. It is just how the majority of photography is made today. There is no difference between film and digital when it comes to compelling photography. If you believe there is, that is your hang up. Great images are made with both.
Corran
Well-known
There is a difference between what and how one photographs with the two mediums. That's all I'm saying, and there is no reason to "upgrade" to an M9 - and it's really not an upgrade at all from his M6. And has a lot of downgrades. But whatever, he can make his choice.
They both use the same framing device, shutter button and means of focusing. They use a different light capturing medium, but both are perfectly capable of capturing the same scene if a person is capable of finding compelling content and then framing it. The essence of photography is framing compelling content in a compelling way. If you can do it with film, you can do it with digital and vise versa. Anything else is personal preference.
As far as upgrades and downgrades, could be. Again that depends on your wants and needs.
ptpdprinter
Veteran
I haven't found that to be the case.
Corran
Well-known
Then you are the exception and not the rule.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
Haven't thought that turns out to be a film vs digital argument 
Well I always prefer film but I have digital mostly for family things, due to the level of details it captures. So that is why I chose sony nex 7. However digital M might change the way I think. I mostly work BW and film looks still better than digital to my taste. And I like the classic look and feel. Plus the reliability etc. And look how Leica screwed up in digital era. First M8 with UV problem, then sensors with rusting..etc. have they had that often design issues during film cameras era?
Ok they got better and fans are still there due to built quality, compatibility and style regardless of the price tags. Maybe I should go for A7 early versions instead of a digital full frame M.
Well I always prefer film but I have digital mostly for family things, due to the level of details it captures. So that is why I chose sony nex 7. However digital M might change the way I think. I mostly work BW and film looks still better than digital to my taste. And I like the classic look and feel. Plus the reliability etc. And look how Leica screwed up in digital era. First M8 with UV problem, then sensors with rusting..etc. have they had that often design issues during film cameras era?
Ok they got better and fans are still there due to built quality, compatibility and style regardless of the price tags. Maybe I should go for A7 early versions instead of a digital full frame M.
Huss
Veteran
I’m sorry, are we talking to LeicaFoReVer or SonyFoReVer?
The beautiful thing about using a reliable digital Leica like an M240 is that it is by far the closest thing to shooting a film camera that happens to have a digital sensor. Focus, shoot, done.
With a Sony - aim, hit the magnify and /or focus peaking button, slowly focus to what you think is right, try not to get motion sickness with the magnified view, back to full view, hope your composition hasn’t changed and/or the subject hasn’t moved, shoot! Fun!
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I use both, film and digital. Both are M .
For family pictures I prefer AF cameras. Sony will works with OP RF lenses and M to AF E adapter.
I have seen how it works. Not bad at all.
Sony is so attractive because of it. They have small AF lenses as well.
But colors are just with odd cast of green and blue. While even with old M-E if I choose correct WB colors are normal.
.For family pictures I prefer AF cameras. Sony will works with OP RF lenses and M to AF E adapter.
I have seen how it works. Not bad at all.
Sony is so attractive because of it. They have small AF lenses as well.
But colors are just with odd cast of green and blue. While even with old M-E if I choose correct WB colors are normal.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
I’m sorry, are we talking to LeicaFoReVer or SonyFoReVer?
The beautiful thing about using a reliable digital Leica like an M240 is that it is by far the closest thing to shooting a film camera that happens to have a digital sensor. Focus, shoot, done.
With a Sony - aim, hit the magnify and /or focus peaking button, slowly focus to what you think is right, try not to get motion sickness with the magnified view, back to full view, hope your composition hasn’t changed and/or the subject hasn’t moved, shoot! Fun!
that was a mistake I made when chosing my nick at the beginning, I was praising for Leica due to being my first rangefinder, M6. The I discovered Zeiss, Voigtlander and Canon. Still haven't tried any nikon. Sony was my aid to digital with advantage of ability to use rangefinder lenses. However I would like something without crop factor.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
I saw A7s is better with micro lenses etc. Which one was yours?I use both, film and digital. Both are M
For family pictures I prefer AF cameras. Sony will works with OP RF lenses and M to AF E adapter.
I have seen how it works. Not bad at all.
Sony is so attractive because of it. They have small AF lenses as well.
But colors are just with odd cast of green and blue. While even with old M-E if I choose correct WB colors are normal.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Micro or macro? You could use any lens with m240 as long the mount adapter exists and you are ok with MF and evf.
I never owned Sony A7. I had money for it, I had it in the shopping cart, but lens selection was bad. Now they have good, small, affordable lenses, but colour from A7s series or III is odd. Nothing close to nice colours from Leica M or Olympus MFT.