Walking around with a M9 (or any other expensive camera)

It's just a camera. A very, very expensive camera, but still just a camera. And meant to be used. Besides, it's not like your M8, which you're already carrying around, is some cheap disposable.

I carry my M9 around all the time & the only people who have a clue as to how valuable it (or any other Leica or similar RF) is are other camera nerds. Thus far, I have yet to be mugged by a camera nerd. Not saying it can't or won't happen, but I'm pretty sure I can handle that situation when it comes up. In fact, I've been more peeved when I've lost 1 of my truly rare cameras, as they're much harder to replace. An M9 is just expensive.

Bottom line: if you're really worried about theft or damage, get the appropriate insurance (& if you're not a professional, personal homeowner/apartment/flat insurance is cheap, @ least in the U.S.).

nakedcellist said:
Hi all,

I would like your opinion on something. I have been saving up and am about to buy a Leica M9. I can now afford it and it is what I want, however, it would be the most expensive thing I have ever bought. My previous most expensive camera was my M8 which I bought used. The thing I am afraid of is actually walking around and using such an expensive camera. I always have my M8 with me, and use it a lot, and would like to do so with my M9 too. I will get insurance of course. M9 owners, what are your thoughts on this? Are you walking around with your M9 without getting paranoid?

Thanks for your time..
Click to expand...
 
i think it's good to realize that it's not just a first v third world, travel-related matter. i spend a fair amount of time hanging and shooting in some local areas where hardship and poverty are much evident, as is the risk of "forceful lessening of the wealth gap." (my hometown - Detroit - is often referred to as third world-like, parts of it anyway.) typical targeted goods are wallets, purses, watches, jewelry, high-end phones. not cameras. matter of fact i usually try to carry a few larger bills in the hope of placating an antagonist on the if-come. fact is, these folks want cash more than anything.
 
jaapv said:
In poor contries just about any camera will cost at least a year's income, so it does not matter a d*mn whether you carry a Ricoh or a Leica. And it will cost a fraction of the Mercedes 600 the governor of the province you are in will be driving - paid for from development funds from your taxes. Having said that it does not do to go into a third world country wearing expensive jewelry or other non-functional status symbols. But a tool like a camera? It does not bother me at all.

People that claim a moral high ground on basis of considerations like this (not you Roger, but one or two other posters, I'm agreeing with you here ;)) are trying to deprive the local population from one of the most valuable sources of income they have - tourism.

As for the fear of using an expensive camera, it is as rational as refusing to use an expensive Nissan Patrol in favor of a rickety Toyota - whatever you do you will be the rich First Worlder. And if you are unlucky you will be the target of some forceful lessening of the wealth gap, regardless of the cost of your camera (which, for a Leica, is rather unattractive in those situations, a pair of Nike shoes are far more at risk)
Click to expand...

You are of course quite right that 'maybe' is the wrong word in poor countries: if the majority of people are living in $1/day, then admittedly not an old Ricoh film camera, but just about anything else (such as a modern Ricoh digi), will be more than a year's income.

The point about the Mercedes is good too. "Rich westerners" are not in my experience especially resented if you don't go about flaunting their wealth. Most poor people are used to the idea that some people are richer than they are, but it's when the rich say (implicitly or explicitly) "I am richer than you and therefore superior" that life can get interesting.

As it can when you try to buy dinner for an Untouchable (Harijan, Dalit, choose your euphemism) friend in a moderately expensive restaurant in India. Especialy if his caste had not previously occurred to you.

Cheers,

R.
 
Everyone: thank you so much for your opinions, all of you! I think I will make the jump next week. And I have insured my current stuff at dsv insurance, they seem like a good shop.

You have my gratitude!
 
Just remember that the moment you purchase it I will consider myself inferior to you and start resenting you!
 
In my opinion, the m9 is a discrete- looking camera, I think my old m3 would look more attractive to a thief.

Don't feel guilty about spending money on the camera, it is less than the average used car, and the camera is a better investment .

Randy
 
Steve M. said:
People seem to live in fear they create themselves (me too, just not on this issue). Just go shoot it. I guarantee that 99.9% of people don't know or care what camera you're shooting, and that's a fairly solid and heavy camera if trouble comes up. You're gonna insure it? Then why worry?
Click to expand...

+1.

Not much more to say, really....life is for living and cameras are for photography. Do both and be happy.
 
Kiyatkin said:
That touched a nerve! I am not saying one shouldn't buy or use anything they want, relax.
Click to expand...

It touched no nerves.
The discussion isn't about me, or anything I own or aspire to own, so I'm very relaxed.
You should be too, and perhaps think before making pointless remarks not germane to the discussion at hand.
 
Last edited:
I once borrowed and used a friend's M9 for about half-hour ... used it with my Noctilux at daytime. Carrying around 11k US$ to take some quick snaps made me feel uncomfortable and I happily returned the M9. Without the equivalent salary I would search for a good insurance before using an M9, realizing it's value did not make me feel relaxed no matter how "old-fashioned" the M9 looks like.
 
Insurance is good. But I also tape over the Leica logos. I know some people have said this is stupid and a waste of time, but when I'm done, the camera look totally nondescript and hardly the kind of bling that would attract a thief...kinda scruffy, in fact.

I found that since a Leica looks a lot like a point and shoot, you don't get all that much attention. Think people see a big DSLR as an expensive "pro" camera more worthy of their attention....
 
As said before insurance insurance insurance, it won't be as much as you think I pay around £35 a month for professional insurance for all my gear, having everything insured gives you real piece of mind. The last time I made a claim was for a Canon 1dmk11n (it was a couple of years ago) and a 70-200 fell out of the boot of my car, the lens was in two pieces and the camera was screwed, my insurance certainly paid for itself that day!
 
I am a bit surprised by the number of members placing so much trust in their insurance policy. Have you ever claimed a lost Leica M9+Leica lens? You may rest assured that your insurance company will challenge your claim...and better be sure you've actually read the fine print of your policy. Besides, if and when you happen to lose your Leica M9+Leica lens, in let's say Ban Me Thuot, in the Vietnamese Highlands, the first thing you'll need is a police report....good luck!
 
I know for a fact that "professional" pocket thieves educate themselves on what gear is worth, so if that is your number one worry, a piece of tape won't do much. If you're worried about the "gun under the jacket" kind of robbery you should consider taping any visible logo. As long as you have a decent insurance, and perhaps also several SD cards, so you don't lose all of your pictures in the off-chance that you actually get mugged, you shouldn't worry.

As far as the whole "using an expensive camera in front of poor people"-thing goes: I constantly feel guilty about owning a 2000 dollar computer and camera gear worth about the same amount, knowing that I could get by with a cheaper laptop and a cheap camera just fine, and give more to those who need it. But at the same time these are the only things I own that are of any value. I only buy cheap clothes, I don't spend my money on alcohol or partying and I try to give as much as I can every month. Unless you were going to spend your M9 money giving it to charity, then I don't see why it's any worse spending it on one, expensive camera, rather than putting it in the bank, or doing anything with it really.
 
Surprised to see this many people insure their cameras. I haven't even thought about it (which may sound silly). Where and who insures your cameras/lenses ?
I have been getting nervous lately about travelling very far and for long periods of time with an expensive camera+lens
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom