porktaco
Well-known
lol. you are grasping at what is innately correct about GAS
I suppose my reason for selling off gear of late is to buy the M9, and "mission accomplished".
What is scary is that I only made a small dent in the drawers of camera gear. I have to sell off another one just to make room for the M9. Raid does not mind...
What is scary is that I only made a small dent in the drawers of camera gear. I have to sell off another one just to make room for the M9. Raid does not mind...
bluepenguin
Established
Unless there is a new FF DRF in the market, I wouldn't sell mine.
nobbylon
Veteran
Brian,
I couldn't agree more and the one I have for sale at the moment I have decided to keep for myself. My main reason for drifting away from RF is my central vision problems which make patch focusing frustrating but we are all only on this planet once. It will enable me to use my summilux's, my summicron's and elmar's which don't get used as i'm using very little film.
The only reason to sell is either financial or that you don't like or have any of the great glass.
If I find that it doesn't suit me as well as my D700 then I will sell it, simple,
regards john
I've been using a 1.25x magnifier on the M8 with the fast lenses, and with telephoto's. I have a second 1.25x magnifier for the incoming M9.
BillCB
Member
A better question might be, "Why would anyone buy an M9 in the first place?" Or any small format camera in this price range? It's madness, madness I tellya! If I had the funds to blow that kind of money on a camera (and I don't) I'd get one of these (and only then if I could write it off my taxes...)
Pentax 645D 40 megapixel medium format camera.
Mmmmmmmmm.... Yummmy. (Lust, lust, lust...) Now there's a camera that's really worth 9-10 grand US... and a bargain at that price! (I wonder how much it would cost with a silly red dot?)
Seriously... I'll never get why folks blow a wad on small sensor "upscale" digicams or "upscale" small format film stuff. IQ and image sophisitication is constrained by the size of the film plane, and high-end lenses and stuff are only squeezing the last couple drops of this out of the medium - and those tiny incremental gains usually only evident under a loupe, or some kind of MTF chart testing. It's like spending $5,000 for a hydraulic press to get a few extra more drops of orange juice out of an orange than your run of the mill dollar store traditional orange juicer.
Jump up to the next format for real gain...
Now you can - for roughly the same price...
It's a few dollars more, but c'mon M9 people, don't penny pinch!
I don't know how far your tongue is in your cheek, Nick, or if you want me to take you seriously at all!
But I do own a 60 mp MF system as well as a 24 mp DSLR (different tools for different tasks) and the over-riding reason for owning the M9 is simply image quality - particularly at normal and wide-angles. It's a fraction of the weight of either of those other systems and yet gives 36 inch prints that are virtually indistinguishable from the MF gear.
But no-one has mentioned the feel of the Leica. Don't others share my love of handling the camera? It simply fits the hand like no other instrument. I just love to hold it! And I love to shoot with it even more - analog in nature, simple, unbeatable in its class.
Back to the original subject - I'll sell mine when something better (at what it does) comes along, but I do agree with those who suspect that many who sell are people who jumped into RF only to find it is a an acquired taste. How else could I have bought all 6 of my Leica ASPH lenses used but in mint condition in the last 6 months?
Bill
Jeff S
Well-known
One hopes that Nick's tongue is firmly in his cheek; otherwise his head is up his ....
Indeed, different tools for different purposes. Can you imagine quick action street work with a 645D? Better be quick with that mirror lock-up and tripod. And better have some good light with not much high ISO capability and slow lenses. Oh, did I mention lenses? Seems he overlooked this small reason many buy into the M system, perhaps to a greater degree than even the small camera form and RF viewing. (BTW, I've owned the film version of the Pentax 645, as well as film Ms...complementary, not comparable.)
Let's also not forget print sizes. For me, print quality is all that matters. For prints sizes under 24 inches, one can't tell much between the M9, 645D or the Hassy/Phase systems. See, for example, here or here. [Note also various early problems with the 645D.] In fact, this is one reason why I have 2 M8.2s rather than 2 M9s (which I could afford); don't print large enough to see the difference.
