The Leica M9 we really want

[adrian_lam1]

<p>Now that Leica has finally given us a full frame digital M. Isn't it time for Leica to give us a version without the red dot, just like the MP?</p><div></div>

[andrew robertson]

<p>Can't you just pry it off?</p>

[Rob F.]

<p>Judging by recent news that the M9 is selling out, it already is the M9 that people want.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>I only want an M9 that is robust and trouble-free. I have no problems with the red dot. People who know Leica know you are using a Leica red dot or no red dot. </p>

<p>Maybe Leica should make an M9 that looks like a flower pot or something.</p>

[roland_dobbins]

<p>I just cover up the dot and the 'M9' designation with black electrical tape - works quite well.</p>

[leicaglow]

<p>Does it take better pictures without the dot?</p>

[colin_elliott]

<p>"......................without the red dot"</p>

<p>Why?</p>

[alastair_anderson]

<p>Better without the dot, yes. Better yet: better high ISO performance. But pretty good as it is. If only I could afford one right now.</p>

[SolaresLarrave]

Well... I like the red dot. What's wrong with it?

[thomas_hardy1]

<p>I got my 401K statement yesterday. Should have bought an M9 instead of stocks.</p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>Ok, I have a question. I'm trying to talk myself into a used M8 and even that is at the upper end of my price tolerance. But consider an M9 next to a Canon 1Ds mk III -- about the same price right? I wish they had a Leica equivalent of the Canon 5d mk II -- a bit less rugged, and so on. It got me wonder about which camera would really survive more punishment -- the 1Ds Mk III or the M9. One has lots of polycarbonate and a magnesium frame (I think) and the other has lots of brass. They're both solid cameras, but would Leica really be sacrificing ruggedness if they used modern materials and put out something they could produce cheaper in order to give people a pro-am version of the M9? Of course they'll never do it, but could they?</p>

<p>It seems to me that the original Leica was really a revolutionary machine and so was the M. In both cases they were hardly catering to their established market. And Leica is certainly experimenting with small cheaper cameras with smaller sensors and some of them almost (but not quite) remind me of this sort of machine. Something to think about. THAT is the M9 I'd like to see for maybe $3000.</p>

[gary_ferguson1]

<p>"It got me wonder about which camera would really survive more punishment -- the 1Ds Mk III or the M9."</p>

<p>The 1Ds MkIII, by a country mile.</p>

<p>I travel a lot with my job, so value a camera that's as portable as possible. I tried the M8 but it kept failing in conditions of damp or humidity. I've tried again with the M9 and it's better, but still a long way from perfect. It's failed twice so far (that's in about 10,000 frames across six countries), both times in misty rain. However, removing and replacing the battery got it working again immediately, unlike the M8 which needed to dry out completely. The other downside with the M9 is dust on the sensor, it needs cleaning about every 2,000 frames. The automatic sensor cleaner on the 1Ds MkIII means I go about 10,000 frames between cleaning.</p>

<p>I've used the 1Ds MkIII from Siberia to Morocco, from snow storms to sand storms, and it's never missed a beat. The only trouble is my 1Ds MkIII outfit weighs in at nearly 6 kilos, versus about 2 kilos for the M9, so for most of my trips the 1Ds MkIII isn't really a practical proposition, where as the M9 delivers what IMO is the best obtainable IQ from the smallest viable package...when it works! </p>

[carbon_dragon]

<p>Well I hate to say this because I love the solid feel of my M2, but I kind of like the solid feel of polycarbonate too. Leica keeps messing around with tiny sensor boutique cameras at reasonable prices, but when it comes to the M line, it's all or nothing. Maybe they're afraid of cannibalizing the M9 by the creation of a 5D like semi-pro version (and they may be right). Too bad though. It just goes to Leica promoting the form over the function. The form of Leica M's is pretty great, but you can't help but see that as good a camera as they may be and as much as I'd like to be using one, that it's more important that the M9 looks like an M than it is that it is the best camera it can be.</p>

[john_gellings]

<p>DWG, why the hell would Leica ever make a 5D type camera to replace the rangefinder when we all love the M series?</p>