Jump to content

Should I buy an M8 and Leica Lenses over an M9 and cheaper Lensess?


Hoaxville

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been dreaming of owning a Leica M for many years, and when the M9 was announced I thought it might finally be time.

 

But the M9 and couple of lenses is going to cost way more than I can afford. I considered for a while buying an M9 and then getting a couple of Voitlander lenses. Making the package more affordable.

 

But then after consideration I thought perhaps it would be best to spend my money on some mint 'used' Leica glass (28mm Cron and 50mm 1.4 Lux ASHP) and then maybe purchase a used / demo / new M8 (I'm looking at a 'shop handled' M8 for $US3200). The idea being I would have quality glass that will suit any upgrades to further M bodies in the future.

 

But I have read so many contrasting reviews and user experiences of the M8. The negatives seem to all focus on unusable 'noise' at ISO 1250 and above. Auto White Balance (has firmware upgrades fixed this?), cameras not working for many reasons (seems to be 'first batches' that seem to fall into this category).

 

Anyway, it's just been interesting reading all the gushy reviews of the M9 where alot of M8 hate seems to come out. You know the drill "problems finally fixed, here there and everywhere etc...."

 

Anyway I'll stop raving, but I would love to hear anyones thoughts on the M8 and my questions.

 

Are people still happy with their M8's. Is it really the digital v1.0 that needed to go to v2.0 (M9) to finally get the digital M right.

 

thanks for your time,

 

g

 

http://www.GlendynIvin.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still happy with my M8. You could probably pick up a used M8.2 which has some advantages.

 

You can see my results on flickr, I really don't think there is anything that I'd 'need' an M9 for. I'll probably buy one for the usability improvements, IR and full-frame, but not because it will produce an image I couldn't have made on the M8.

 

YMMV, David.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents... is that its really all about the glass not the body.

 

Get the best lenses you can they will give you really satisfying images on the M8 and then as you grow with Leica you can think about later M bodies.

 

I used to shoot DSLR but two years ago I tried the M8 and it just felt right... I have not looked back.

 

Oh... you might consider the Summerit line of lenses... at least for some of your kit. They are wonderful and relatively affordable.

 

Also, while not a lab test check out this thread. I think for most uses the difference in IQ between the M8 and M9 is not great.

Edited by tollie
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But the M9 and couple of lenses is going to cost way more than I can afford. I considered for a while buying an M9 and then getting a couple of Voitlander lenses. Making the package more affordable.

 

But then after consideration I thought perhaps it would be best to spend my money on some mint 'used' Leica glass (28mm Cron and 50mm 1.4 Lux ASHP) and then maybe purchase a used / demo / new M8

 

If you figure that digital bodies will reduce in value, and hopefully, the lenses will increase, why not learn with a used M8 and get good glass?

 

FYI: I have a "demo" M8 (1/8000 shutter) that I got 2+ years ago, started with Voigtlander lenses, now have the 28 cron and 50/1.4asph. I still have most of my CV lenses.

 

Will I get an M9? yeah, probably. Especially a demo or good used one.

 

Is the M8 a hassle? Maybe 1 day/month I worry about reflections with the UV/IR filter, so I take the filter off.

 

Once every thousand or two clicks I get the green blobs that happen when strong light falls on the edge of the sensor.

 

Other than that, the M8 is a great camera.

 

JohnS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I went through the same thought process. Ended up getting a demo M8.2 with one-year Leica warranty and the 28 and 50 Summicrons. I am a long time Nikon shooter, so I was not yet ready to make the financial commitment of an M9. I am very pleased with my M8.2.

 

I disagree with the notion it is unusable at ISO 1250 and up. I did a head to head noise comparison with my D300 and am of the opinion that the M8.2 at 1250 (ISO 1600 equivalent) is about a half stop nosier than my D300 at ISO 1600. The D300 is considered by many to be quite good at ISO 1600. I can hand hold my M8.2 at significantly slower shutter speeds than my D300 so with reasonably static subjects I can shoot at a lower ISO than I can with the D300. My M8.2 at ISO 640 is much better than my D300 at 1600. I shoot DNG exclusively and the processor used makes a big different in visible noise IMO. Capture One seems to do better in this regard than Lightroom 2.5. If I go to ISO 2500 with the M8.2 - images will need serious attention from Noise Ninja or the like. Conversion to B&W works nicely, but that is not my preference.

 

The M9 seems a bit better at high ISOs from what I've seen. Some of that improvement may stem from the ability to set ISO in one third stop increments. IMO if Leica were to add that feature to the M8/M8.2 firmware it would make a big difference at higher ISOs.

 

I got used to crop sensors when I went from film to digital and for some purposes (like candids) prefer them. I love the full frame of my D3/D700, but don't use them for everything.

