funkydog
Well-known
Film M bodies (1,2,3,4,4-2,4-p,5,6).
The real deal for a fraction of the price of a M9.
with the hulabaloo, isn't the M9 still the "thing"?
- Thread starter kshapero
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 59
- Views 6K
The real deal for a fraction of the price of a M9.
maddoc
... likes film again.
sig
Well-known
With the cost of the m9, it has to be the "thing".
Bug
Member
I just checked Snapsort and am a little surprised: on the short description of the M9, they write:
"Built-in focus motor - Autofocuses with more lenses"
This might be another specificity of the M9 which just a very few has discovered: the M9 can autofocus!
I mean, autofocus, on an M... Only the M9 does it!
😛
"Built-in focus motor - Autofocuses with more lenses"
This might be another specificity of the M9 which just a very few has discovered: the M9 can autofocus!
I mean, autofocus, on an M... Only the M9 does it!
😛
Range-rover
Veteran
Hi,
I used to think Leica was the "thing" but with all the camera advances
not that much anymore. I wonder if Nikon will ever make a Digital Rangefinder
that would be something, then that would be the new "thing".
Range
I used to think Leica was the "thing" but with all the camera advances
not that much anymore. I wonder if Nikon will ever make a Digital Rangefinder
that would be something, then that would be the new "thing".
Range
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I am answering only because I want to be able to write "hulabaloo" once in my life...
Of course, one can easily say that the M9 will be obsolete eventually, when better sensors will be substantially better, processors faster...whatever. Or when it will come out an M10, M11, M-whatever with live-view, EVF, image stabilization whatever you might like which is not in the M9. However, even though I don't particularly like the M9, I completely agree that Leica has been one of the few camera makers which passed from film to digital by just changing the film for a sensor. I wish there would have been a digital Nikon, like a FM3a with a digital sensor, a digital OM which is really like the old OM with the digital sensor, and digital backs for Hassys and Sinars which would not cost a harm and a leg to buy or rent. So, just for this reason, I would give a 5/5 mark to the M9, even if I don't really need or like it and probably will never buy one I agree that it will remain for a long time while cameras which possibly occasionally get better pictures will probably be considered obsolete sooner.
Just out of curiosity, Leica used to produce also a digital module for R8 and R9, anyone knows why the whole idea just died? I should think that, especially with the prices of R lenses, probably more than someone would have rather invested a bit more in the sensor than changing everything and pay a lot of money for the 50something points autofocus, 11fps shutter and so on and so forth...
Ok, I know, it is easy to convert Leica R glasses to be used with Nikon or Canon...
GLF
Of course, one can easily say that the M9 will be obsolete eventually, when better sensors will be substantially better, processors faster...whatever. Or when it will come out an M10, M11, M-whatever with live-view, EVF, image stabilization whatever you might like which is not in the M9. However, even though I don't particularly like the M9, I completely agree that Leica has been one of the few camera makers which passed from film to digital by just changing the film for a sensor. I wish there would have been a digital Nikon, like a FM3a with a digital sensor, a digital OM which is really like the old OM with the digital sensor, and digital backs for Hassys and Sinars which would not cost a harm and a leg to buy or rent. So, just for this reason, I would give a 5/5 mark to the M9, even if I don't really need or like it and probably will never buy one I agree that it will remain for a long time while cameras which possibly occasionally get better pictures will probably be considered obsolete sooner.
Just out of curiosity, Leica used to produce also a digital module for R8 and R9, anyone knows why the whole idea just died? I should think that, especially with the prices of R lenses, probably more than someone would have rather invested a bit more in the sensor than changing everything and pay a lot of money for the 50something points autofocus, 11fps shutter and so on and so forth...
Ok, I know, it is easy to convert Leica R glasses to be used with Nikon or Canon...
GLF
jarski
Veteran
after Photokina, we probably have least an option, though even pricier.
then M9 could drop to 3k€ which is still much too much personally.
then M9 could drop to 3k€ which is still much too much personally.
icebear
Veteran
icebear
Veteran
After Photokina it might as well be the D900 with 48MP and 248589 ISO, 40fps weighing in at 3.8 kg (w/o) SSD hard drive and battery.😀
Just kidding of course.
If you want a digital rangefinder and are used to Leica M, there is only one logical choice : M9.
If you want a digital SLR a D800e, s(?) might be one of the best choices.
Out to Lunch
Veteran
If and when Nikon, Canon and Fuji will further worm their way into the rangefinder-like segment of the market, Leica won't have the necessary capital to keep the pace.
jsrockit
Moderator
or M8/M8.2 ... yes, they aren't as bad as people make them out to be.
jsrockit
Moderator
Nikon, Canon and Fuji would have to start making luxury products for that to happen.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
It's my Thing, sounds like it's your Thing, but I doubt it's everyone's Thing... 🙂
What does it mean to "top it" given that it might be an utterly inappropriate camera for many uses?
kxl
Social Documentary
21mm IS 21mm - full frame or not.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Godfrey
somewhat colored
And ... People stopped buying R8s and R9s because they wanted a digital body.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
Probably true, but I'd rather not waste much time doing macro photography, or working with longer focal length lenses, or doing high speed sequence shots with a Leica M body. An SLR or TTL electronic body is much better suited to endeavors like that.
The M, as a camera, is lovely in its responsiveness and flexibility within a particular confine of use. Other cameras do a better job for other confines. 🙂
back alley
IMAGES
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Again, not a word of disagreement. Absolutely useless for rapid-action macro sports photography...
Cheers,
R.
Similar threads
- Article
- Article
