haempe
Well-known
Thanks, Vince.
What me hunts is the question, can a M9 rise my appreciation for files. I use digital cameras only for work and I have never the same esteem for the files as for my negatives. I handle my negs carefully, archive penible... if a file is gone, its gone... that cares me not really.
Is a lovely Digi-Cam the key to beginning to love files...?
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
After two years I'm still trying to get/work the bugs out of my M8............with the semi bad experiences I've had with Modern Leica, I think the only way I'd ever end up with a M9 would be to trade my IIIC K and MOOLY C motor for one. :/
I'm getting my old "Wetzlar" Leitz M6 back with the Ver 4 Cron f2/50 and I'm really stoked about going back to film, too bad they stopped developing film in your area, I think I'll be building myself a dark room in the next few years to be certain.
Great shots BTW Vince, really like that Elmarit shot and the details with the cat ~ But still in my opinion the camera's way overpriced at $7,000 - after seeing the factory video of the production line and realizing that 3/4 of the entire works of the M9 are built in Portugal (the cameras are just finished at Solms) I don't feel the full frame constitutes paying such big money for a camera that's just finished in Germany not totally built there.
I don't know maybe I'll change my mind when I get the M9 in my hands for the first time?
I'm trying not to be a sourpuss, but I figure that if my M8 goes back enough times the factory will go ahead and replace it, I have seen that done with some of the early cameras like mine is.
I still LOVE film and personally for me the Leica has always been the #1 film camera there is out there and I'm going to go back to my roots and try to sell some Retro PiNuP photo packages to the girls out there, hardly anyone left here in Central Florida is even shooting film anymore, my M6 and Chrome IIIC K are iconic at the camera club meetings here, the photog's come up to me and ask me if they can touch them (pett them) while it seems to be they are like some extinct rare animal *sigh*
Tom
I'm getting my old "Wetzlar" Leitz M6 back with the Ver 4 Cron f2/50 and I'm really stoked about going back to film, too bad they stopped developing film in your area, I think I'll be building myself a dark room in the next few years to be certain.
Great shots BTW Vince, really like that Elmarit shot and the details with the cat
~ But still in my opinion the camera's way overpriced at $7,000 - after seeing the factory video of the production line and realizing that 3/4 of the entire works of the M9 are built in Portugal (the cameras are just finished at Solms) I don't feel the full frame constitutes paying such big money for a camera that's just finished in Germany not totally built there.I don't know maybe I'll change my mind when I get the M9 in my hands for the first time?
I'm trying not to be a sourpuss, but I figure that if my M8 goes back enough times the factory will go ahead and replace it, I have seen that done with some of the early cameras like mine is.
I still LOVE film and personally for me the Leica has always been the #1 film camera there is out there and I'm going to go back to my roots and try to sell some Retro PiNuP photo packages to the girls out there, hardly anyone left here in Central Florida is even shooting film anymore, my M6 and Chrome IIIC K are iconic at the camera club meetings here, the photog's come up to me and ask me if they can touch them (pett them) while it seems to be they are like some extinct rare animal *sigh*
Tom
Last edited:
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Fortunately I still have a number of 'extinct rare animals', such as my screw mount Leicas and my Contaflex TLR, so I haven't completely turned my back on film. But, for the considerable investment (actually $6400!), for me it was worth it. My mind and my work are so focused on digital, that film has now become something that I use once in a great while. And I don't personally feel that my photography has suffered, or my 'experience' of using a camera has been compromised (of course, using the old lenses is a big bonus), but what I really did was some 'house cleaning' of cameras that I hadn't been using, and shifted that money to the M9. Plus - here again, for me personally - it's become a great bridge between the personal and professional.
As far as appreciation for files vs negs goes -- just have a hard drive crash, and you'll definitely appreciate your files!
As far as appreciation for files vs negs goes -- just have a hard drive crash, and you'll definitely appreciate your files!
The Meaness
Well-known
Is #8 the Hektor? Great photos - and a well told story.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
The horizontal one with Boris cutting Mary's hair? Yes, that's the 73 Hektor, shot at about f/2.2, I think.
porktaco
Well-known
More Hektor please indeed!
Shot at f/2.2, ISO 160
this and the elmar are both glorious.
film is gorgeous, but expensive.
haempe
Well-known
I had 3 or 4 in the last 15 years, I don't have any file older than 5 years, I think thats the difference.
Not a longlasting feel, like for a negative (I had fortunately no house fire yet -
).But anyway, thanks for explaining your thoughts about that and ...
Good light!
