Mrbessar4a
Member
What's the half truth? We obviously agree... The best camera is the one you have on you! And you probably have on you the camera you prefer. it doesn't mean that "nothing comes close" to what the M8 and M9 can do, it just means you like them more. Doesn't mean you can't learn to like anything new. The day we refuse to learn anything new is the day we grow old!
Lss
Well-known
I choose not to worry about such things when I travel. It can happen with any camera, and it has happened with any camera. I can say that the M8 has been the most reliable digital camera I have owned and used. Well, a couple of point-and-shoots have been every bit as reliable, but they have seen less use. I am the first or second owner of all my other digital cameras, I am the third owner of my M.
peter_n
Veteran
I don't think it was extrapolated. It was a survey thread of the type I have/have not experienced a defect in my M7 and the sample size was ultimately large enough to give statistical significance. As I recall the defect rate among members was about 1 in 4.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Keith, I feel for you..
I have waffled so much over the past year on the M9 - Should I? Shouldn't I? - and this is even though I have seen the reviews, heard about the problems, and yet I still considered it a lot this year.
But now with Kodak selling the sensor business (and seeing that they sold it to an M&A&O firm) and all the other issues I know exist out there, I too can't bring myself to plunk down all that money on an M9 body. Even the "used" ones are expensive for me and I would have to seriously get rid of both my D700's and a couple lenses just to get ONE body - and I would always need two because of how/what I shoot.
I know that just because a certain number of folks have issues doesn't mean EVERY camera has issues but the fact that it's a luxury item now (or maybe Leica has always been a luxury item) it would really burn in my gut should something go wrong with the camera OR it would make me baby it so much that it would inhibit my ability to shoot effectively.
So, for now, I will sit and wait and see and continue to shoot film (as long as it's around) and scan my images. I can't afford the money or the aggravation that the M9 may cause to me.
Cheers,
Dave
I have waffled so much over the past year on the M9 - Should I? Shouldn't I? - and this is even though I have seen the reviews, heard about the problems, and yet I still considered it a lot this year.
But now with Kodak selling the sensor business (and seeing that they sold it to an M&A&O firm) and all the other issues I know exist out there, I too can't bring myself to plunk down all that money on an M9 body. Even the "used" ones are expensive for me and I would have to seriously get rid of both my D700's and a couple lenses just to get ONE body - and I would always need two because of how/what I shoot.
I know that just because a certain number of folks have issues doesn't mean EVERY camera has issues but the fact that it's a luxury item now (or maybe Leica has always been a luxury item) it would really burn in my gut should something go wrong with the camera OR it would make me baby it so much that it would inhibit my ability to shoot effectively.
So, for now, I will sit and wait and see and continue to shoot film (as long as it's around) and scan my images. I can't afford the money or the aggravation that the M9 may cause to me.
Cheers,
Dave
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I need to have something reliable. Yes, any camera can crap out. In over 30 years of shooting and traveling, the only cameras to ever have crapped out on me have been the digital Ms. I use other systems. My preference is Leica. It is what I like and from my point of view, the files are superb. But that means nothing if the camera doesn't work.
BTW, I am a big fan of the MFT system. I get great files, the IQ is quite nice, but the files do not compare to the Leica's. I still use them and enjoy them anyway.
When I have a commercial job, I reach for my 5Dll. I know what it can do, and it delivers for my clients.
Thanks Dave. I hope Leica someday comes up with a reliable M!
Last edited:
MCTuomey
Veteran
I guess the digital M's are more enthusiasts' cameras than professional tools. I say this because it seems that even the people who own them rely on other gear when the shots must be made.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Shade
Well-known
I wouldnt say that, although I may not be as professional as most of you guys, I rely on my m9 all the time. The only time I rely on other cameras would be when I need a long telephoto or when Im shooting kids jumping around..
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I use the correct tool, for me, that the job calls for. I shoot a lot of corporate, business, and some sports events. There are times when a rangefinder is perfect and I use that. Most times, I am stuck in one place or need to move around a lot for different vantage points. Making lots of lens changes would be quite difficult, cumbersome, and possibly losing the moment. I also need to be quite unobtrusive, being back a bit further. For most of this work, a SLR with a moderate zoom and flash works perfectly.
dave lackey
Veteran
Deja vu all over again. Keith, it sucks that you have had bad luck. Hell, I have bad luck going to buy groceries, every line I get in is the longest, slowest line, always! But I still go.
Everytime someone posts a Leica problem thread, it goes to hell in a hand basket from Leica bashers.
This is the kind of crap that causes me to rethink even being on RFF. Not that your OP was a bad one, it's just that Leica bashers come out of the woodwork in droves.
Tell ya what, I quit.
Everytime someone posts a Leica problem thread, it goes to hell in a hand basket from Leica bashers.
This is the kind of crap that causes me to rethink even being on RFF. Not that your OP was a bad one, it's just that Leica bashers come out of the woodwork in droves.
