Jeff S
Well-known
I kept the M8.2 in lieu of buying the M9 in part because I don't make huge prints, don't shoot high ISO and don't shoot extremely wide.
But I did try the M9, and compared to the M8.2, I missed the 2m frame lines, the top display, the sapphire screen, the battery life and the processing speed. The files from the M9 also required much more effort, with sometimes less pleasing results, for my b/w work.
Both cameras (and lenses) disappoint by not having proper weather sealing.
The shutter noise with either camera is no issue. But the noise from the motor re-cock is annoying; the discreet setting only delays the inevitable screech. I'd love a quieter motor or ability to manually re-cock.
Jeff
But I did try the M9, and compared to the M8.2, I missed the 2m frame lines, the top display, the sapphire screen, the battery life and the processing speed. The files from the M9 also required much more effort, with sometimes less pleasing results, for my b/w work.
Both cameras (and lenses) disappoint by not having proper weather sealing.
The shutter noise with either camera is no issue. But the noise from the motor re-cock is annoying; the discreet setting only delays the inevitable screech. I'd love a quieter motor or ability to manually re-cock.
Jeff
Paul Luscher
Well-known
I've found out the hard way that I've accidentally left it on, when the pics come up on the back screen. Too late then, of course.
Meter can also be kind of quirky. Few years ago, I shot a show with the camera in Auto mode. Because the performer was against a black background, I dialed in maybe -1to -1& 1/3 compensation.
When I checked the pics, the exposures were all over the place. Some were right on, other were horribly underexposed. I began to realize that what was happening was that the performer's guitar, depending on how he held it, would catch the full glare of one of the spotlights on its highly polished surface, and that bright spot was fooling the meter.
So since then, when I shoot in that venue, I put the camera in manual, and do a little quick chimping of the first few shots to make sure the exposure is spot-on. No problems since, other than the occasional short-circuit between the ears, so to speak...
dogberryjr
[Pithy phrase]
I wish it had better high ISO and a self cleaning function for the sensor.
victoriapio
Well-known
my Luigi bottom plate fixed the issues of removing the bottom plate for battery and card. Otherwise the rest of my problems with the M9 are because of ME ;-(
gdi
Veteran
It doesn't have a velvia emulation mode or a print button.
But seriously, it is what it is. I don't see much value in complaining that it doesn't have a top LCD, or no live view, etc. You asked what people didn't like about their M9, that implies that they actually own one, and it just doesn't make sense to me that someone would buy one knowing that and then complain about it. I'd bet you knew it didn't have those features before asking what owners don't like about it. And I'll bet you know what it costs, so those who complain about not being able to afford it probably aren't helping either.
Anyway, my experience has been good. I have had no real problems with mine in two years (but I use it lightly), other than a couple of times it locked up and I had to take the battery out to reboot it. It takes careful processing at times, and you have to remove the bottom plate to change batteries and SD card, but after owning an M8 and going through those problems, the M9 is a dream come true.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Exposure Compensation can be set-up to require a half press of the shutter button, eliminating accidental adjustments.
From the Main menu > Exp. Comp. Setup > Set. ring & del. but.
As I recall only the red readout in the VF displays the adjustment when setting it this way- not sure if it is displayed on the screen also.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Well trying one out would settle this no? I'm sure a dealer you know would set you up with a "Test Drive". Reading others complain about things that I never am bothered with makes me think that we're all different.
One could argue the M3 wasn't a mature camera either- only 50 / 90 / 135 frame lines, annoying goggles to use a 35mm lens, no meter...
But they do- and the film M bodies never had matrix metering, or Shutter Priority or Full Program modes. They are not SLR bodies- that's the S2. The M9 is very much like an M7. A little louder and a smidge bigger, but higher shutter speeds and remarkable files. Try it and let real experience make the decision. If you keep wondering about it getting talked out of it by us here is unlikely to remain satisfactory for long.
victoriapio
Well-known
I agree the M9 is not fully mature. Then again, how long did it take Leica to evolve from the IIIG to the M7? I find it a very workable camera, if I didn't I wouldn't own it. Here's another way to pose this question, what do you NOT like about an M7, M6, ETC?
No camera is perfect, film or digital, Nikon or Canon, ff or 3\4 frame, ect.
No camera is perfect, film or digital, Nikon or Canon, ff or 3\4 frame, ect.
gdi
Veteran
Well trying one out would settle this no? I'm sure a dealer you know would set you up with a "Test Drive". Reading others complain about things that I never am bothered with makes me think that we're all different.
