My feelings about the M9

[manolo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Louis, my wishes to improve the M9 are very different than yours; I would only need it water-sealed and to continue to have the best image possible at iso 160 (or the lowest) and not compromise it for high iso.

[JMacD]

The M9 works as an upgrade for me, because I shoot wide.

Same reason as others, I gain the equivalent of two new lenses.

My WATE now gives me an actual 16mm lens. I didn't have that before.

My 21mm f2.8 gives me an actual 21mm lens at 2.8 vs the WATE at f4. So I gain two extra stops.

Two free extra lenses more than justifies the upgrade cost.

 

I shoot landscapes and architecture. I need wide.

 

I skipped the 8.2 upgrade as it didn't give me my wides back.

 

I expect an M10 within two years, Probably will skip that until the M11.

 

What would I want beyond the M9? Faster processing of images from the buffer. A Maestro type chip when it comes will do that. They didn't have time this time to get it done on the 9.

 

Higher clean ISO would be very nice but that probably requires a CMOS chip that will come.

Live view will come then, which will allow a RF to truly match an SLR.

 

Weather proofing doesn't matter to me since all my lenses would then be the weak link in the chain. I guess for weather proofing I will use an S2?

[Bo_Lorentzen]

JMacD,

 

I think I agree with you on skipping the 10... I was just thinking by the time people start talking 10 there will be raining used M9's and it would be a good idea to replace the 8 for backup.

[jaapv]

Maybe you could point out to them that the M8 is on the " approved" list of Getty Images - with an enthusiastic commentary.

This is a bit old, but I thought some of you might like to see what Getty Images say on their website for contributors about the Leica M8. All major pro cameras are reviewed and approved or disapproved for use by Getty Images contributors, and this is the review of the Leica M8 from when it was released:

 

 

Leica's digital rangefinder M8 - approved

 

Overall rating: 4 out of 5

 

Preferred Supplier Pricing:

Penn Camera:

Calumet: £2999

 

File Size: 29.7Mb

 

Color space: Adobe RGB 1998

 

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

 

Report by: Richard Newstead, Digital Editor, Getty Images:

 

The Leica M8 shoots at 10.3Mp, which when converted from RAW produces a 29.7Mb TIFF file in 8 bit colour. It features a low noise CCD which was specifically designed for Leica and does not use an anti-alias filter which hugely improves on RAW image detail.

 

We have recently tested the camera in a range of situations with very good results. The quality of the files is of a high standard, closely competing alongside SLR's with similar Mp specifications. The files we shot captured an impressive amount of information, with excellent interpretation of fine detail. The colour response was very good, but lacked the vibrancy or punch direct from camera which is normally expected with a camera at this price range. Shadow detail was excellent, the CCD suppressing noise incredibly well in darker areas.

 

The camera shoots in the RAW 'DNG' format which is not specific to any camera manufacturer. The files we captured were processed with Capture One Pro.

 

The camera is of typical Leica quality, with a solid 'no fuss' design that feels like it is built to last a lifetime. The controls are simple and intuitive with the 2.5" LCD display clear and bright. If you are a fan of Leica systems you will not be disappointed, the M8 is a lovely camera and retains the feel of quality which has long been associated with Leica. The ability to shoot such hi-resolution files on a camera so small and compact is a fantastic feat of technology. Travel photographers need never be without a camera in their bag again!!

 

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

 

Report by: Nick Mullord, Production Manager, Getty Images:

 

File quality from this camera is immediately impressive. Image detail is extremely sharp the clarity is striking; colours are warm and vibrant whilst retaining a true likeness in appearance.

 

When capturing fine hair detail, the camera does a good job in interpreting these areas without some of the digital ill affects that can be very noticeable. After interpolation it is possible to see some level of softening - which can easily be remedied with the application of some minimal sharpening within Photoshop.

 

It is possible for images from this camera to be interpolated to all of the files sizes offered through our Large Format File Service; although at the top end of the scale (300Mb) some digital issues are becoming apparent. Having said this when viewed at print size, the images are totally acceptable even at these billboard size proportions.

 

What is remarkable about this camera is the lack of noise produced in the shadow areas, even after applying a considerable density correction in Photoshop, little noise is evident.

 

Excellent results from this highly desirable camera.

 

 

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

 

Conclusion:

 

A recommended camera albeit a little expensive when compared to SLR's. As always individual image files should be checked at 100% magnification in the event of any technical issues when resizing to 48Mb (softness or artefacting). Cropping of files should be restricted to about 20-25% depending on the quality of the original capture."

 

Hope you liked it. I think it's interesting to see an outside viewpoint on this from someone who will be using the files but doesn't have any feelings as to the camera itself, as we as buyers would have.

