Jump to content

Anyone has both M10 and M9


reddot925

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I already have an M10 but I recently picked up a rare new M9-P in beautiful brandy leather from Germany.   But I'm not sure if I should keep it.

 

Because I have and love the M10 and the first M Monochrom.    I have not seriously shot color with the M9 but am intrigued by the CCD, should I just use the camera and possibly sell it at cost since I picked up on sale or just sell it now for profit?   Anyone feels the image difference justify owning both M10 and M9 for color?

 

Thanks! 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have the M10, but I have or had the M9, M240 and SL. They all have their distinct colours, though in my limited use of the M10 I'd say there is a family resemblance to the SL.

Only you can say if you like the M9's colours. To my eye they are Kodachromish, which for me means unrealistically strong saturated colour. I prefer my colours realistic.

 

Edit: you didn't ask for advice on whether to sell the M9, but I'll offer it any way. Sell it and buy a different lens - much more useful!

Edited by LocalHero1953
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for the replies, yes I agree some color pics from Flickr's M9 group seems little too punchy.  

 

As for collecting, I want to collect the M9 since the CCD is now old breed, but I fear other parts of camera will just be too outdated like high ISOs and unusable LCD.

 

So the question is only should I sell it right away, or after I play with it for a while then sell. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, seems to me you need to decide if you are a collector or a shooter.  

 

If you're a collector, isn't the fact that the M9 is now old and outdated a good thing?  If you're a collector, things like poor ISO performance and small, unusable LCD shouldn't matter, should they?  Why would you even shoot it, as wouldn't that detract from its value?

 

If, on the other hand, you actually want to use the camera, the M9 has nothing on the M10.  

 

The M9 was, and is, a great camera.  I love mine - and still occasionally shoot it.  But the M10 is a vastly more refined platform, in pretty much every way.  And speaking purely of color... the M10 produces the best color of any M-camera to date, IMO.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Agree M10 color is fantastic. You still shoot M9, is it just for kicks or does it give you a certain different look?

 

I'll be honest, I mostly use the M9 anymore in situations of "risk," when I'm in an environment which I don't want to subject my newer camera(s) to.

 

For example, I'm an avid motorcyclist.  I'll happily carry my M10 in the tank bag on my BMW R1200GSA because I'm convinced the vibrations the camera is subject to there are minimal.  My Harley Road King, on the other hand, has heavy vibrations at idle (it smooths out very nicely once you throttle up) and when I'm on a week-long trip, I'd prefer not to subject my "main" camera (the M10) to those.

 

I do the same things with lenses, invariably taking my older lenses - Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH vice my newer Summicron 50/2.0 APO; or my Noctilux 50/1.0 vice my newer Noctilux 50/0.95 - when I'm in a situation of risk.  It's not that I consider the M9 or those older lenses "expendable" - I take the same due care with them I do with all my equipment.  But should something bad happen, I'd rather it happen to those than to my current mainstream body/lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Understand this well.  I travel a lot so I do the same for day or night that I'll be going to potentially high risk place, I'd take my Fuji gear instead of expensive Leica body and lens to not attract attention or reduce my exposure should it be damaged or stolen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I got the M10, I kept my M9. It was my Monochrom 1 that I got rid of (only owned it for the extra ISO range - and the M10 solves that and gives me color, and a quieter shutter as well ;) )

 

You never know when a camera may have to go into the hospital, so I need a (cheaper) M backup camera available. Or, as Jager says, a less valuable camera for high-risk situations (that don't need ISO 6400).

 

Plus, I have a sentimental spot for the M9 - its pictures over 7 years won me some (inter)national awards.

 

Color is a matter of taste - I actually like the warm, bright M9 CCD "Kodachrome" colors very much, but after a couple of weeks playing with M10 files, I can match (or improve on) the M9 output easily by adding some saturation and/or contrast - and avoiding like the plague either Leica's "as shot" or Adobe's "Auto" white-balance. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My experience is the same as adan's: I sold both my M9-P and MM before buying the M10, but I'm not worrying about having a back up digital M, which could turn out to be foolish. Similarly, I find that I can match the M9 look fairly well, and I don't miss the MM because I like the B&W conversions from the M10 — and, indeed, prefer the being able to use the color "filters" in SEFEX when converting M10 files to B&W.

_______________

Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I have M9-P, M-P(Type 240), and now , M10.

I keep the black m9-p, and silver m10.

For me, CCD is really amazing. So I finally keep one, I like use it in good weather with 160 ISO.

But during night, M10 have a  better performance.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello, I have M9-P, M-P(Type 240), and now , M10.

I keep the black m9-p, and silver m10.

For me, CCD is really amazing. So I finally keep one, I like use it in good weather with 160 ISO.

But during night, M10 have a  better performance.

 

This is why I haven't pulled the trigger on the M10 yet. I shoot with a M-E (which has CCD) , but I also have a Q, and a 5D3, but the only camera where I sometimes get that "wow" image is with my M-E. Don't get me wrong, the Q creates some beautiful images, but they don't have that unique look that the M9. It's very subjective, and I try to stay out of these internet debates, but it's just my opinion. I would hate to spend all that money on the M10, and lose that look that I love about the M9. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I owned the M-9, M240 and M10.  I would say there was a minor reason to keep the M9 with the M240, since the M240 was a bit flatter (less punchy) with slightly less appealing colors (to me).  The M10 color pallet is virtually indistinguishable from the M9 and the punch is just right.  For me, there is no longer a reason to have the M9.  The M9 simply provides no advantage in any circumstances for me anymore.  It was and is a brilliant camera, but the M10 provides the same look (to me) with better everything else.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

No. I sold everything CCD (M9/MM) end of last year - the rumored CCD sensor look magics only help to comfort you if you cannot update (which is fine ...) or for whatever reason like the look of the M9 body ;) . Colours can be changed to liking. Not a reason, in my opinion. The M10 completely embraces the M9 and does so much more. I did not care the poor M9's LCD so much, as I mostly used it for settings only. But the M10 finder is definitely improved, the body is just beautiful / the first one I think I may not be tempted by an M10-P. The low light capabilities are night and day between the two. So yes, the M10 really is the better M9 in every respect and also stays (like the m9) a real photographers camera. No video. Good thing for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the M10 since the end of January and still don't feel inclined to sell my M9. Apart from the idea of a backup, the M9 has some real advantages over the M10:

- quicker startup time. The M10 is for streetphotography still too slow in critical situations. I was in a national festival the other day and missed some crucial moments on the street, 2 seconds startup is a long long time in certain situations. It makes no difference if you re-awaken it with the shutterrelease button or with the on/off button. The led frames are also off during startup, so you can't frame in advance and can't do nothing but wait

- in the M9 the handling of the menu and the menu itself is less complex and thus faster. This is of course because the M10 has more options but you don't need them in every type of photography.

Edited by otto.f
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of us who own both the M9 and M10 appreciate the M10 is a much better camera and the M9 is a very good camera with a unique look. I own both. I love both. M10 wins hands down. Like no comparison. But I'll keep the M9 and get the sensor replaced. It's a fantastic camera, flaws and all. It's a Leica M for goodness sakes.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...