 

All in all I think I made the right decision. The M8.2 is a very fine camera and the improvements found in the M9 (other than one third stop ISO settings) are not that critical in my shooting. At some point I will want the wide angle lens performance of the M9, but I can wait on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I went through the same decision process and decided on a used low actuation M8.2 with a 1yr warranty. Honestly, I'm glad that the M9 is hard to get because I would have snapped one up instead. But in the weeks after the announcement the "bloom came off the rose" for me and I used a more objective decision based analysis that led me to the M8.2. I agree with others that it really is all about the glass and after shooting with and enjoying the M8.2 in these past few weeks I am even more confident in my decision. Going with a used M8 made it possible for me to afford glass that I am very unlikely to part with in future. The same can't be said of any digital camera body - including an M8/M9/M??.... This is my first RF (although I used one for a while in the seventies) and I have so enjoyed the experience thus far, I'm even thinking of film again. Thus, I might be more likely to hold onto the M8.2 and pick up an M6/M7 or MP for "full frame" B&W instead of trading up to an M9 once the smoke clears.

 

It is true that if you read enough on the web you could easily come away with the idea that the M8 was a train wreck of a camera that many delight in deriding. Maybe many of the early production M8s deserved the moniker but the M8 overall is a damn fine camera, IMHO.

 

I'm not at all knocking the M9 and if money was no object for me I would get one when available. But I am not at all bothered by the crop factor of the M8.2 nor the IR cut filters. Take that away and I'd say with a used M8 you have >90% of the M9 "experience" (and comparable IQ) at a fraction of the cost of entry to the digital M world and, more importantly, that great Leica glass.

 

This is the way I view it. The limiting performance factors for me as a photographer (i.e., with M8.2 in hand) include my own talent, skill and creativity. Full-frame, higher ISO performance, and snappier electronics of the M9 are simply not likely to improve on this in any substantive way. YMMV of course.

Edited by pharyngula
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the consensus here and would definitely advise used M8 plus Leica glass instead of M9 plus CV lenses. The lenses will have long term value. If you outgrow the M8 in time, you can always buy an M9 then. I have both cameras and could happily live with just the M8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I got the original M8 and already had a reasonable array of Leica glass from my film cameras. I still added a 28mm with the M8, as that provided an equivalent 35mm field of view. Leica offers helped with the IR cut filters, but I still had to buy a few.

 

BUUTTT! If I had it to do over again on a limited budget, I'd get an M9 and the new CV 50mm f1.1 Nokton as a starter lens. Then add Leica glass as the budget allows. Once I get a full complement of Leica lenses, the Nokton would take a secondary role as the low light, narrow DOF specialist. I'm considering buying the new CV anyway for this special purpose, even though I have other 50mm Leica capability. The $10k Leica Noctilux is way beyond any conceivable budget I might devise, so the Nokton might fill the bill for this specialty.

 

As an alternate starter, the 50mm Leica Summarit is not that much more $$ than the Nokton, and much more compact.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been dreaming of owning a Leica M for many years, and when the M9 was announced I thought it might finally be time.

 

But the M9 and couple of lenses is going to cost way more than I can afford. I considered for a while buying an M9 and then getting a couple of Voitlander lenses. Making the package more affordable.

 

But then after consideration I thought perhaps it would be best to spend my money on some mint 'used' Leica glass (28mm Cron and 50mm 1.4 Lux ASHP) and then maybe purchase a used / demo / new M8 (I'm looking at a 'shop handled' M8 for $US3200). The idea being I would have quality glass that will suit any upgrades to further M bodies in the future.

 

But I have read so many contrasting reviews and user experiences of the M8. The negatives seem to all focus on unusable 'noise' at ISO 1250 and above. Auto White Balance (has firmware upgrades fixed this?), cameras not working for many reasons (seems to be 'first batches' that seem to fall into this category).

 

Anyway, it's just been interesting reading all the gushy reviews of the M9 where alot of M8 hate seems to come out. You know the drill "problems finally fixed, here there and everywhere etc...."

 

Anyway I'll stop raving, but I would love to hear anyones thoughts on the M8 and my questions.

 

Are people still happy with their M8's. Is it really the digital v1.0 that needed to go to v2.0 (M9) to finally get the digital M right.

 

thanks for your time,

 

g

 

http://www.GlendynIvin.com

 

i think a good rule of thumb is to get the best glass first.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A question might be; how big do you print? Many here are regularly printing at 30"x20" from the M8. Do you need to print larger? If so get the M9 [with the caveat that such large prints are more demanding of technique and lens setting]. If you rarely make big prints; I'd suggest the M8/M8.2. If you get the urge to make extremely detailed files you can always stitch M8 images together [i'm up to around 30 image stitches].

 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Glen, I agree: it's all about the glass.

 

I you look at the M9 forum, there is a thread showing a comparison of the M8 and M9 with just about the same image (yup, magic).

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/106551-m9-vs-m8-pix-redux.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

For M8 is capable camera and can get used for half the price of M9. That is one Leica lens for sure.

 

I don't even think about (or drool about) M9 since I have M8. But, if I were buying new camera, maybe I would be considering M9 though.

 

But, by all means, I have not pushed my M8 to its full potential. For example, I have not printed over 12x18".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me tell you, I have printed larger than 12"x18" with my m8 (17"x22". 20"x24") and I believe the results from the M8 match the M9 and in some cases surpass it! I am not joking here!