[johnbuckley]

Thanks again for some very thoughtful points in response to my original post. In fact, after reading them through I think my initial thoughts are being changed. I had not factored in the ability to use Leica lenses as intended, or indeed the fact that new customers to Leica will only see an incremental cost over that of a M8.2.

 

For now, the M9 is not on my shopping list. Now that I have found a certain rythm with film which I did not the last time I used it, for the forseeable future I'd like to hone my skills in that respect. I do suspect, however, that after some time when I feel confident about working with full frame film it will become apparent that a digital workflow with a full frame camera makes sense.

 

We'll see.

 

Once again, thanks for the thoughtful responses - this is such a great forum.

 

LouisB

 

Louis - like others I found your post well-argued and thought through, and written in a non-ideological tone commanding us to think about it. I'm glad some of the response you've received have gotten you thinking, just as your piece got us thinking.

 

I've been using the M9 on a daily basis since the 22nd of September. Maybe 1500 images taken in that time. It is evolutionary, and I'm thankful for that. It is the actualized M8, the M7 in digital format I wanted before the M8. All my lenses reverted to their intended angle of view. The file quality is greater than the M8's. Because I was able to trade in an M8.2 to buy it, it cost me something like $3000 -- an observation that it's not just Leica, the manufacturer, with sunk costs to exploit.

 

The M8 is a great camera, with some kinks and limitations. The M9 has fewer of either. I've been shooting with Leica's for a shorter time than many and I'm not a pro -- I got my M7 in 2002. Changed my whole approach to photography and revived a love that had lain somewhat dormant as I fiddled with Nikons that even in the 1990s seemed too complicated. With the M9, for the first time, I have the camera that makes me understand the concept of "I think through my eye." Enjoy your M8, and the M7. I think you'd enjoy the M9, and after a week's use, would probably write an equally thoughtful paean to it. JB

[Printmaker]

Hi Tom

You need to be careful with those patronising assumptions.

When I first got interested in Leica 4 years ago, I was astonished at the quality of their finish . . .. if you went to a second hand shop there were racks of mint condition M6s and M7s. Later I realised that this was because the cameras simply hadn't been used.

But looking at the M8's for sale , they ARE used - black chrome looking grey, silver chrome with shiny corners.

Whilst I'm sure that a large proportion of M9 users will be professionals (i.e. doctors, dentists, lawyers . . even software developers (god forbid)., the difference these days is that the cameras are likely to be used. I think it's been one of the shocks for leica; there's been a change from selling camera gear that disappears into the ether with no complaints or returns (because they're hardly used, and it's tough to decide that a rangefinder is incorrecly calibrated when a film comes back from the processor a week later).

 

. Suddenly cameras come back with dead pixels/badly calibrated rangefinders/lenses which don't focus to infinity . . whatever. There is lots of fantastic photography by amateurs (look at the galleries here).

 

The fact that you make a living from photography . . . . and the fact that you are a good photographer . . are not at all the same thing.

 

Jono,

 

You are of course right. I was just in a foul mood yesterday. My accountant gave me my budget for 2010 purchases based on 2009 profits - which was the worst fiscal year proportionately in the last 20. My budget was shockingly low, thus my grumble.

 

As for Leica customers, the basic customer was the same back in the late 60s when I was working my way through college by selling Leicas in a store that specialized in Leica. At that time well to do doctors, lawyers, etc. were trading in their lightly used M2s and M3s on M4s and then later equally lightly used M4s on M5s. Maybe one camera sold in twenty went to a working photographer. The same is likely true today.

 

I was certainly not disparaging anyone's talent... and I would be the first to admit that you have an amazing eye for composition and light. It is always a pleasure to look through your photos. And, looking through postings, galleries and websites, shows me that many who post here are very talented artists. I was just pointing out that most M9s will be used for vacation photos and photos of wives, kids and pets where the cost per click is totally irrelevant.

 

I'm not sure how this past year has been in England but here art and advertising took a hard hit. Revenues were off 40-60%. Two years ago, there were four art printmakers on island; today, I'm the last one standing. Two years ago, there were 6 commercial photographers (not including wedding photographers), today we are two. So please understand my frustration when the accountant tells me to choose a less expensive camera.

 

But, hey, I see a light at the end of the tunnel. Business has been up the last few months. People are becoming more confident. Art is beginning to sell. The helicopter and boat companies are making new ads and ordering posters. I have orders and bookings. There's hope. My M9 may have to wait for the 2011 budget but, what the hell, there are not many M9s available anyway.

 

Tom

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tom,

 

The budgets in California is nothing to brag about this year. not as much shooting as I would like this year. Though as you, Im pretty sure things are starting to look up.

