Trade M9 for m4/3

[CaptZoom]

Over the last year or so I don't know how many times and countless hours I've spent convincing myself to trade in my M9 system for a m4/3 system (OMD-5 or GH3). M4/3 smaller bodies, weather sealed, great ergonomics, tactile programmable buttons, tilt-able screens, sensor based image stabilization on the Oly, better battery life, good build quality, good color capture, more than significantly cheaper, better flash sync speed and sync options. Yet just when I get ready to put the M9 on sale, I can't. Dunno why, I just can't. I guess this is what love is.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Real camera vs. toy camera?

(Dons flameproof suit...)

Cheers,

R.

 

[back alley]

this does seem like an apples and grapefruits kind of thing.

honestly, i don't understand comparisons between leica and anything else.
a drf in this day and age is something that a person must really want...choosing between a fuji and a sony...that i can understand.

 

[Roger Hicks]

this does seem like an apples and grapefruits kind of thing.

honestly, i don't understand comparisons between leica and anything else.
a drf in this day and age is something that a person must really want...choosing between a fuji and a sony...that i can understand.

Nah... More like kangaroos and telescopes.

Cheers,

R.

 

[chrishayton]

Real camera vs. toy camera?

(Dons flameproof suit...)

Cheers,

R.

This statement pretty much sums up my view of the two systems. Micro four thirds is a well established system that promises so much but the cameras are too 'digital' and the sensor is too small if you are used to the quality you get with a full frame sensor.

By 'too 'digital' ' I mean that everything is electronic, Electronic VF, information communicated electronically (shutter speed, aperture etc)

However many people really like that these days, especially people who haven't used manual film cameras extensively.

I have had an Leica M8 and Lumix G1 G2, Oly EP-1 and still have a E-PM1 and got a fuji X100 yesterday

The M8 was.. well an M8, wonderful output in good light and great handling and user interface (replaced with a Nikon D3 as I was sick of the low light performance and unreliably)

The Micro four thirds all leave me cold, I like the idea of them but don't enjoy using them. I tried a OM-D for a few hours and even that didn't do it for me as much as I like the weather sealed aspect of it. I would consider spending sometime with an OM-D before making a judgement on ergonomics, I wasn't impressed, too small and fiddly for me.

Early days but the X100 seems to be the best of both worlds for me so far.
Great IQ, Great low light performance, Great handling, OVF!

 

[Monochrom]

they really cannot compare...leicas are demanding in many ways...many people may get frustrated if lack the passion for them...and the time to practice...

 

[djonesii]

Only one choice in FF coupled range finders. Mx

If you can live with all the down sides it is ok and my choice. AF and relatively little d o f

Is more important than the RF!

DAVE

 

[x-ray]

Real camera vs. toy camera?

(Dons flameproof suit...)

Cheers,

R.

OK then my Hasselblad digital system compared to my M9. The M9 is a toy by that reasoning.

Yes you can compare the M9 and M4/3 cameras. They both produce images but IMO it depends on how each will be used as to whether you can compare them. You can compare pure image quality but it's much more than that. You wouldn't shoot mid field sports with an M9. An M9 wouldn't be a good under water camera. The Hasselblad wouldn't be the ideal camera for sports but would be ideal for fashion or studio illustration. The M9 would not make a good product camera. If it's for snapshots either the M9 or OM would do fine.

IMO a good 4/3 camera is a better choice for most people.

 

[gdi]

I sold my M9 recently and now use OM-D and an X-Pro1 systems.

The Leica image quality at low ISO is a little better than the Fuji, which is a little better than the Oly. Obviously, only the Leica is an RF, but it also offers the over-stuffed ham sandwich digital Leica ergonomic experience. The reliability, handling, and feel of a nice film M (M3/P for me) is much preferable ( though off-topic). Of the M9, OMD and Fuji, I prefer the Fuji for handling; as for build quality; obviously none of these are toys.

So far I have not missed the M9 a bit.

