Let's look at numbers here, since this is your livelihood.
An M-9 is a one-time investment, plus occasional maintenance. How often does a camera really need maintenance, though? It will depreciate greatly at first, take advantage of the tax code with the depreciation. You already have the glass, but you might need an adaptor.
A film camera has operating costs. You have to purchase film and have it processed. Let's assume that if you drive or mail it, total cost is somewhere between $15-20. I only get about two per 36 frames that I like. Unless your
this guy and get 32 keepers per roll,
you're losing 95% of that money. Your success rate is surely higher than mine, though.
Assuming you already have the Leica film body and glass, you can shoot 12,600 frames of 35mm for the price of a Leica M-9.
That's a lot of film, but less than a roll a day for a year. You'll still have to scan the keepers, and $7000 later you still won't have a digital Leica M-mount. So, if you shoot enough the M-9 will pay for itself because your operating costs of the film body. If you don't adjust your prices, nor should you, you've become more profitable.
My suggestion, if a cropped M-8 isn't an option, is to wait until the M-9's start popping up on the used market. I can't see how 35mm film is profitable
for photographers anymore, and the argument against it gets stronger with more megapixels available in cameras each new year. Is the M-9 going to be obsolete when the M-10 is introduced? It certainly won't make the M-9 less functional...
Medium format still has some advantages over digital, so I'd keep the Hassy. Digital backs are available for the Hassy, and the same thought process applies for it.
So, yes--I'd say a digital Leica M-8 or M-9 would be wise.