 

One point, if one out of twenty might have been a professional user, that is probably a huge percentage, because most "any" camera I see is 90% + prosumers etc.. and a few pros. I suspect leica is equal to most others in that regard.. (just possible the 19 are dentists and doctors rather than journeymen and teamsters.. I don't know and cant say for sure.. but if there are so many great Dentists here, why can't I find a good dentist in los angeles who is a leica shooter.?)

 

.

[Leitzmac]

Louis,

 

I always find your posts insightful and this thread is no exception.

 

For some reason - call it myopia - when it comes to Leica/Leitz lenses and cameras I have only ever wanted to shoot film (and then mostly black and white). I use M4, M6 and MP and I use them primarily in low light situations and in places where I need to be discreet. Delta 3200 is almost always in one of the bodies along with HP5 or Tri-X pushed a stop in one of the others. I also like the reliability of the mechanical bodies and always take one (or two) with me on jobs as back up if everything else fails.

 

Given the above, you can understand that when Leica released the M8 I viewed the spec, read various people's assessments on the forum and saw some of the pictures I decided it wasn't for me. Though the M8.2 seemed to improve on some areas of the M8, it still didn't inspire me to part with my cash. Well, when I heard about the M9 I thought it would be the camera that would finally cause me to shoot Leica digitally. I have been selling some 'bits and bobs' recently with a view to buying an M9, but having read your initial post and some of the replies I think I'll hold off for the moment, it seems I'd just be disappointed and frustrated if I thought I could use the M9 in the way I expect to use my rangefinders. If Leica address some of the issues raised I may be swayed by the M9.2 or M10!

 

Thank you and the other contributors for your thoughts and good luck with the M7, I'm sure you'll love it.

 

Al

[BKK dan]

Good thread and agree with many of your points. All this wait time for the M9 have allowed me to think whether I really need one since I already own a M8 and am very satisfied with it (except for quality issues like shutter and dead pixel).

 

Dead pixel and you accept that?!

[yanidel]

Dead pixel and you accept that?!

I don't but it just showed up. I am waiting for the M9 to arrive to send it for repair.

[noah_addis]

...I think I'll hold off for the moment, it seems I'd just be disappointed and frustrated if I thought I could use the M9 in the way I expect to use my rangefinders. If Leica address some of the issues raised I may be swayed by the M9.2 or M10!

 

I'm curious what makes you think that. After working with the M9 (in the real world, not a quick test) I've come to the conclusion that I can use it just as I used my film rangefinders. The only difference is that I can print larger with the M9:D

 

The problem is that some people think they can use it like an 8fps DSLR, which is another matter entirely...

[ChrisC]

....My chief feeling when I think of the M9 is one of torpor. I just am not inspired by the product.......... But I want real innovative convenience. For example, a dioptre adjustment in the viewfinder. Live view (I kid you not) and an articulating LCD screen...a really big LCD screen ...Audible single point focus confirmation. Spot metering (please!). ..The M9 does not solve any problem that I currently have with the M8. ..

 

Louis - An interesting post with interesting responses. I would not have linked inspiration with Leica, and expected the M9 to be delivered as it was; essentially an 'M' with a larger sensor and tiresome legacy issues which many here celebrate as fantastic design solutions [i really don't want to repeat the list again]. It is what it is; the only digital rangefinder camera in production, and like the M8 before it we have the Henry Ford choice of taking the M9 [as with it's M8 predecessor] with it's post- Second World War viewfinder design solutions, or go brick-like with Canon et al.

 

I really would prefer to be inspired by Leica though. But I can't help feeling that amongst the obviously very clever people they have working for the company, they possibly have a compassion policy to let village idiots do the final tweak to some of their products. The latest incarnation being the new X1 with it's very nice lens, good choice of sensor, whisper quiet shutter, but a collection of finishing tweaks to make it fairly unusable by many photographers who might otherwise have chosen it for good photography. [Anyone here ever picked up a camera and thought to themselves.....'it's a really nice camera; but if only it had a really slow shutter lag after pressing the release, and some essential controls just where I need to hold it ........'].

 

Perhaps, had Leica not opted to invest energy into the S2 you [and I] might have seen an 'M' digital which solves our user problems with modern solutions to framing our images. An 'M' line with an added, alternative, modern viewfinder offered as a different option to the legacy one [which would still have it's fans of course] would, I believe, strengthen Leica. I see who the S2 is supposed to be for but I can't see who is actually going to buy it in substantial numbers; but I can see who would switch to Leica if the legacy viewfinder and framing wasn't such a compromised mess. It's not a popular view here in the heart of the legacy fan-base; but the 'M' viewfinder in it's current configuration is poor; for me it's by far the weakest part of the 'M'.

