M8 to M9 worth it?

[david strachan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi All

I have an M8 with lenses

15mm (20mm FF),

21mm (28mm FF),

35mm (48mm FF)

50mm ( 68mm FF),

90mm (120mm FF) and 135mm. (180mm FF)..so I don't really miss the crop factor with the M8.

 

The quality of the image for any size printing, etc is all there.

So am I only missing the v shallow depth of focus??

 

cheers Dave S

[Photoskeptic]

It was not worth it for me. I bought an M9-P thinking that FF would make a difference. Surprisingly, it didn't. With the same pixel pitch the image quality out of the camera is the same. Since the M9 uses a thicker low pass filter than the M8, for me personally, the color fidelity is not as good and the bw conversions lack the tonality of the M8.

End result: I still have an M8.2 but not an M9. YMMV.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[bocaburger]

For me it was worthwhile if for nothing else than to be free of the mandatory need for IR cut filters on every lens and carrying spares in each size for my lenses on vacation in case one got damaged. Full frame was a secondary benefit but I could have lived without it. Changing the ISO on the M9 is also a quicker affair. I did like having the shot count and battery level on constant display on the top plate though. The M8 was and is a great camera though.

[erl]

Hi All

I have an M8 with lenses

15mm (20mm FF),

21mm (28mm FF),

35mm (48mm FF)

50mm ( 68mm FF),

90mm (120mm FF) and 135mm. (180mm FF)..so I don't really miss the crop factor with the M8.

 

The quality of the image for any size printing, etc is all there.

So am I only missing the v shallow depth of focus??

 

cheers Dave S

Dave, the M8 is great, I have two of them.

 

However, the M9, I have one, does give FF use of your lenses whereas the M8 lengthens the effective focal length (ie. 50mm is 68mm on the cropped sensor etc.) (opposite of what you wrote above, typo?)

The M9 is quieter, has a better view in the VF and it's high ISO is better.

[digitalfx]

Dave, the M8 is great, I have two of them.

 

However, the M9, I have one, does give FF use of your lenses whereas the M8 lengthens the effective focal length (ie. 50mm is 68mm on the cropped sensor etc.) (opposite of what you wrote above, typo?)

The M9 is quieter, has a better view in the VF and it's high ISO is better.

 

agreed...I never looked back after upgrading my M8. ditching the IR filters alone is worth the upgrade, but add all the things eel listed and you will be very pleased with the upgrade.

[BerndReini]

It is well worth it. ISO 640 was my upper limit with the M8, the M9 I shoot conservatively at ISO 1000, which really makes a difference. It gets me by in most low-light situations. Also, consider how expensive fast wide lenses are. As others have said, the IR filters, especially at night were sometimes a pain with double images of pinpoint highlights etc. Further, no more parts are available for the M8, so if you love the CCD sensor, you better pick up an M9, while they are still for sale.

 

I will agree though that the M9 has lost a little bit of that bite of the M8 despite its higher resolution. If you shoot mostly black and white, then the MM would really be an upgrade.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It was not worth it for me. I bought an M9-P thinking that FF would make a difference. Surprisingly, it didn't. With the same pixel pitch the image quality out of the camera is the same. Since the M9 uses a thicker low pass filter than the M8, for me personally, the color fidelity is not as good and the bw conversions lack the tonality of the M8.

End result: I still have an M8.2 but not an M9. YMMV.

 

+1

 

I tried the M9 and stuck with the M8.2 (at the time). Besides the above, I also preferred the 2m frame lines, sapphire screen, top LCD display…and no buffer issues, card issues, red edge, etc. And since I don't make huge prints or rely on high ISOs (ASA 400 was fine for decades), those potential M9 advantages didn't persuade.

 

The filters were no issue (funny how naysayers now praise filter use with the MM) and the crop factor never bothered, having shot most formats from 35mm to 8x10….one adapts quickly. (As Erl notes, all of your effective fields of view are backwards…the M8 is 1.33x longer, not shorter.)

 

Having said all that, I did move to the M240, and keep an M8.2 as back-up. FF wasn't the determining factor; rather, I like the shutter feel and lack of motor re-cock noise, better battery and processor, weather sealing, better RF, and it still has 2m frame lines. Plus LV allows for fast focus calibration checks, and occasional EVF use with longer lenses allows for alternative focusing.

 

At the end of the day, all of these cameras offer plenty good enough file quality, especially given how far PP elements have come. For me, a lot comes down to other personal aspects.

 

Jeff

Edited June 30, 2014 by Jeff S

[david strachan]

Hi All

I have an M8 with lenses

15mm (20mm FF),

21mm (28mm FF),

35mm (48mm FF)

50mm ( 68mm FF),

90mm (120mm FF) and 135mm. (180mm FF)..so I don't really miss the crop factor with the M8.

 

The quality of the image for any size printing, etc is all there.

So am I only missing the v shallow depth of focus??

 

cheers Dave S

 

 

 

I should have written:

 

15mm (20mm FF equivalence),

etc, etc,

Also...

"very shallow depth of field"

 

cheers Dave S

[Ecar]

Yes, if only because FF enables you to buy cheaper or better lenses for a given FOV. Eg, if you want f/2.8 at 28mm FOV, you need an Elmarit 21/2.8 (now discontinued) on the M8, whereas you could buy a cheaper Elmarit 28/2.8 on the M9 - or treat your FF camera to a Summicron 28/2 and still have some cash left.

 

Having said that, I still enjoy using my M8 (original, still has the 1/8000 shutter ) and M8.2 and, as long as I use them within their limits, I don't feel like the IQ is an issue compared to my more recent digital Ms.

