Sell my M9?

[mdwsta4]

I love the M9 as it's a joy to use and I love the results it produces. That being said, after owning one for nearly 2 years, I find I don't use it all that often anymore. It was my primary body until the x100s came out and travelled with me everywhere. The original x100 was my primary camera until I sold it and picked up the M9.

For the past few months, I've enjoyed the x100s mainly for it's high ISO capabilities. I've also recently acquired an M2 which I've been using quite a bit lately as my film/rangefinder fix.

As my as I love the M9, between the x100s and M2 (not to mention Canon gear for paid gigs), I'm wondering if it's time to let the M9 go. Prices have obviously plummeted since the M240 was released, but it's not like they're going to go back up, they're just going to continue to decline.

Obviously I'm posting this in the digital M forum, but I'm interested in hearing what others think.


Thanks!
M

 

[Darthfeeble]

M, you will regret it, I do. There's a quality to the images it will get that isn't in the X cameras. That said, there's a quality in the X cameras that the Leica won't get. I sold mine to finance a return to DSLR versatility, I wouldn't do it again.

 

[raid]

Keep both cameras. You use the M9 for up to ISO 600, and use the Fuji for higher ISO settings. I use 95% of the times ISO less than 400.

 

[Godfrey]

To me, it's a camera. If I'm not using it, and have other things I'd rather do with the money, I sell. You can always buy another—M9s will be around for a long time to come if you want another one.

The M9 represents a lot of money sitting on the shelf and depreciating, if you're not using it. It was for the same reason that I sold my Hasselblad 903SWC in 2004 ... I realized I wasn't using it, prices were slowly coming down, and much as I loved the thing, it was just costing me money to sit on it. I had other uses for the money at that time too. Of course, I missed it, and last year I found the prices for SWCs had stabilized nicely at a lower level, and I had the spare cash, so I bought another. It still mostly sits on the shelf, but it cost me less and I am not strapped for the money now. Same for my Hassy 500CM.

G

 

[swoop]

The M9 will hold around $4k for awhile. Just like the M8 held its price for a long time and the same way the RD-1 used price hasn't really budged. You'll see some desperate sells or really worn ones go for around $3500 but that's about the bottom line. Really great condition bodies are still selling for $4500. Also keep in mind that right now the market is flooded with used M9's as many are selling to upgrade to the new M. As those cameras change hands the price will stabilize.

 

[kshapero]

I sold mine and I regret it but then I regret everything I sell.

 

[Bruno Gracia]

do whatever You want, deep inside, You know.

 

[CameraQuest]

I love the M9 as it's a joy to use and I love the results it produces. That being said, after owning one for nearly 2 years, I find I don't use it all that often anymore. It was my primary body until the x100s came out and travelled with me everywhere. The original x100 was my primary camera until I sold it and picked up the M9.

For the past few months, I've enjoyed the x100s mainly for it's high ISO capabilities. I've also recently acquired an M2 which I've been using quite a bit lately as my film/rangefinder fix.

As my as I love the M9, between the x100s and M2 (not to mention Canon gear for paid gigs), I'm wondering if it's time to let the M9 go. Prices have obviously plummeted since the M240 was released, but it's not like they're going to go back up, they're just going to continue to decline.

Obviously I'm posting this in the digital M forum, but I'm interested in hearing what others think.


Thanks!
M

yep, you should definitely sell it quick.

Better take my $500 before prices go any lower ! 😀

Stephen

 

[jsrockit]

I got rid of my M9 once I got the X-Pro1. The M9 is the more elegant camera and the closest thing to a film camera in digital. However, the X-Pro1 was the better tool for what I wanted to accomplish photographically. I miss it on an emotional level, but not from a practical point of view. Plus, you can always buy another M9 if you end up missing it.

 

[loneranger]

The M9 will hold around $4k for awhile. Just like the M8 held its price for a long time and the same way the RD-1 used price hasn't really budged. You'll see some desperate sells or really worn ones go for around $3500 but that's about the bottom line. Really great condition bodies are still selling for $4500. Also keep in mind that right now the market is flooded with used M9's as many are selling to upgrade to the new M. As those cameras change hands the price will stabilize.

totally agree, I recently saw an M9 with 189,000 shutter actuations sell for around $3500. I doubt if the x100 shutter can even get close to that. Anyways, I think prices on the M9 will be around 4K for a while

 

[hiromu]

If I have a camera that I don't use, and especially if that camera can bring $4000+ of money, then I would sell it.

Unlike film Leica, digital is digital, is digital. Newer one is almost always better than the old one. And once the newer one is more available, the older one gets cheaper on the used market. (And that's how I came back to M8...)

 

[Roger Hicks]

. . . If I'm not using it, and have other things I'd rather do with the money, I sell. . . .

For me, there is a fundamental dimension missing in this argument. For HOW LONG do you have not to use it? Ten days? Ten weeks? Ten months? Ten years?

For that matter, what is "not using it"? Never? Or taking 50% of your pictures with something else? 75%? 50%? 99%?

Cheers,

R.