 

[Roger Hicks]

OK then my Hasselblad digital system compared to my M9. The M9 is a toy by that reasoning.

Yes you can compare the M9 and M4/3 cameras. They both produce images but IMO it depends on how each will be used as to whether you can compare them. You can compare pure image quality but it's much more than that. You wouldn't shoot mid field sports with an M9. An M9 wouldn't be a good under water camera. The Hasselblad wouldn't be the ideal camera for sports but would be ideal for fashion or studio illustration. The M9 would not make a good product camera. If it's for snapshots either the M9 or OM would do fine.

IMO a good 4/3 camera is a better choice for most people.

Right first time.

Cheers,

R.

 

[CaptZoom]

Guys noticed I said things like weather sealing and better portability, not video, resolution or autofocus! In any case, I have no regrets about the M9 and its on no danger of being replaced any time soon (as evidenced by my inability to prt with it). That damned thing just feels right...not sure quite how to quantify that!

 

[x-ray]

I don't think there's anything special about the M9. For me the optics are special and make using the M9 worthwhile. If I could use my M lenses on my Nikon D800 I would rarely use my M9. I wouldn't sell it but it would get much less use. It's the wide open performance of the new glass like the 24 Elmar, 35 Summilux FLE, 50 Summilux asph and 90 apo asph Summicron. No other 35 makers lenses perform as well. Stopped down two stops there's no big difference.

 

[mike_j]

The answer is to have both. I bought a mft Panasonic G1 when they first came out. It uses its own zoom lens plus the Leica/Zeiss and even a couple of Canon FD relics. It has tilting screen, superb fo r macro, handles long lenses well etc.

I hate it - it hardly ever sees daylight. Too fiddly, too complicated, too many menus. But if I need to do something that my M8 (not gone M9 yet) can't do it is available.

 

[thegman]

Never used an OM-D, but I can't believe the GH3 has better ergonomics than an M9, I had a Lumix G1, and it was very confusing in IMHO.

I get the weather sealing thing though, I've missed shots because I was in heavy rain with camera I didn't want to get wet.

 

[maitani]

Trade M9 for m4/3

umm......, nope!

 

[gdi]

Quote:
Trade M9 for m4/3



umm......, nope!

I agree - it must be "Trade M9 for M4/3 plus a few thousand $".

 

[Tom Diaz]

Over the last year or so I don't know how many times and countless hours I've spent convincing myself to trade in my M9 system for a m4/3 system (OMD-5 or GH3). M4/3 smaller bodies, weather sealed, great ergonomics, tactile programmable buttons, tilt-able screens, sensor based image stabilization on the Oly, better battery life, good build quality, good color capture, more than significantly cheaper, better flash sync speed and sync options. Yet just when I get ready to put the M9 on sale, I can't. Dunno why, I just can't. I guess this is what love is.

You might feel better if you got a Ricoh GXR-M to be friends with your M9. Great build quality, great performance with M lenses, and it might satisfy the appetite that is making you sometimes want an m4/3.

Tom

 

[djonesii]

Kind of like Ferrari 360 or F350 pickup

Kind of like Ferrari 360 or F350 pickup

Both are excellent at what they do, but they are very different ways to get the job done.

If moving a couch is your goal the Ferrari sucks. If a track day is your goal, the F350 sucks equally bad.

If your goal is really the daily commute after dropping the kids at school either sucks equally bad but for different reasons.

My suggestion is if you have the money laying around, get both and enjoy them for what the do best, and savor the differences in work methods where they overlap.

Dave

 

[jsrockit]

Dunno why, I just can't. I guess this is what love is.

Don't do it. You'll regret it. However, perhaps you have a nice Leica lens that doesn't get used that much? Sell that and start your Micro 4/3 set-up. Nothing wrong with using both.

 

[jsrockit]

I don't think there's anything special about the M9. For me the optics are special and make using the M9 worthwhile.

The only full frame mechanical rangefinder on the market isn't special? 🙄