M9 or M9P or M-E

<p>Once again I'm considering, seriously this time, buying an M9 since the price has fallen a bit more. I have the money to buy one and if I do it I'm trying to decide between a used M9 or a used M9P or even possibly a new M-E. Plus I'm debating black paint vs chrome (or grey or silver) -- in other words finish.</p>

<p>My M8 is a silver grey as are my M2s. My lenses are mostly silver but some black. Price is important but I could stretch to the P or the M-E probably. As far as I could tell, the results would be the same with all the cameras in terms of image. What things would you think I should consider and who would you buy from? I'm inclined to buy from KEH, B&H Photo, or Tamarkin (who I bought my M8 from).</p>

<p>With a new M-E you'd have the assurance of, well, having bought something new: and you'd have a warranty. Tamarkin may be the best source because you know them and, in all probability, they value returning customers.</p>

<p>Going from M8 to M9 (or equivalent models) gives of course full frame and the resolution improvement is nice but really only similar to going from a frame unit area of 1 x 1 to that of 1.33 x 1.33 with somewhat better ISO performance.</p>

<p>A more significant improvement would be going to a FF 36 MP sensor and at least equivalent but hopefully better ISO performance. For that reason and because budget would seem to be important I would suggest you look at the new Sony FF A7r (36 MP) which is due out in December or the early New Year. At about 1/2 the cost of an ME, it seems to be an interesting support for Leica optics and for higher resolution files.</p>

<p>The other factor is the CCD versus CMOS debate regarding image quality and of course, by retaining the same type of Kodak sensor in going beyond M8, the M9 series allows you to retain the advantages of CCD. Whatever, unless you know the seller or have some sort of guarantee, it would seem to make sense, as suggested, to buy new.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, I'm 56 with a really bad back. Weight is CRITICAL. I can't even carry my RTSIII or my Canon 5D anymore because it's just too painful. I can handle Leica's and cameras like Nex7's but nothing much bigger than that. Even the Nex with the Sony 16-80 Zeiss is marginal for me.</p>

<p>David, I think the Alpha A7r is about 16 ounces while the NEX-7 is 12.5 ounces. Both are quite light compared to average DSLRS and even compared to the M9 or M9P, at about 20 or 21 ounces. You can make use of the the lighter Leica optics, like the 35mm f2 or 50mm f2.8, among others, to keep overall weight low.</p>

<p>Of course, back problems differ in type. Mine was quite a challenge and painful a few years ago, but has improved significantly with specific exercises and time, possibly the vertebrae are rearranging themselves. Not ready to take on a several month Compostella walk, perhaps, but I am much more fluid than I was.</p>

<p>As interesting as that might be, ounces count and make the difference between fun and torture. I shot Minolta all my life so I have no prejudice against the brand. The Nex is great and makes a pretty great manual Leica camera body, but at this point The three Leicas above are the only options on the table.</p>

<p>I can go an hour or maybe two well rested, but with a heavy camera like say a Canon 5D plus the 24-105/4L, the pain starts within a few minutes. I've even debated going to a non interchangeable camera such as the Sony RX1 but I think the Leicas (and their lenses) or the Nex's represent the extreme maximum of my current capacity. I can carry a Nex or my M8 and a couple of lenses without making the pain worse.</p>

<p>The only time I use bigger cameras is when I'm operating right out of the car. Heck I used to use my RTS III with a variety of Contax SLR lenses. Anyone who has used those knows just how heavy the camera and lenses are. My Contax 200/3.5 weighs more than my entire outfit these days. Those days are gone.</p>

David. If you like the M8 I would stick with Leica. I have the m8 and the new M240. The m240 can be shot in live view

like the Sony and also like a rangefinder. Even with the EVF I much prefer using the rangefinder and just use the EVF for

non Leica lenses. I personally don't worry about the body colour that much (my digital Leicas are black but the corn I use

a lot is the silver one - seems fine on the body). In terms of CMOS vs CCD the new Leica M sensor is regarded as very

good (indeed several people say it as good as the Nikon D800 E for IQ). That said the additional resolution while nice is

not essential - I am sure the M9 has plenty of resolution unless you shoot test charts. I also miss the CCD a bit with the

CMOS new M. While the new M has better AWB and high ISO performance I prefer the look of the m8 CCD sensor. Of

the three I suggest the New M-E unless you find a great (low use) M9.

