Should the Leica M9 be a Film Camera?

In my view a film-based M9 would be a welcomed camera by many photographers.

 

Why? Because in certain situations film is the elegant choice. Just as in other situations digital is the

elegant choice. (Let's squash the endless and pointless digital vs film debates from the start.)

 

Like the Nikon F6, this Leica M9 could borrow from the digital M8. The quiet built-in motor, the metal

shutter curtains, the 1/8000 top speed and the digital informational back window would be excellent

features. The M9 could have a swing-open back.

 

It could sell for about the same price as the M7, which should not be discontinued.

There ya go bloating a perfectly adequate film camera, the M7. It would be a monster with all that crap. 1/8000th of a second, indeed. Who's going to shoot sports with an RF? Motor drive - same thing. The motor winder is just fine for left-eyed folks. Heck, the Vit is even better: no batteries. Swing out back? Why not add cupholders, too?

Alex, I will pay $3,000 for your M8 towards your film M9.

<p>Quiet built-in motor: My thumb is quiet. Metal shutter curtains: In a Canon P (etc). 1/8000 top speed: I have three cameras that sport 1/2000 and I'm not sure I've used it once. (If I want bokey-wokey I can use slow film or an ND filter or both.) "Digital informational back window": I don't know what that is but it sounds like more irritating crap to go wrong. A swing-open back: Again in any Canon.</p><p>I don't know how things are down in Ōsaka, but up here in Tōkyō a Canon P is under ¥20 thou these days.</p><p>Still, if you have money to burn and don't want to give it to charity....</p>

The best thing that could be done to update the old M cameras is to replace that squinty old viewfinder with a high-eyerelief zooming finder. Oh yeah -- and get rid of that slick plastic covering and go back to good old Vulconite.

If film-based, what could it possibly offer that isn't addressed with current perfect models?

Autofocus?

Film based but use only a tiny part of the frame so we have to buy new lenses.

The MP can not be improved in any substantial way. Sorry.

 

If you need auto anything, get a N or C.

We have seen the last of new Leica M film camera models. The M9 will most certainly be a digital camera with at least 15-20 mega-pixels, (possibly) a larger sensor, no magenta cast, and (if they're smart) will be modular for easy upgrade.

Is Leica going to be around to make a M9? They can not even keep their rangefinder lenses in stock. They are having a hard time keeping up with the M8 also. Raising prices, lowering inventory and the company is not growing, really what's next?

"Is Leica going to be around to make a M9?"

 

I thought of this too - Leica (as we know it) might not survive, but the Leica name will certainly be around. Someone will make an M9 (whatever it's configuration is) with a Leica nameplate.

It's called the Hexar RF (or almost). Why did they stop making it? I've had one for a long time and its lenses are good too.

Film? Nah, they would never recover the engineering cost from just the units that would sell to collectors.

 

Digital? It will be a while. Nobody has a higher density 1.33x crop sensor available. Well, at least not on the open market, and Canon's very unlikely to sell their sensors to anyone else! (Most of the market uses 1.5x crop sensors.)

 

When the medium-format crowd starts complaining that 39 megapixels isn't enough, then Kodak might spin a new generation of sensor.

 

Leica's not going to respin it for a 12 megapixel sensor, it's going to have to be a meaningful step up.

 

They can't go full-frame until someone has sensors that are much more sensitive, so that the microlenses can be smaller, or totally eliminated.

 

I think one important feature to add would be image stabilization in the sensor.

I think the M9 should climb the digital development curve from the M8. They have their digital product now, right? Okay, now they can take their time and really get it right. The M9 should be to the M8 what the Nikon F2 was to the Nikon F. Take a fresh look at things and add all the little details to really finish the product and make it great. Address all the complaints, then add all the little features to make the product better.

 

There is no need to retire the MP and the M7.

"Digital? It will be a while. Nobody has a higher density 1.33x crop sensor available. Well, at

least not on the open market, and Canon's very unlikely to sell their sensors to anyone else!

(Most of the market uses 1.5x crop sensors.)"

 

Kodak or Dalsa will be hapy to make any size and density sensor a client specifies.

 

My understanding is that Leica could not go to a 24x36mm size sensor without making a

larger (taller) body and shutter to accomodate the necessary room around the edges of a

24x36mm sensor.

Haha Alex. Good joke. I think we have seen the last of Leica's film cameras. THE WORLD IS DIGITAL, BABY! In spite of that I'm keeping my treasured film based cameras (most of them at least). Now if Leica could just come up with a digital capture device which would slip in our M based cameras' film compartments extending across the film supports behind the shutter and allow us to use either film or digital.(I'm dreaming, of course, one company advertised this but it never got off the ground).

<i>Should the Leica M9 be a Film Camera?</i>

 

How about a digital that works without IR filters? Or maybe one that just plain works <wink>.

Brad, did I hear you say the film M's are perfect cameras? ;)

Digital film is truly a dream, universal to fit in any 35mm chamber. The company that worked on the idea had a very intriguing concept. Too bad it didn't get off the ground. I wouldn't call the idea dead however it will become reality in time. Probably after they figure the last film camera has bitten the dust. That way they can sell the gizmo, as well as a new camera and lenses to match. Do I sound cynical or what. The Leica gear will still be pumping but how many of even the die hard leicaphiles will have kept bodies and lenses when film becomes difficult to find. BANG, that's when it will be released.

ROFLMAO! 99.9% of the people who shoot film cameras do so because they want to shoot film. The few who want to shoot digital but are married to their old clunkers don't make enough of a market for serious development of Digital Film. Look at all the trouble Leica is having trying to get digital to work in a gutted M body, let alone something the size of a film canister. Ok, maybe that's a bad example. But I'm sure it'd be a monstrous challenge even for some company that knows what they're doing.

An M9 film camera. My M7 doese a decent job with it's 1/1000s 'top speed'. I've used SLR's in the past that had 1/4000s top shutter speed but I really cannot recall I ever went beyond 1/1000s with those. Also, why replace the famous cloth shutter? There really is no need for it since their reliability is problably the highest among any film camera.

 

IMO Leica should simply continue the production of the excellent M7 as their prime rangefinder camera. There is no need for an M9 with metal vertical traveling shutter and 1/8000s shutter speed. Let the Canons and Nikons of this world make those cameras I'd say.

I like a high top shutter speed because it lets me shoot wide open in daylight. Other than that, I'm fine with the MP.

Like Nikon's F6, the M7 is about as close to perfection as you can get for 35mm film cameras and are probably the last of the film cameras for both companies. I couldn't envision being interested in a Leica M with bells & whistles, the aperture priority enough technology in the M7 for me. :-)

Leica perfected the 35mm rangefinder camera with the M3. Everything since then has been a refinement of that perfection.

Bob Blakley wrote:

 

> I like a high top shutter speed because it lets me shoot wide open in daylight.

 

Me too. I would like an M7 with the M8 shutter. For my work, that would be perfect. In the meantime, I will make do with a Hexar RF to supplement my M7s. 1/4000 sec is good. 1/8000 would be better.