[tobey bilek]

Above is all true, depth of field, filters, adding no menu to manually input lens corrections.

 

Sharpness is trade off because less magnification is required for M9. 10 to 18 MP translates to around 25% bigger image linearly. Important if you make large prints.

 

M9 are painted unless you purchase a M9P and this may pertain to chrome P only . I dislike painted cameras as they do not hold up nearly as well.

 

M8 is already depreciated, so a well functioning one will serve you well for years at minimum cost unless there is already a high shutter count or you get one with a screen that is not repairable.

[Ted Lemon]

Hi All

I have an M8 with lenses

15mm (20mm FF),

21mm (28mm FF),

35mm (48mm FF)

50mm ( 68mm FF),

90mm (120mm FF) and 135mm. (180mm FF)..so I don't really miss the crop factor with the M8.

 

The quality of the image for any size printing, etc is all there.

So am I only missing the v shallow depth of focus??

 

cheers Dave S

 

I found it worth it when I brought an MM and then exchanged my M8 (coffee stain issue) for an ME. Just nice to be able to take out both and have the compatibility of FF. I also found the ME a fantastic camera (I know its an M9 less bells and whistles). I would think about it for the price vs a mint M9 used.

[david strachan]

Are M9 files harder to process?

Would I loose-out on superior IR and B&W images?

I wonder about the stories of using only the central best bit of the lens??

Thanks so much for your comments everyone; some real wisdom in the Forum…You are really helping me with this problem I’ve wrestled with for over a year.

Cheers Dave S

[erl]

Are M9 files harder to process?

No.

Would I loose-out on superior IR and B&W images?

Not really. Consider IR photography as an 'effect'. So how many of your images do you really want to display with such an effect? I suspect not many, but I may be wrong. What do you mainly use your camera for should be the answer you look for.

I wonder about the stories of using only the central best bit of the lens??

That is what an M8 does. One way of thinking about it is that you paid for all that glass around the circumference of the lens and don't even use it with an M8! OTOH, the special characteristics of your lens (mainly aberrations that reside in the outer edges) such as a Noctilux are lost to the M8. The M9 sings (opinion) with those areas.

Thanks so much for your comments everyone; some real wisdom in the Forum…You are really helping me with this problem I’ve wrestled with for over a year.

That's a year you will never get back! Just buy the M9 and enjoy the wonderful benefits of being able to use it.

[Jeff S]

...some real wisdom in the Forum…You are really helping me with this problem I’ve wrestled with for over a year.

 

The best wisdom comes from your own experimentation….don't waste another year and just figure out a way…rent, borrow or buy...an M9 (or a new M, for that matter). I did, and let my experience, and prints, do the talking. No forum comments could have satisfactorily answered questions based on my own workflow, style, needs and preferences.

 

Jeff

[goorackerelite]

Absolutely!! The M8 is a good option if you like to shoot with a bite in your images with more neutral color response and surprisingly good BW conversion.

 

The M9 is in another league as far as the nuances of tonality is involved. But it's more demanding of lenses and user technique, and it's not quite as bitingly sharp as the M8.

 

However the M9 pulls far ahead of the M8 in terms of color depth, feel, bokeh, and refinement.

 

Both are amazing cameras, I just feel that the M9 is a bit more amazing. I haven't touched my M8 since I got my M9 a month ago, if that helps any.

 

Regards

[david strachan]

Gentlemen, my thanks,

very convincing arguments from everyone! So much so...I am still tussling.

 

In Australia, as Erl knows, impossible to hire in Adelaide...I admit I haven't even touched one.

 

If I could resolve, then find what I want in Australia, I'd need to find about $4,000 for the purchase.

I'd prefer feeling it with a warranty in a camera shop. That's my annual camera budget!

(But I have collectables to sell.)

 

I wouldn't sell my M8...heard too many regret stories...

 

cheers Dave S

[wda]

Are M9 files harder to process?

Would I loose-out on superior IR and B&W images?...

 

Cheers Dave S

Not if you retain your M8 as well, as I did.

[Guest JMF]

Not if you retain your M8 as well, as I did.

 

+1 !

[geotrupede]

M8 only features

1/8000th of second (Note 8.2 looses some features like shutter speed)

30 minutes max for B (photos of stars!)

better screen (apart coffe stain)

IR photography possible

 

M8 issues

requires IR filters to operate

reflections on filters for lights

issues when light are on edge of frame (bleeding of sort)

ISO 320 is the upper limit

10MP

compressed RAW (unless in maintenance mode)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

M9 only features

no need of IR filters

no reflections due to filters

no issues when light are on edge (actually there may be issues but these are really rare)

ISO 640 is the upper limit (you can use 2500 but grain is very visible)

18MP, nice the ability to crop

no compressed RAW available

a little less noisy than the M8

wider lenses are really wide

 

M9 issues

1/4000th (there is ISO 80, but is not the same as 1/8000)

2 minutes max exposure time (?)

screen colour is really bad

red edge on wide lenses (requires software correction)

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Overall M9 has been a good upgrade for me, but some of the feature of M8, like the 1/8000th or the nicer screen are very much missed. ISO and slight higher resolution allow more with the files. I could use both without knowing.

For example if you want a noctilux feel on the M8 you can use the CV 35 1.2...

What you cannot do is to use a 12mm and have a 12mm FOV...

 

Another thing to consider is the accuracy of the viewfinder that performs differently for different models (it is optimised at different distances).

 

After all, both are good for taking pictures,

:-)

G

Edited July 1, 2014 by geotrupede
forgot the red edge!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[billo101]

No