KEH, and carry one camera and one lens, or at most, that and an extra lens in your pocket.

 

To me, most of the significance of the later cameras above the M8 is a little better ISO performance, and

maybe more ability to throw some areas out of focus with full frame.

<p>I can get the used M9 for $4000 or a bit more where stretching to the M-E would be $1500 more (a lot but I could do it and it would be new) but what might be the different experience there? I don't think I can stretch to the 240 though. Just too much.</p>

<p>As a user of the M9 I can vouch for it. However, if Sony brings out a NEX with the same 36 MP sensor as the new A7r, at a similar price (circa $2300) and with better ISO performance than my M9 and with Leica lens compatability, brand identification and nice looks will count little for me.</p>

<p>Colour or finish just doesn't matter. I prefer chrome, but have a grey paint M9, which has an incredibly soft paint. Anyhow, because the body is a bit exposed anyway it is taped up on all leading surfaces. If you are used to an M8, a clean M9 with a bit of warranty would make you happy, and you might get out under $4000.<br>

The only new body would be an M-E, ok if you don't need a frame selector lever, and you get the full warranty. Common sense says that is the way to go if you can afford it, even if the M9 or M9p have a few useful refinements.<br>

I needed my 2 year warranty, for a dodgy sensor, and know that with digital, nothing lasts forever, so I drag it around everywhere.<br>

Sorry about your back. Assume weight of current lenses is not an issue. Good luck</p>

 

I was experiencing some back problems and decided low car seats might be part of the problem. The next car I bought (PT Cruiser) was noticeably more comfortable and I also raised my chair at work and avoid low seats in peoples living rooms. No more back problems (except a twinge when I see a Porsche or Mini Cooper). I've always avoided heavy cameras. Good luck.

<p>Yes a 36MP Nex would be very tempting. Especially as the Nex does a good job of being a manual camera (except for the 1.5x crop factor). </p>

<p>I had good luck with my M8 (everything worked and continues to work). But I do worry a bit about getting a bad one. I'd like to hope that any infant mortality would have been fixed by the first owner. I wouldn't buy one from eBay. With this much money if I buy a used one (or a new one) I'd want to do it with more faith in the seller. I bought the M8 from Tamarkin, I'd go with them again, or with KEH (who I've bought from a lot) or from B&H Photo. </p>

<p>I just feel like the M-E would cost more for less though. No new sensor, no live view or EVF etc. I don't need any of those things but if I'm going to buy an M9 why buy a reduced version of one. Finish isn't a big deal for me but the grey isn't all that good looking either. I typically buy chrome or silver grey but maybe it's time for a black. They seem to be more common on the used market.</p>

<p>The fact that this is even hard is a tribute to Leica. They've managed to come up with an M10 (err… M) that is actually worth considering vs. a used M9. Good for them.</p>

<p>So far as I know, body colour has no effect on weight and is therefore of no relevance to your bad back (which was not mentioned in your first post). If weight is so important, then it is the weight of the entire kit that must be carried, not just the weight of the body and lens in your hands. If I were in your place, I'd carry not an M Leica and several lenses but a light digital camera with a light zoom lens. It would mean compromises, but nothing in photography has none of those.</p>

<p>Yes I've thought of that. But I already have Leica lenses (and Voigtlander lenses) and I can still carry the M8 and a couple of lenses or the Nex7 and a couple of Lenses so why not use them? Eventually I probably am going to have to go to something smaller but I might have 10 years at this weight level. As to color, it usually has no effect on weight, though in retrospect I should have bought black Leica lenses given that they are lighter. Also there is durability to consider. Is chrome or paint a better bet for long term usability? Probably not a big factor.</p>

<p>It's an odd thing how people feel some types of cameras are more comfortable to use than others. Is it just familiarity? I'm comfortable with the M's and it makes me slow down with my photography where the Nex with an AF lens tends not to. I'm not just looking for utility. Even the used M9 is a stretch financially but one I hope to enjoy.</p>