One could argue the M3 wasn't a mature camera either- only 50 / 90 / 135 frame lines, annoying goggles to use a 35mm lens, no meter...
But they do- and the film M bodies never had matrix metering, or Shutter Priority or Full Program modes. They are not SLR bodies- that's the S2. The M9 is very much like an M7. A little louder and a smidge bigger, but higher shutter speeds and remarkable files. Try it and let real experience make the decision. If you keep wondering about it getting talked out of it by us here is unlikely to remain satisfactory for long.
Listen to Robert here.
Leicas don't appeal to everyone's sensibilities; but then again no camera does. The digital Ms really are meant to maintain the feel and usability of the film Ms, not to have every state of the art convenience feature the industry has developed.
I am sure that Leica would have made it even more like a film M if it were feasible; the shutter sound, the thickness, etc. And could they have changed it more and gotten rid of the removable bottom plate, added a CMOS and live view, replaced metal with plastic, etc., if they wanted to? I think so, but they have been staying quite true to the 35mm Leica tradition.
As to the M9's maturity - if immature means the it has some bugs that pop up now and then, then it could be deemed immature,
and in good company with the Xpro1(proper raw conversion software doesn't exist yet and the few lenses have sub-par focusing), OM-D (locks up with some lenses and buzzes), 5D MkIII(light leaks - a first for a digital camera!), and others.
ChipMcD
Well-known
There are some thoughtful comments here, and I agree with most of them. My main personal peeve is the shutter noise, or more accurately, the noise of the motor recocking the shutter. It's much louder than my film Ms or my IIIg even. I am not sure that the build quality, or at least the "feel" of the camera in one's hand, is up to earlier Leica products either. Higher ISO would also be nice.
That having been said, and recognizing the inherent limitations of the camera, the images it produces are really remarkable. It's not a universal tool for all purposes. No camera is. Maybe that will happen as digital improves; it hasn't yet.
I am a lifelong film user, and I used Nikons before Leica. I hauled my F5 out a few weeks ago to photograph a parade because I wanted accurate, quick autofocus (50-something year old eyes not being what they used to). I also had my M3 along with a 50mm Summilux ASPH. The Nikon shots were fine, but when one pixel peeps the scans, the Leica glass quality is really apparent. I have a D800E on order, and it will be interesting to see how they compare. I won't be surprised of the M9 equals or surpasses the Nikon, at least when pixel peeping, because of the glass.
That having been said, and recognizing the inherent limitations of the camera, the images it produces are really remarkable. It's not a universal tool for all purposes. No camera is. Maybe that will happen as digital improves; it hasn't yet.
I am a lifelong film user, and I used Nikons before Leica. I hauled my F5 out a few weeks ago to photograph a parade because I wanted accurate, quick autofocus (50-something year old eyes not being what they used to). I also had my M3 along with a 50mm Summilux ASPH. The Nikon shots were fine, but when one pixel peeps the scans, the Leica glass quality is really apparent. I have a D800E on order, and it will be interesting to see how they compare. I won't be surprised of the M9 equals or surpasses the Nikon, at least when pixel peeping, because of the glass.
Yoricko
Established
The M9 is a great overpriced camera. It could do better in many other sectors (noise, DR, size), but I'd say it's good enough to bear through all these pains for the window finder, rangefinder, and M glass with the convenience of a digital body.
kingqueenknave
Well-known
The M9 really needs:
1/16000 second shutter
Noiseless ISO of no less than 25000
6" retina display auxiliary LCD that slides into the hot shoe.
Until then, it's merely a great camera to take pictures with.
1/16000 second shutter
Noiseless ISO of no less than 25000
6" retina display auxiliary LCD that slides into the hot shoe.
Until then, it's merely a great camera to take pictures with.
krötenblender
Well-known
Don`t know, if it was already mentioned, but I DO HATE SENSOR CLEANING!
I've read here the meter is fooled too easy with wide angle. Well, if you know that, you can work with that, no problem.
Battery live... well I have three original batteries and one no name and I have no problems with that.
ISO 160 or 80 with pull down... No Problem, and very seldom an issue, high ISO: the same.
Bad LCD: I don't use it anyway for anything other as the menu (you need that to go to the *%&§$!! sensor cleaning-mode...!) I don't chimp.