Tell ya what, I quit.
MCTuomey
Veteran
c'mon, don't quit, dave. selfish here - i enjoy your posts.
Enthusiasts with deep pockets..
Cheers,
Dave
I'm sure you have quite a bit of nice gear too right?
thegman
Veteran
The more parts a machine has, the more points of failure it has. An M9 is more likely to fail than an M3 simply because it's far more complicated. It's also probably more likely to fail than a Nikon D3x, as they are designed for the working professional, and the Leica is designed to be beautiful.
You had some bad luck with the M8 and M9, but that is the price we pay for buying niche items. It's a price worth paying I think, versus just buying what the head thinks is right but the heart is indifferent about.
You had some bad luck with the M8 and M9, but that is the price we pay for buying niche items. It's a price worth paying I think, versus just buying what the head thinks is right but the heart is indifferent about.
celluloidprop
Well-known
Defending a $7000-8000 piece of equipment that cannot be counted on to perform with 99% regularity is patently absurd.
I don't make a lot of money, but I'm young, single and live with some frugality - if I really wanted to stretch, I could sell enough stuff to buy a M9 and not put any part of it on credit.
Part of me really wants to - developing my own B&W in my current house is tough, and otherwise it's ~$10-12/roll for purchase and development plus my time scanning.
But frankly, with all the issues I couldn't justify buying a M9. It would be my only digital body - if it needs a two-month repair in NJ, what am I supposed to? If the sensor fails post-warranty, am I supposed to drop several thousand more for replacement?
Screw 'beauty,' a $7000 camera should be every bit as reliable as a $2700 D700 - many of which are at 150,000 activations without breaking down.
(and, of course, the question: why not go D700 - I had one and the files are amazing. But a D700/24-70 or D700/35G package is just kinda ridiculous in size and attention drawn.)
I don't make a lot of money, but I'm young, single and live with some frugality - if I really wanted to stretch, I could sell enough stuff to buy a M9 and not put any part of it on credit.
Part of me really wants to - developing my own B&W in my current house is tough, and otherwise it's ~$10-12/roll for purchase and development plus my time scanning.
But frankly, with all the issues I couldn't justify buying a M9. It would be my only digital body - if it needs a two-month repair in NJ, what am I supposed to? If the sensor fails post-warranty, am I supposed to drop several thousand more for replacement?
Screw 'beauty,' a $7000 camera should be every bit as reliable as a $2700 D700 - many of which are at 150,000 activations without breaking down.
(and, of course, the question: why not go D700 - I had one and the files are amazing. But a D700/24-70 or D700/35G package is just kinda ridiculous in size and attention drawn.)
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Another victim of Forumitis Negativus...
celluloidprop
Well-known
If that's what you want to call it, fine. Fans of given cameras and brands have a tendency to overlook flaws and failures and complain about those who criticize - and I find that absurd.
I'm not a fan of large corporations in general, I don't feel a need to send positive mental energy there way just for existing.
I'm not a fan of large corporations in general, I don't feel a need to send positive mental energy there way just for existing.
Mrbessar4a
Member
It's just that i compared raw files from both. There's just 2 or 3 parsecs difference but it's just me
Then you're right, it is just you. I've shot 35mm to 8x10 sheet film. ****ty plastic lenses to Zeiss Hasselblad lenses and Rodenstock taking lenses for my Deardorff. AND some Leica glass on film and the M8. They're not better, though I'm sure if you spent the money it's nice to think so.
hendriphile
Well-known
An M9 body is a computer. Computers crash. It's part of their job description.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
It just has to do with the way the internet works - it attracts negativism. It is quite foolish to regard it as having any statistical relevance.
Last edited:
celluloidprop
Well-known
It's also foolish to disregard user reports.
I had the first unibody 15" Macbook Pro - mine had an issue with processor whine unless it was under load (keeping it under load, of course, meant constant fan usage and high-heat on internal components). I posted on MacRumors asking if anyone else encountered it and got a stream of "that doesn't exist, whiner" and pro-Apple reports of how wonderful other unibody MBPs were.
Well, the issue was real. After getting the runaround from Apple Geniuses, I tried the old stevejobs@apple.com trick (which was an e-mail that apparently went straight to executive relations) - I got a call the next day and they set up a return for me at a different Apple store.
I had the first unibody 15" Macbook Pro - mine had an issue with processor whine unless it was under load (keeping it under load, of course, meant constant fan usage and high-heat on internal components). I posted on MacRumors asking if anyone else encountered it and got a stream of "that doesn't exist, whiner" and pro-Apple reports of how wonderful other unibody MBPs were.
Well, the issue was real. After getting the runaround from Apple Geniuses, I tried the old stevejobs@apple.com trick (which was an e-mail that apparently went straight to executive relations) - I got a call the next day and they set up a return for me at a different Apple store.