Buy Leica M9 Now - June 2013 ?

[stan_blevins]

<p>Hi Friends, Just want to express my appreciation for the many insightful and informative responses I received to my "buy a Leica M9 now?" question. Like many others, I'm sure, I'm watching the price fluctuations. But I'm thinking fairly soon an M9 will cost 1/2 the price of an M (240), and for my purposes will serve me almost as well (or maybe completely as well). At any rate, many, many thanks for your help! Stan</p>

[dave_redmann]

<p><em>I'm thinking fairly soon an M9 will cost 1/2 the price of an M (240) ....</em></p>

<p>For whatever one datum is worth, there's an M9 offered on my local Craigslist (New Orleans) for $3900 (or maybe $4100--the caption and body disagree). So it sounds like your estimate is in the ballpark.</p>

 

[carbon_dragon]

I asked a similar question not long ago. At $8000 i didn't even consider it. At $4000'ish it becomes at least possible, if I

was buying it from a reliable source (KEH, B&H, etc.). I still want one, but thus far my alternate response was a NEX-7.

It's not ideal because my 35 is essentially a 50 and my 50 is a 75, but it's a lot cheaper and the NEX EVF is in some ways

a better system than the rangefinder, though the M's rangefinders are magnificient. I may yet change my mind.

[Gus Lazzari]

<blockquote>

<p>"in some ways a better system" <strong><em>David G.</em></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yes, but<strong> very few</strong> ways: No power needed, ambient framing and superimposed center image. That's about it...<br /> Much has already been written about the <strong>multitude of advantages</strong> of a mirrorless camera EVF vs. an SLR or RF system.<br /> <br /> As you already know David, the EVF method takes care of <strong>so many issues</strong>, especially as it relates to the majority of lenses that in fact have <em>focus-shift</em> error.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>If I hadn't already a number of Leica as well as Voightlander-Cosina lenses neither the M9 or any other Leica digital M body would probably not greatly interest me as there are several other system digital cameras offering full frame, high resolution and high ISO capability at lower price. Faced with a high price tag I might have foregone the M9 and left the M optics on the shelf, or used them only occasionally with an M film body.</p>

<p>However, neither we or the cameras are eternal, so it made sense to me to invest in the M9, use it now and accept the slightly lower quality compared to the newer M. After a number of years of fruitful use I am happy that I did not delay the decision and if needed I would buy a used model today and benefit from the several thousand dollars of savings compared to the new price.</p>

<p>Like any expensive purchase I would buy from a known source and test the camera before purchase or have a written consent for return if not satisfied. In addition to the verification of the regular controls and actions of the camera I would make a number of images of clear sky and blow the images up on my computer to check for any pixel damage or the presence of excessive dirt on the sensor. </p>

[Karim Ghantous]

<p>IMO the M9 is worth the current asking price. I wouldn't use lenses wider than 24mm (from what results I've seen) but if the M8 is still worth having (and it is) then the M9 is more than twice as good for only double the price.</p>

<p>I still do not have one for various reasons. But I'm much less likely to buy a DSLR than a digital M. For what I'm doing, the NEX with cheap (but good) lenses does the job very well (I think some folks haven't caught up with the new paradigm).</p>

<p>I'm more curious about film these days, and might use it more if my recent discovery about scanning turns out to be viable. I'll let you know.</p>

<p>Unless you have predictable work, it makes little sense to spend so much on camera equipment.</p>

[aplumpton]

<p>Karim, I am interested to know what the problem might be with optics wider than 24mm? It is true that the distance between the nodal point, also the rear elements, of those lenses and the film plane is quite small compared to DSLRs, but Leica (or their supplier Kodak) has apparently reduced this problem of oblique rays with the microprisms in front of the sensor. I have not seen significant problems with either the M8 (with the 12mm Cosina lens) or the M9 with wider than 24mm optics, but maybe I am not paying enough attention to the finest details of the far off-axis regions of my photos.</p>

<p>If "predictable work" is a synonym for the frequent use of the camera, as either advanced amateur or professional, and also a desire to attain the highest image quality for the format, then I agree with you that it is then quite worthwhile to "bite the economic bullet" and acquire an expensive camera.</p>

<p>Otherwise, waiting until the price eventually comes down is simply missing lost opportunities and the photographer may then be happier and fulfilled in his work by considering less expensive options. Some quite fine photographs for viewing at print sizes up to 8 x 12 or even 10 x 15 inches, or for less demanding computer or tablet screen viewing, are made with the simplest and only modestly expensive instruments.</p>

<p> </p>

[rgerraty]

<p>THe M9 with my 18 and 21 Zeiss lenses is stunning. Some colour fringing especially with the 21, but not a deal breaker. I still haven't bothered to learn how to use CornerFix.</p>

[MTC Photography]

<p>I wait for the M</p>

 

[carbon_dragon]

In low light, my NEX-7 EVF can be very grainy. With the focus peaking on, sometimes the whole viewfinder is red. I'm not

saying it's universally better than the clear, perfect rangefinder image you get in a Leica M, but there are at least reasons

to prefer either and the NEX is a lot cheaper. I think the M9 is worth the current used prices too.

 

 

The thing is, I'm already experiencing my old Contax SLRs breaking down without any way to repair them due to the

electronics. Leica may be there and repairing the M9 for some time, but they don't have infinite spares so even if the M9

body lasts forever, the internals might not, so it's not like an M2 which will last forever with people to make parts if

necessary.

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>I am sticking with the M9 for color and with the M8 for B&W images. Waiting for better cameras will never end; there will always be more modern cameras.</p>