_goodtimez
Well-known
Vince, I believe that poeple acquiring an M9, and considering the high tag, are healthy enaugh to keep their old stuff as well.
Think twice, if you have as much as nice film cameras is because you love it.
Have you considered procesing your B&W yourself ? this is where the fun is.
Going from what you have to an M9 is going to be a hard transition and if you are just wondering it could mean you would regret it.
Think twice, if you have as much as nice film cameras is because you love it.
Have you considered procesing your B&W yourself ? this is where the fun is.
Going from what you have to an M9 is going to be a hard transition and if you are just wondering it could mean you would regret it.
LeicaTom
Watch that step!
The M9 does seem to really work well with the older lenses, which is what my style of Photography is all about (Vintage PinUp).
I have a chance now to possibly acquire one now, but one of my cherished collectors IIIC K's will go out for a sale/trade. I find it hard to do this, while I still don't know enough about the M9 yet and my experience with the M8 wasn't so happy, with sensor problems, sudden death, multi photos in one frame, sensor dirty all the time, battery life stinks etc. etc.
I'm really wanting to go back to doing more film work also, (the past year was a bad year for me and my work, after my car accident) and well I traded my M6 away (for the second time) and now I'm getting it back (to stay this time) but if I get the M9, I will try to get back into the swing of things, using a full frame digital and MOSTLY 50mm lenses.......
I'm just wondering if I will have that same exciting feeing I had with getting the M8 (before it started acting up on me). I did find the M8 a great camera despite all the troubles mine gave , it did take great photos when it was working, I just couldn't rely on it 100% to carry on my business.
I hope that with the M9 Leica has made a camera that I can carry on working in my business shooting the vintage PinUp's and also backing it up with a Film M6, I hope that the M9 is a camera that can hold up to daily use and produce photos BETTER than the M8 did?
(I've read somehere that the M8 takes better photos (BETTER COLOR & SHARPNESS) due to having no IR blocker?) How true is this statement???
I'd like to hear from everyone who made the transistion from M8 to M9 and or people who are using the M9 full time and what they think?
Thanks
Tom
I have a chance now to possibly acquire one now, but one of my cherished collectors IIIC K's will go out for a sale/trade. I find it hard to do this, while I still don't know enough about the M9 yet and my experience with the M8 wasn't so happy, with sensor problems, sudden death, multi photos in one frame, sensor dirty all the time, battery life stinks etc. etc.
I'm really wanting to go back to doing more film work also, (the past year was a bad year for me and my work, after my car accident) and well I traded my M6 away (for the second time) and now I'm getting it back (to stay this time) but if I get the M9, I will try to get back into the swing of things, using a full frame digital and MOSTLY 50mm lenses.......
I'm just wondering if I will have that same exciting feeing I had with getting the M8 (before it started acting up on me). I did find the M8 a great camera despite all the troubles mine gave , it did take great photos when it was working, I just couldn't rely on it 100% to carry on my business.
I hope that with the M9 Leica has made a camera that I can carry on working in my business shooting the vintage PinUp's and also backing it up with a Film M6, I hope that the M9 is a camera that can hold up to daily use and produce photos BETTER than the M8 did?
(I've read somehere that the M8 takes better photos (BETTER COLOR & SHARPNESS) due to having no IR blocker?) How true is this statement???
I'd like to hear from everyone who made the transistion from M8 to M9 and or people who are using the M9 full time and what they think?
Thanks
Tom
Last edited by a moderator:
MCTuomey
Veteran
I'd like to hear from everyone who made the transistion from M8 to M9 and or people who are using the M9 full time and what they think?
Thanks
Tom
Tom, I'm trying to make that transition myself, for the sake of greater resolution. Too early to say a lot, and also hard to say because I'm not in a position to shoot the cameras side-by-side at the same subjects. The file differences I've seen so far seem to be addressable as part of post-processing (I only shoot DNG): variations in white balance, sharpness, noise, and contrast. Also, the M9 itself seems more demanding in terms of focus accuracy for a given lens (apparent shallower depth of field).
I need to do my color management and start printing to say anything with confidence.
Ben Z
Veteran
FIY coding that lens (and the 15mm as well) as the pre-ASPH 21 Elmarit works quite well to correct red edge as long as the ISO is 160 (and most likely in the situations where red edge is the most noticeable--outdoors in daylight--one most likely can shoot at 160).
loquax ludens
Well-known
To the OP, here is the answer to your film lab woes. You don't even need a darkroom, just a dark bag for film loading. This is quite a lot cheaper than buying an M9.
