M9 Backup

[swamiji]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The problem with using a film Leica as a backup is that it's film. You have to equip yourself for two types of cameras, not to mention processing issues with M7s. With a now less expensive M8, you would not skip a beat. Why not just live with one lens/IR filter for your backup M8? Otherwise, you should investigate the Panasonic G1 or G1F solution. One adapter and you can use all your Leica lenses. But you should consider a G1 as an extension as well, one that would allow you to use macro and telephoto lenses not available for the M9. The G1 also allows you to use the EVF rather than the small screen in the sun solution. If I wanted simplicity, however, I'd go for the G1F with the new 20mm lens, perhaps with an adapter to use a 50mm Leica lens as a 100mm short zoom. More than adequate.

 

The advantage of using a film Leica as a backup is that it's film. You don't need multiple types of charging stations, different types of memory. You don't have to convert it to Tri-X in post, because you are using real Tri-X. Right now my M7 is my primary and my M9 is backup. Depending on my needs, I switch. No IR filters, No crop factor change, You just pick up the camera and shoot. One of the biggest advantages, is the breaks the bad habit of chimping. It becomes just you and the subject, the camera (Film or Digital) becomes part of the flow, part of the vision. The question is where you want to break your workflow on the computer or in the camera.

[AlanJW]

Thanks to all for the replies, all of which were thoughtful, and taken together, mostly inconsistent, which only shows this is another of those very personal decisions. I think I am still leaning to X1 as it gives me not only a 35mm equivalent backup but a pocketable camera for those times where even the M9 is more than I want to carry (like some business travel).

 

Thanks again.

[Jeff S]

The question is where you want to break your workflow on the computer or in the camera.

 

Film is great...but you make it seem as if there is no workflow after it comes out of the camera. Yes, Tri-X is Tri-X, but it doesn't develop itself...or fine tune itself. Maybe one step is eliminated...but then other steps need to be added.

 

With digital, the computer replaces what I used to do in the darkroom, not just what happened in the camera. The film obviously needs to be developed properly. Then the same "burning/dodging" type decisions apply, film or digital. And, in a hybrid film/digital workflow, the film needs to be scanned, and that too involves workflow decisions.

 

The choice of camera back-up needs to account for the whole chain of events, including necessary post-camera workflow, which is always necessary, film or digital...just different.

 

FWIW, and to my surprise, I'm spending less time in front of the computer than I ever spent in the darkroom to achieve similar quality b&w prints. (Note I didn't say same quality...no need to engage in a silver/ink jet print debate. My point is about workflow choices. Print results are another personal matter.)

 

Jeff

[jkphoto]

First of all let me say that I learned the hard way to have a backup with me at all times. I was recently in Colorado, and took a day trip (have not been able to do that much recently) after a business event, and when I took out my M8, found that the shutter button had failed and could not use the camera.

 

A friend had a G10 that I used, but, I found myself thinking more about the camera than the images as I had never used one before. Took some pictures, but made no images if you know what I mean.

 

So from now on, along with my M9, I will bring either my M8.2 or D-Lux4; and my M6 keeps talking to me so maybe .... well you get the idea, it can be anything you are comfortable with, but, it needs to be something!!!

[swamiji]

Film is great...but you make it seem as if there is no workflow after it comes out of the camera. Yes, Tri-X is Tri-X, but it doesn't develop itself...or fine tune itself. Maybe one step is eliminated...but then other steps need to be added.

 

With digital, the computer replaces what I used to do in the darkroom, not just what happened in the camera. The film obviously needs to be developed properly. Then the same "burning/dodging" type decisions apply, film or digital. And, in a hybrid film/digital workflow, the film needs to be scanned, and that too involves workflow decisions.

 

The choice of camera back-up needs to account for the whole chain of events, including necessary post-camera workflow, which is always necessary, film or digital...just different.

 

 

Jeff

 

Actually what makes my workflow so easy for film, is because I have really good, commercial grade, Photolab about 15 min. from my house. I simply drop off my film one day and pick up the CD and negatives the next, and there scanner is far better than anything I can afford (Lets say in the S2 plus all the lenses range). From that point on, the workflow is the same for Digital or film.

 

Someday I may wish to setup a darkroom, until then this works well

 

What I am taking into account that most are not, is what makes Rangefinder photography unique. As it has been mentioned here in this forum, when a Rangefinder Photographer picks up a lens (lets say a 35mm) they start to see with 35mm eyes. That was the problem for me with the M8/M9 combo that I had. The 1.33 crop factor drove me nuts. The filters was a minor issue. So the perfect backup for a M9 would be another M9, however since in this thread that was not a choice. I choose for myself and continue to enjoy that choice was a film M that was full frame. Someday I may pick up another M9 (when they become available). Perhaps an al-a-cart... On the other hand a IIIg is looking good as well.

 

As it has been quoted here: Photography has not changed since its origin except in its technical aspects, which for me are not important. - Henri Cartier-Bresson

[Jeff S]

Actually what makes my workflow so easy for film, is because I have really good, commercial grade, Photolab about 15 min. from my house. I simply drop off my film one day and pick up the CD and negatives the next, and there scanner is far better than anything I can afford

 

Well, if that's all you do, then you could just as well trust a lab to work with files from a digital camera. You wouldn't even need to drive to the lab. Different strokes...