Buyer's remorse is another oversimplification. Some buy an M9 (or M8) as their first rangefinder and just don't get along with it. Not everyone's cup of tea. Some use an M for a while, and then age starts messing with their eyesight. If one can't see well enough to manually focus, then a key advantage and reason for owning an M becomes a hindrance. Some realize too late that an M is not an all-around tool (for most people)...while some manage long lenses, macro (Viso) or sports/action work, these are not the M strengths. Or, perhaps they didn't admit to themselves that, after relying on their DSLRs, they were too lazy, or not knowledgeable enough, to learn to effectively use a primarily manual tool.
A good photographer will make do with about any tools. But, if they have the resources, they will own the best tool(s) for their own needs and preferences (which by then are well defined). And in the digital world, the required tools go far beyond the camera and lenses...one better have the right software, hardware, papers, inks, profiles, etc -- and know how to use them effectively, both separately and together -- to make the best prints. The chain and its weakest link and all that...
This whole mindset of my camera is better than your camera...not just simplistic, but quite childish and tiring.
Jeff
Indeed, different tools for different purposes. Can you imagine quick action street work with a 645D? Better be quick with that mirror lock-up and tripod. And better have some good light with not much high ISO capability and slow lenses. Oh, did I mention lenses? Seems he overlooked this small reason many buy into the M system, perhaps to a greater degree than even the small camera form and RF viewing. (BTW, I've owned the film version of the Pentax 645, as well as film Ms...complementary, not comparable.)
Let's also not forget print sizes. For me, print quality is all that matters. For prints sizes under 24 inches, one can't tell much between the M9, 645D or the Hassy/Phase systems. See, for example, here or here. [Note also various early problems with the 645D.] In fact, this is one reason why I have 2 M8.2s rather than 2 M9s (which I could afford); don't print large enough to see the difference.
Buyer's remorse is another oversimplification. Some buy an M9 (or M8) as their first rangefinder and just don't get along with it. Not everyone's cup of tea. Some use an M for a while, and then age starts messing with their eyesight. If one can't see well enough to manually focus, then a key advantage and reason for owning an M becomes a hindrance. Some realize too late that an M is not an all-around tool (for most people)...while some manage long lenses, macro (Viso) or sports/action work, these are not the M strengths. Or, perhaps they didn't admit to themselves that, after relying on their DSLRs, they were too lazy, or not knowledgeable enough, to learn to effectively use a primarily manual tool.
A good photographer will make do with about any tools. But, if they have the resources, they will own the best tool(s) for their own needs and preferences (which by then are well defined). And in the digital world, the required tools go far beyond the camera and lenses...one better have the right software, hardware, papers, inks, profiles, etc -- and know how to use them effectively, both separately and together -- to make the best prints. The chain and its weakest link and all that...
This whole mindset of my camera is better than your camera...not just simplistic, but quite childish and tiring.
Jeff
NickTrop seems to be immune to ergonomics. Don't bother.
MCTuomey
Veteran
An 18 mpx sensor produces 36 inch prints "virtually indistinguishable" from prints from a 60 mpx MF sensor? I've no reason not to believe what you say since your gear list includes both types of cameras and can presume you've done the comparisons. So, why am I skeptical? Seems like an extravagant claim for the M9, no?
Jeff S
Well-known
Read the links from Luminous Landscape in my above post. They actually did the tests, and the results were similar to 24 inch prints; beyond that the detail from MF emerges. Whether these differences are important for practical purposes is another question and will vary based on individual needs, preferences, subject matter and level of scrutiny.
Jeff
samuelphoto
Established
I almost sold mine when I realized how much collective $$$ Iv'e got into the system. But then I realized, there is no other camera in a similar package that will allow me to do what this camera does. I've tried DSLRs more than once, only to realize they don't work for me creatively nor are they sufficiently portable. The high ISO capability of the D700 certainly tempted me, but not once I put it in my hands with one of those massive lenses. However, the low light capability of the M9 is certainly adequate for my purposes and the resolution with a good Leica prime lens is phenomenal. So, I pulled my ad and felt a smile come to my face.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
I haven't sold one because I don't have one to sell.
Anybody have a spare M9 I could use?
Anybody have a spare M9 I could use?