Nice JOBO ATL 2000 Film/Print Processor w/lots of extra
Nice JOBO ATL 2000 Film/Print Processor w/lots of extra
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Honestly, I've lost the energy to develop black and white film. As a commercial photographer, I shoot all day, and then sit in front of the computer working on images. To then spend my weekends/nights processing film has now become a bit much for me, and it's much easier to integrate photos from a digital Leica into my current work flow. As an example, I did in fact break down and buy some chemicals in the hopes of processing a few rolls of Tri-X that I shot. That was two months ago, and both the film and chemicals are still sitting. And BTW, I am no stranger to processing and printing B+W, so I know the drill, have all the stuff, changing bag, etc etc. I just don't think it's going to happen with any regularity at this point.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
A few shots from the National Gallery in DC last weekend....
furcafe
Veteran
I can see where someone who only shoots B&W & certain types of subject matter (landscapes?) might find the extra IR sensitivity of the M8 to be an advantage, but as far as general photography, I can't say that the M8 takes better photos than the M9. For me, the M9 is a better camera in practically every aspect (I wouldn't have minded keeping the M8's LCD frame counter & having a real chrome finish option, but those are minor quibbles), which is why I sold my M8.
As I posted earlier, the only "bad" thing about the M9 (other than the price) was finding out how many of my old lenses (mostly 50mm) front or back-focus by a significant amount when shooting close & wide-open, but that's certainly not the camera's fault. Vince apparently has had better luck w/his vintage glass than I have, so good for him.
As I posted earlier, the only "bad" thing about the M9 (other than the price) was finding out how many of my old lenses (mostly 50mm) front or back-focus by a significant amount when shooting close & wide-open, but that's certainly not the camera's fault. Vince apparently has had better luck w/his vintage glass than I have, so good for him.
I hope that with the M9 Leica has made a camera that I can carry on working in my business shooting the vintage PinUp's and also backing it up with a Film M6, I hope that the M9 is a camera that can hold up to daily use and produce photos BETTER than the M8 did?
(I've read somehere that the M8 takes better photos (BETTER COLOR & SHARPNESS) due to having no IR blocker?) How true is this statement???
I'd like to hear from everyone who made the transistion from M8 to M9 and or people who are using the M9 full time and what they think?
Thanks
Tom
So Vince, it is safe to say that you are happy with your decision?
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Yes, I'm extremely happy with my choice, and fits perfectly with my workflow. No regrets.
As far as any 'issues' with using older lenses, I really haven't had any at all (and I make a point of shooting them wide open or very nearly to it), and I've tried my 50 Summar, 50 Xenon, 50 Summicron, 73 Hektor, 105 Mountain Elmar, among others. The only thing is that sometimes the meter seems to overexpose by about 1/2 stop, but that might just be due to where I'm pointing the camera.
As far as any 'issues' with using older lenses, I really haven't had any at all (and I make a point of shooting them wide open or very nearly to it), and I've tried my 50 Summar, 50 Xenon, 50 Summicron, 73 Hektor, 105 Mountain Elmar, among others. The only thing is that sometimes the meter seems to overexpose by about 1/2 stop, but that might just be due to where I'm pointing the camera.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Trying out a new lens.....
21/2.8 Kobalux, wide open @ f/2.8, ISO 400
21/2.8 Kobalux, wide open @ f/2.8, ISO 400
Vince Lupo
Whatever
Another Kobalux shot, at f/5.6, ISO 160.
Don't know if I like this lens more than the Voigtlander 21/4 -- the extra stop is nice, and I think the image quality is better, but boy, that viewfinder is massive!
Don't know if I like this lens more than the Voigtlander 21/4 -- the extra stop is nice, and I think the image quality is better, but boy, that viewfinder is massive!
Vince Lupo
Whatever
A couple of more new shots...
Shot this one this morning -- 50/2 Summicron @ f/2.8. ISO 400
Last week - 21/4 Voigtlander.
I sent the Kobalux back, as I didn't really see a big difference between it and the Voigtlander.
Speaking of 21's, I am about to try out an old 21/4.5 Biogon (Contax) that was converted to M-mount. Think this one will give me trouble in the corners? Is the current 21/2.8 Zeiss a better choice?
Shot this one this morning -- 50/2 Summicron @ f/2.8. ISO 400
Last week - 21/4 Voigtlander.
I sent the Kobalux back, as I didn't really see a big difference between it and the Voigtlander.
Speaking of 21's, I am about to try out an old 21/4.5 Biogon (Contax) that was converted to M-mount. Think this one will give me trouble in the corners? Is the current 21/2.8 Zeiss a better choice?