 

Jeff

[swamiji]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, if that's all you do, then you could just as well trust a lab to work with files from a digital camera. You wouldn't even need to drive to the lab. Different strokes...

 

Jeff

 

I wish it was that easy. But it still goes through LR. Someday perhaps a DR

[Rick]

WeinschelA, I think I know what you mean as a back up. You want something that can be carried on business trips and everywhere else, when you don't want the "big" M9 around. You want a pocketable camera that can serve those occasions and can fill in with excellent image quality if the M9 goes bonkers.

 

The only camera that has that image quality you want and has a small size is the X1. That is it. Yep, two grand and it has a few warts. But, it is very small and the image quality is better than any point and shoot mentioned so far. And, some of the PAS mentioned are not really totally pocketable like the GF1 and the Olympus.

 

Get the X1.

[Jeff S]

I wish it was that easy. But it still goes through LR

 

And, that just illustrates my point that film and digital still require post-processing elements...just different ones.

 

To your original comment that Tri-X at least comes out of the camera like Tri-X...well, that's not the complete story, since unless you specify the developer, developing time and method (tank, agitation) for a given paper, your results will be subject to variability that will ultimately need to be addressed in LR. You're actually using a darkroom...just not one under your complete control...and that likely means even more work on the back end.

 

Remember, too, that with digital, each image can be exposed and processed differently from the outset. With a roll of film, those decisions are generally made 24 or 36 images at a time.

 

For the OP, these post-processing issues are important to consider when choosing a back-up camera.

 

Jeff

[drdannn]

Hi, A Digilux 2 or 3 will give you the Leica experience and auto focus too. I have both cameras and recommend both. Dan

[AlanJW]

Jeff S:I agree with you. For me an M6, MP or M7 might be a nice nostalgic trip, but I really don't want to go back to all the variables and limitations of film. I have a Nikon F3 sitting around and haven't used it in 6 years (not worth selling)and that's enough nostalgia.

 

RickLeica: The X1 was the conclusion I reached also, for all the reasons you list, plus when I am out for some serious work, the X1 can be tucked in my bag truly as a backup. The X1 has limitations too, but my style is deliberative rather than spontaneous so the limitations are outweighed by the bigger sensor. Yes it is too expensive, but my accountant, bless him, just told me I am due a tax refund on an amended return for 2005, and what a nice use for found money! (Too bad the refund wouldn't cover an S2).

 

Thanks again. This forum is a great resource.

 

 

Alan

[Fotomiguel]

I'm using my M8 as backup. No differences when shooting. That's the important for me.

[yanidel]

I use the Sigma DP2 as backup to my M9, mainly travel. It has the huge advantage to fit in a suit or jacket pocket. Both the X1 or GF1 are slightly too big for that.

Also, the manual focus dial of the DP2 + external viewfinder makes it an experience similar to the M, no need to peep at the LCD to know your focus distance.

As for IQ, wonderful at ISO50-200, I like a lot the rendering of the Foveon sensor. Not a low light beast for sure, but no other compacts can match a M9 + super fast lens anyways. The X1 has probably less quirks and a better built product with great imagery, but I find the LCD manual focus system plain stupid. Unacceptable for a company whose tradition is reportage / street. So I'll pass on it.

[swamiji]

For a Pocket camera the D-Lux 4 is full featured and not bad IQ.

[Jet]

M8 without question.

 

Jet

[Benoit Petot]

Hi all,

I’ve had the same concern since I got my M9. But addressing the backup issue isn’t easy one and “backup” is an umbrella word covering a lot of different needs: What do you want backup ?

Are you looking for a spare camera in case of lost, break-down or worst ? In this case:

• Are you a professional needing a camera always available (with the same type of results) ?
  
• Or are you a hobbyist ? for whom the break-down backup is less fundamental ?(even so, I, a few years ago spent a full day on the road between Death Valley & Kanab-UTAH to get my Hassy fixed)
  

Will your “spare” stay in your bag useless almost forever (an M9 isn’t built to fail) ? Or will you use it to make alternate photos in a different style ?

Are you looking at a backup as “a light camera always in your pocket” ?

How many lenses do you have in M Mounts ?

Everyone can understand that there is no definitive answer to such a question.

For myself:

My Leica M6 has been the spare of the Hasselblad for more than 15 years, and the same M6 has been my pocket camera since day one (with a 35mm you can bring it with you everywhere and all the time).

For the next few years:

• the M6 will probably be the “breakdown spare”:
  - It can use the same lenses,
  - with a good scanning a Velvia-pic will provide a good dng
  - during the shooting the switch from M9 to M6 is 100% transparent
  
• my cell-phone will probably be be my alternate pocket camera
  

But I believe that the biggest need is to address the partial failures of the M9 kit:

• The availability of power (I plan to buy a second charger and a third battery)
  
• A safe management of the SD cards (in film’s times I dropped the even films in my left pocket and the odd in the right and I processed them separately). To be honest, I’m not very confident with all my pictures on the same 2grams of silicon on a unique stamp size, losable gadget). So before my next trip, I’ll buy an Hyper-Card download tool).
  

But, who know?, we are probably worrying too much:

• My best picture are the M9 ones (after 40 years of Linhof, Rollei, Hasselblad & M6).
  
• And, with the exception of its buggy firmware, the M9 works without failure just as a standard piece of German technology. One fix in 17Years of my M6 and my lenses are back in Solms for the first time, just to be coded.