 

Louis, we might have some views in common about the M9 [though no thanks to an articulating screen] and 'M' development in general, but I think it unlikely that the 'M' line will become design-adventurous, and therefore will not become inspirational to ether of us.

 

I sincerely hope I am wrong.

 

My name is Chris and I have an M8 [which produces good photographs when I am being a good photographer - despite it's viewfinder].

 

.............. Chris

[Leitzmac]

I'm curious what makes you think that. After working with the M9 (in the real world, not a quick test) I've come to the conclusion that I can use it just as I used my film rangefinders. The only difference is that I can print larger with the M9:D

 

The problem is that some people think they can use it like an 8fps DSLR, which is another matter entirely...

 

 

In a nutshell, because it appears it won't operate under the same circumstances: Very high ISO (can you push it to 6400?), extreme temperatures, places where I don't have access to batteries/electricity...

[andym911]

had the opportunity to shoot with the M9 last week....can't put my finger on it but it didn't do it for me....but it did light my fire for my M8.2 again and made me realize that full frame or not, the size of the sensor really does not make my images any better...

 

Am sure that there are many M9 owners that are thrilled with it...especially the Wide shooters, but for me the hobby guy I'll stick with my small sensor and a bag of ancient lenses;)...starting to really discover this little tiger again

 

have fun whatever M you use

 

Andy

[jaapv]

places where I don't have access to batteries/electricity...

I think that is not an argument. There is no limit (well, maybe a financial or physical one) to the number of spare batteries one can take, and at 400 shots a battery... And the charger will charge from 12 volts as well.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Andy,

 

You are perfectly right about the M8, it is a outstanding camera. You mentioned wide, and I just want to bring up the CV 15mm, get one for you M8's birthday, its a lovely pocket size lens which ads a whole new dimension to your M8. (also get a 20mm viewfinder to match the perspective)

 

.

[Fotomiguel]

My feelings about the M9 are each day stronger and deeper. One has to try it to judge it. So huge IQ in so nice camera. It seems to be more delicate than my M8... May be not... It's just me... I use it carefully.

[Leitzmac]

I think that is not an argument. There is no limit (well, maybe a financial or physical one) to the number of spare batteries one can take, and at 400 shots a battery... And the charger will charge from 12 volts as well.

 

I can think of several places I've been where I haven't been able to charge batteries so I've had to take a mound of batteries with me in the past. For digital, currently I'm using Canon 1D bodies and though I can charge them via inverter off car batteries (then the laptop/drive etc. must be powered too - although you could just take a stack of memory cards!), I prefer bodies where I have the option of rechargeable or single use. Therefore in some locations where I require a high spec SLR body I still use 1V HS and as mentioned I bring my film Ms that I know I can rely on. I also wonder what would happen should you drop an M9 onto rock - I once saw an M6 dropped onto concrete and it continued working without skipping a beat! Horses for courses.

 

I must admit I have no personal experience of the M9 as yet, so my comments are just in response to what I've heard and read. This is not an attack on the M9, which I am sure is a great camera for certain applications under certain circumstances - I'm simply saying it appears not to be the DRF I am looking for.

 

Like Andy said: 'have fun whatever M you use'

[jaapv]

I had an M6 run over by a city bus - it didn't take too well to that. An M8 will die if you drop it 6 M onto rocks, I found I know what you mean, but the ability to charge M8/M9 batteries directly from any 12V source is a big help, I found. I tend to take a stack of SD cards, which is a relief over lead bags full of film.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[marknorton]

Louis, an interesting post and discussion which followed. I'd go further than some and say that after two months with the M9, I realise I needn't have bought it.

 

The mistake I made was thinking that moving to the M9 would mirror my Nikon D2x to D3 experience where the new camera provided not only the move to FF but significant all-round improvements - speed, handling, menus, display. Then, as a crowning achievement, there was the stunning (and even now still impressive) high ISO performance. There was a real feeling that the new camera moved the game forwards.

 

I just do not get the same feeling with the M9. My M8's came back from upgrade in Solms in fine form, fully sorted, and all the way through the summer provided great IQ. The M9 arrives and, yes, we have FF and, yes, we no longer need IR filters but we've lost some things, some others are new and badly thought out, the evident cost cutting still rankles and the camera's a bit of a slug. Then there's the IQ problems with the 18mm SE and the fact that one third of Leica's lens range is now outside the scope of the viewfinder. Overall, I needn't have bothered.

 

It may be the M9's arrival has more to do with throwing a financial lifeline to Leica than in moving their DRF game forwards. To me, the camera feels incomplete, a work in progress.