But: I DO HATE SENSOR CLEANING! :bang:
I've read here the meter is fooled too easy with wide angle. Well, if you know that, you can work with that, no problem.
Battery live... well I have three original batteries and one no name and I have no problems with that.
ISO 160 or 80 with pull down... No Problem, and very seldom an issue, high ISO: the same.
Bad LCD: I don't use it anyway for anything other as the menu (you need that to go to the *%&§$!! sensor cleaning-mode...!) I don't chimp.
But: I DO HATE SENSOR CLEANING! :bang:
kingqueenknave
Well-known
It seems like you're letting other people talk you out of the M9 experience. Why don't you shell out $100 or so to rent one and see how it suits your photography. I mean you could easily shoot the equivalent of $100 in film during a one week rental, so you wouldn't be loosing anything.
krötenblender
Well-known
To rent one is a good idea, if you can not test one otherwise. But I think, for real testing you need to pay more than $100 for rent. At least here in Germany, you pay more than that to get the M9 for a weekend...
kingqueenknave
Well-known
Contact Dale if you're in the States. I rented an M9 from them for a week and it cost me $100. They also give you 30 days to apply the rental cost toward the purchase of any Leica product.
mdwsta4
Matty Westside
As a relatively new Leica user coming from Canon DSLRs and the latest batch of Fuji cameras, here are my list of complaints:
1. Viewfinder display information: Why can I not get shutter speed in any setting other than A? How hard is it to display a meter with how far off your exposure is rather than the >*<? Even old film cameras had a meter. This is easily my biggest complaint
2. Battery life: I've gotten used to shorter battery life with the x100 and X-Pro 1, but am used to very long battery life on my Canons. If batteries weren't over $100 (which is just absurd) it wouldn't be as much of an issue. Or if generic batteries worked with the camera. I've used SterlingTek batteries on my 30D and 5D2 for years with no issues.
3. Poor display screen: meh. I threw it in there because it's worth mentioning on such an expensive camera. It is really bad. Plus side is I rarely use it.
4. ISO performance. Funny how only a few years ago low noise ISO 800 was a big deal. I'll admit I've gotten spoiled with the Fuji's ability to shoot at 3200 with low noise so it would be nicer to have less noise above say 800-1000.
5. Shutter recock noise. Why? The shutter itself is nice and quiet. The recock is pointless and noisy.
6. Weather sealing. I've just been used to my professional cameras having these. Not that I shoot in downpours, but it's nice to have.
That said, those really are minor complaints and the camera is a joy to use. Had the X-Pro 1 offered real manual lenses/peak focusing, and/or been able to auto focus quickly in low light it would be a different story. The M9 is a great camera and one I'm glad to shoot with.
1. Viewfinder display information: Why can I not get shutter speed in any setting other than A? How hard is it to display a meter with how far off your exposure is rather than the >*<? Even old film cameras had a meter. This is easily my biggest complaint
2. Battery life: I've gotten used to shorter battery life with the x100 and X-Pro 1, but am used to very long battery life on my Canons. If batteries weren't over $100 (which is just absurd) it wouldn't be as much of an issue. Or if generic batteries worked with the camera. I've used SterlingTek batteries on my 30D and 5D2 for years with no issues.
3. Poor display screen: meh. I threw it in there because it's worth mentioning on such an expensive camera. It is really bad. Plus side is I rarely use it.
4. ISO performance. Funny how only a few years ago low noise ISO 800 was a big deal. I'll admit I've gotten spoiled with the Fuji's ability to shoot at 3200 with low noise so it would be nicer to have less noise above say 800-1000.
5. Shutter recock noise. Why? The shutter itself is nice and quiet. The recock is pointless and noisy.
6. Weather sealing. I've just been used to my professional cameras having these. Not that I shoot in downpours, but it's nice to have.
That said, those really are minor complaints and the camera is a joy to use. Had the X-Pro 1 offered real manual lenses/peak focusing, and/or been able to auto focus quickly in low light it would be a different story. The M9 is a great camera and one I'm glad to shoot with.
Vince Lupo
Whatever
1. Buffering -- after 8 successive exposures, you have to wait.
2. No shutter speed display in the viewfinder (unless it's on 'A').
Other than those two things, I'm pretty happy with it.
2. No shutter speed display in the viewfinder (unless it's on 'A').
Other than those two things, I'm pretty happy with it.