<p>Don't worry, I definitely pay attention to new small cameras with good sensors. What I'm looking for here though is advice on these three possibilities. As far as I can see the P version of the M9 is just less obvious with a nice engraving and a sapphire rear screen (nice but worth $1400 or so?). And the M-E is just a cut down version of the M9, though I admit having a warranty would be nice. Tamarkin gives you a 6 month warranty with them. I never needed it last time so I don't have any experience trying to use it. I have a feeling I'd be just as happy with a used M9 but I wanted to see if anyone thought I was wrong about that. I appreciate your suggestions whether I decide to take them or not. </p>

<p>ME will be every bit the same experience as the M9. The colour is better in the flesh (metal) than the pictures, but not everyone's cup of tea.</p>

<p>Whatever you get, the move from M8 to M9.....etc, will be seamless, only easier without any concern about cut filters. Do you have to sell the M8 to raise the necessary?</p>

No and I still need the M8 for IR photography. Used black M9s seem more common and I'm thinking black is a good idea

anyway. I'm thinking I can see the shutter speeds on the dial a bit better and it's a little less consipicuous though I typically

am not a people photographer so it's not a big deal.

<p>I think the black looks good, and would be less conspicuous. It's good not to have to get rid of the M8. One nice thing about it is that it gets the best out of older lenses that aren't all that sharp in the corners.<br>

A middle aged man with a bad back and what looks like a film camera, however, and you are already invisible :)</p>

<p>I decided to find out more about the A7 given the mention of it here so I watched a couple of LONG reviews on YouTube from people who had pre-production copies. I have to admit I'm intrigued. Tricky using that same E mount for full frame. It's not clear if a Leica M lens on an adapter would work right. They mention Leica but don't say which line of Leica lens they are using.</p>

<p>The weight is 14.4oz/407g according to the website (without the battery apparently) whereas the NEX-7 is more like 10.3oz/291g so it IS heavier. On the other hand my M8 is 545g without the battery (similar to the M9). So I can't exactly claim it's too heavy if I can carry the M8 and a lens. God knows it's a lot lighter than my Canon 5D mkI and even the 50mm lens.</p>

<p>36MP is a lot, especially without an AA filter and especially if I can use my existing Leica lenses AND it's lighter than the m9. It does give me pause for thought.</p>

<p>I know it's a bit off track, but considering you already have a Canon 5D & lenses, have you considered adding a 400g weight Canon 100D/ Rebel SL1?, clearly half the weight of your 5D, to the mix?<br>

I know it has a smaller sensor, but 18mp is reasonable, and I think it comes in somewhere around $600. There are also, clearly, some light Canon EOS lenses of good quality.</p>

<p> </p>

I think it would be hard for that camera to compete with my Nex7 and the leica lenses. The A7R presumably might use

those same Leica lenses though, so the competition would be more meaningful. Plus I only have 2 Canon lenses, the 24-

105/4L (too heavy to carry) and a 50. Not much point in extending the Canon line. The 5D was great but I had a better

back then. If that wasn't a problem I'd be seriously considering a 5D mk III or a Sony A99.

 

 

I do like rangefinders though.

<p>And rightly so.<br>

I have an adaptor for Leica Visoflex lenses on my Canon DSLR, but almost never use them.</p>

<p>36MP worries me in terms of running out of storage space on the computer. Even 18MP will hasten the time when this happens. Also, I should think storage time and download time would be increased. I think, at least in my case, I would avoid larger file sizes than I really need. For now, the 10 to 12MP of my M8.2, X100, D700, D-Lux 6 (etc.) have been adequate for my print sizes of 8 x 10 to 11 x 17. The step up to 18MP for an M9 would be not unreasonable; but 36MP?</p>

<p>Rob, that's quite simple as I'm sure you must know. You can adjust down from 36 MP on those photos that don't need it or if you don't want to do that in Photoshop Elements or whatever you can use jpeg at image capture instead of RAW on some photos to reduce the file size.</p>

<p>But you can't go up from 10 or 18 MP to 36 MP when you may need it. That detail is just not there.</p>