MCTuomey
Veteran
Jeff, thanks for the link. I feel better about my skepticism. To be precise, the authors state that the M9 gives 95% of the MF backs' quality at 13x19 prints at 300 ppi. Which is just about the M9's native resolution, so I'm not surprised, especially when you consider their M9 sported a 50 ASPH 'Lux and the MF backs sported far less sophisticated glass. Still, a 13x19 is a far cry from 36 inch prints and probably 24 inch prints as well.
Print big? Shoot big. Print small? Shoot small.
The only reason I'd sell an M9 (if I had one) is if I wanted bigger prints. And that's the only reason I'd consider moving to an M9 from my M8.
raid
Dad Photographer
I don't mind, Brian. It is for a "good cause" after all.
I will one day buy the M9, or if available tnen, the M10. No kidding.
Using MF film cameras will stay as an option besides the M9 one day.
BillCB
Member
My words "virtually indistinguishable" were used a little loosely, I will admit. Let me rephrase!
At a normal viewing distance for a 24 by 36 inch print (240 dpi) most people (i.e. most buyers) will be very happy with the Leica print, assuming perfect exposure and sharpness and full frame, no cropping.
Now put the same print from an MFDB beside it - at normal viewing distance - and most people will sense there is a difference, but a fairly small one.
But - if that same person does what so many of us photographers do and starts pixel peeping from, say, a foot away, then the differences become quite evident. But most buyers don't do that! (I should say that early on in my love affair with the M9 I did do direct comparisons of this sort. I used the 28 Cron on the M9 and a 45 mm on my Phase at the right distance to make the linear image the same - the proportions were of course different. At 30 inches, virtually no difference. At 36 inches, a small difference. At 48 inches, no competition!)
IMHO, the difference with MFDB shows up in (a) prints larger than 30-36 inches, (b) when you need to crop significantly and (c) in terms of dynamic range.
Don't get me wrong - if I know I need a big print, I'll generally use the MFDB. But if I do need to print the M9 large, I don't hesitate. I have recently sold 4 Leica prints 24 by 36.
Hope this clarifies!
Bill
MCTuomey
Veteran
That helps, Bill. Thanks for clarifying.
astroboy888
Newbie
I sold mine after 1 mth as I was not prepared to wait between 3 to 6 months for the camera to be sent to Germany for repairs. There was a issue with the memory card. Sold it at a big discount because of the issue.
Bought another and two months after getting it, the 2nd unit is now on it's way back to Germany because of a sticky shutter and alignment issues.
Unfortunately I cannot afford to buy a spare M9 while my present unit is being repaired so I'm just going to buy a 2nd hand M8 for the time being and sell it once my 9 comes back from the "motherland".
I am based in Singapore and a M9 here retails for US$8692. The price has dropped slightly this year.
I have a friend who had the shop take out three new M9's before he was finally satisfied with the 3rd. This is someone who has gone through 5 M9's.
A joke among some of the M9 users here is the only way to shoot with a M9 is always to have a spare M9 body in case the 1st fails. As one friend practices what he preaches. He always shoots with 3 M9's. One for colour, one for B&W and a spare body.
They are amazing cameras when everything works well including their lenses but the drawback is the long turn around time should they need servicing at Solms.
Bought another and two months after getting it, the 2nd unit is now on it's way back to Germany because of a sticky shutter and alignment issues.
Unfortunately I cannot afford to buy a spare M9 while my present unit is being repaired so I'm just going to buy a 2nd hand M8 for the time being and sell it once my 9 comes back from the "motherland".
I am based in Singapore and a M9 here retails for US$8692. The price has dropped slightly this year.
I have a friend who had the shop take out three new M9's before he was finally satisfied with the 3rd. This is someone who has gone through 5 M9's.
A joke among some of the M9 users here is the only way to shoot with a M9 is always to have a spare M9 body in case the 1st fails. As one friend practices what he preaches. He always shoots with 3 M9's. One for colour, one for B&W and a spare body.
They are amazing cameras when everything works well including their lenses but the drawback is the long turn around time should they need servicing at Solms.
horosu
Well-known
I must be terribly lucky then to have everything fine with my first (bought october 2009).
H.
H.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Me too, though I got mine a month or six weeks later than you did. No problems so far!
Cheers,
R.
John Robertson
Well-known
When a camera costs more than some cars no thanks and in five years its technology will be obsolete?