 

I tested the M9 with my Noctilux at the Photo Plus Expo in New York City and compared the 17"x22" with shots made with my M8 and the Noctilux and guess what? the prints from the M8 are SHARPER!!!!!!

 

The M9 looks mushy. The M8 looks sharper and at the same time, in the case of the Noctilux, it has that lovely swirly background we all love. The Noctilux is a very demanding lens, and this is proof the M8 is far from outdated!!!!

 

I was thinking about buying an M9, but have changed my mind for a second M8 (I have a black one, and will now buy a used M8.2 chrome--YES!!!, REAL CHROME!!!!!, not that cheap PAINTED GREY STUFF!!!).

 

Yes I know the M9 has better high ISO performance. But who cares!!!! Look at what you can get for even $1,100 USD (Voigtlander 50mm f1.1 Nokton) as far as lens speed and you wil be fine with ISO 640 and under for most of your shooting!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, IMO, the answer is M8-something + Leica lenses over M9 + CV lenses.

 

Economically, the lenses have proven to hold their value or appreciate. Digital cameras have proven to depreciate, to varying degrees.

 

The M8__ without its AA filter is going to be sharper. Add Leica lenses and it will be as sharp as possible. The M9 cannot be as sharp, although larger files either translate to less enlargement for really large prints or more room for post-exposure cropping - but no matter how good they are (and many are very good), the best CV lenses do not match the best Leica lenses.

 

IMO the remaining M9 advantages in this equation are perhaps one EV advantage in low light conditions and no IR issues. I am going to get whipped and beaten here, but I mostly do not use IR filters and mostly do not notice color rendering issues.

 

So - my vote: M8__ + Leica lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest EarlBurrellPhoto

Anyway, it's just been interesting reading all the gushy reviews of the M9 where alot of M8 hate seems to come out.

 

A few people seem to have a compulsive need to convince themselves that the M9 they just splurged on is far better than the M8, and the way they do that is by demeaning the M8 and anyone who "still" uses one. Most people seem to agree that the M9 doesn't improve all that much on the M8 in terms of absolute IQ, and the absence of any compelling photographic evidence to the contrary supports that.

 

That said, the M8 is probably a more demanding camera to use. One has to consider the cropped FOV when choosing lenses, especially if one is used to "thinking full frame". One has to use those pesky IR filters, and make sure wide angle lenses are coded if one doesn't want to spend one's time using Cornerfix on all those shots. With the M9 if your standards aren't super-picky you can forget about the IR issue. The non-upgraded M8 has very skimpy framelines, not too convenient in real-world photography. The M8.2 has much better framelines. The M9 reverts somewhat, sadly.

 

Probably the main issue at this point in time is, you may need to wait a long time to get an M9, whereas an M8 or 8.2 can be found quite readily.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO I'd suggest buying:

 

a) the cheapest M8 available with a warranty, and

 

B) the 'best' Leica lenses to suit your needs whilst on the M8 AND which will still be viable to retain if you upgrade to a full frame M9/? in the future.

 

Leica lenses will at least retain a good proportion of their value (or better) whilst digital camera bodies (probably even Leica) will depreciate.

 

I would very much like to buy an M9 but am having trouble convincing myself that I really, genuinely, absolutely need the extra 'quality'!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can afford it. I would go with the M9 plus the 50mm ASPH. I understand your dilema. I really would not like to spend 4k on a lens and not have it function as I want it. If I buy a 50mm lens, I want it at 50mm. That might not be an issue for you.

In addition, the awsome Leica glass is very sharp in the corners and sides. The corners and sides of the frame are not used with the Leica m8, so in a way that expensive glass is wasted.

 

If I had an M8, I would want the final completed product that I feel is the M9. I would want to upgrade as soon as I could. That is my opinion. Others, are very happy with the M8 and can just stick with the M8. I think you have to ask yourself, if you will want to upgrade soon.

 

The M9 is a complete package. It performs very well. In my tests, and the tests on DPreview there was no IR color shifts seen. I am happy with the benefits the M9 brings over the M8, and in the end it was worth the financial difference. I will keep the M9 for as long as I can forsee, since the image quality and camera function is all I can expect in a top end digital rangefinder camera.

 

Good luck with your decision.

 

Regards,

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it really depends on your own financial situation.

Do you want to put the bulk of your money into something that will steadily lose value over the next few years. Or in something that is much more likely to hold its value.

 

Let's say you buy an M9 and a CV28 Ultron. That's going to cost around $8,000.

Just a guess, but in three-four years, that kit will probably be worth around $4,000.

 

For the same amount of money - considering there is a viable used market - you could get an M8, 28 summicron and 50 lux asph. With good deals, you might even have enough left over to add a 90 elmarit-M.

Another guess, but in three to four years, that kit will probably be worth around $7,000.

 

More importantly, in scenario 2, you have lenses that will last a lifetime.

 

Your lenses are the foundation of your kit. At least, that's how I treat my kit. I could sell a bunch of lenses and upgrade my M8 to an M9, but I'd really regret that down the road.

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...