 

[jsrockit]

For me, there is a fundamental dimension missing in this argument. For HOW LONG do you have not to use it? Ten days? Ten weeks? Ten months? Ten years?

For that matter, what is "not using it"? Never? Or taking 50% of your pictures with something else? 75%? 50%? 99%?

For me it was when it became my third option... and then because of that it sat for months. A third option camera shouldn't cost twice as much as my first and second options combined.

There's two schools of thought here. There are those that like to keep everything they bought and don't care about depreciation...because they plan on keeping it. Others like to upgrade often and get what they can get back after using it for awhile. Neither is wrong.

 

[kennylovrin]

I have a tendency to sell stuff quickly after I haven't used it for a while. I'm also very indecisive in the sense that one day I can think "I'll sell everything except my hasselblad" and then the next day I can think "god I never use that hasselblad, I'm going to sell it".

I've been like that with all my cameras basically, and the most recent example is the hasselblad that I think I've owned for not even two months.

The thing is that I am a hobbyist, and while the argument "I use that camera for this and the other camera for that" works for some it doesn't work for me.

I find it very stressful having several cameras, I don't shoot stuff that requires me to have one high ISO camera and another one for being "unseen on the streets" etc. I just shoot..

But I've realized one thing after I bought my M9, and it is that I stopped feeling the urge to upgrade, since then I've tried an M6 as well for the film experience which then stressed me out ("why do I have two cameras that are the same, one digital and one film" - that kind of thing) so I sold that. Then I bought the hasselblad to try out that.

But none of the new digital cameras interest me anymore, and I've realized it's because I "respond emotionally" to my M9. I think that is why I started to miss my M6 again. I don't feel anything like that with the hasselblad, or any other cameras I've owned for that matter earlier, so I might sell it and get another film M perhaps in the future.

So yeah, what I'm trying to say is that if you have no emotional connection to the camera, and no technical requirement to use it, no point in keeping it.

On the other hand, having an emotional response to a camera might sound a bit ridiculous, but that is how it is for me. That is probably also why I accept the ridiculous price of the M9 (I actually think it is overpriced, but I choose to accept it).

The draw of the Leica brand is pretty strong I guess. 🙂

 

[hausen]

I dropped my M9 in the harbour awhile ago and I also miss it on an emotional level, but replaced it with RX-1 and don't miss M9 on a practical level. Agree also with the point Roger makes above. Think it is easy to have an expensive camera and then ask yourself whether you are using it enough to justify the outlay or whether to hold onto it. Think you will always second guess whatever decision you make but I think if you are asking yourself this question then sell.

 

[tempest68]

Use it or lose it!

 

[mdwsta4]

Thanks for all the input everyone. I haven't shot a frame on the M9 for 3 months. That's quite a long time for me. Earlier today I was going over some images I've taken with it and remembering that my x100s simply doesn't produce the same quality files or lovely bokeh that my 50 cron does.

Going to let it simmer for another few days after looking back at old photos, but like many of you said, it is a decent chunk of money to have sitting around not being used.

 

[thompsonks]

Your question is one that others like myself are likely to ask. A friend has been asking herself the same question, and in my case I'm going to sell one of two M9 bodies. For me, the X100s takes care of everything except for the opportunities that matter most.

Leica has more trouble than Fuji with white balance, with Fuji files needing much less initial correction. From what I've seen, M240 white balance looks even more problematic than M9, though I understand a firmware update is on the way. For the time being, I'd rather have a Fuji and an M9 than a Fuji and an M240, and plan sell one of two M9 bodies.

At the moment I'm making a set of 14x21" exhibition prints from Fuji files. They always look fine in little versions, but prove hard to print large. They hold up well from the standpoint of resolution, but it takes a lot of work to reproduce the liveliness of prints from Leica files. Larger prints generally need a bit more saturation and contrast, and X100s files seem to present tonality and contrast problems that don't yield to straightforward corrections. I find mixes of flat shadows and highlights with OK midranges, and have to do some compensatory manipulation.

My solution is to carry the Fuji as a 'constant companion' camera, but to use M9 when shooting more intentionally. YMMV, but this works best for me.

 

[rwchisholm]

I wouldn't

I wouldn't

Sell the M9, that is...

I've bought and sold all of them and just repurchased the M9. The CCD is pretty awesome. No, not the highest dynamic range. No, ISO capabilities pale in comparison to other cameras. But the M9 and the available lenses are pretty rad.

My advice, keep the M9 and a "pocket" camera, like the x100s, for the higher ISo stuff. I have the RX1 and soon to have the M9 again. The rx1 will be my quick and dirty camera and the M9 for more serious, thoughtful work. Best of both worlds. R

 

[Pioneer]

Can't really advise you on this but I will tell you how I feel.

For me the M9 is an important camera so I use it. Not all the time, but often enough that I don't want to sell it. You obviously do not feel the same so it may be best for you to sell it and move on. In my case I have an emotional attachment because it is the only digital camera I own that feels just like a film camera when I am using it. Based on your initial post you are more concerned about the depreciation and do not have that same attachment. Sell it and move on.