Jump to content

Justifying the cost for a M9

daveolson

By daveolson
in Digital Forum

Recommended Posts

daveolson

daveolson

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

To begin, I really don't like digital photography. You can take a bad picture, sit at your computer and with Photoshop or some variant, produce a masterpiece for the Getty Museum

of Photographic art. What I enjoy about film is that it's demanding of you as the photographer. Shutter, aperture, and a few other minor things like a light meter for absolute precision; press the shutter release button and viola. If it's good or maybe great, it's primarily you. If it isn't, it's also you. Slide film leaves no room for errors, print film, yes to a degree. Black and White very much so. OK, I've been taking photos for government for 40 years. I started with a 4x5 Speed Graphic, then to a Polaroid, and finally 35mm film. After that came medium format in three of it's different formats. There is nothing more spectacular than a 4x5, or 8 x 10 direct contact print. I have digital and have also spent several hours on the computer manipulating prints. When one, most should not have been shot, two, with the multiplicity of special design and effects it boggles the mind. Is that the picture I took? Can I justify the 8 thousand dollars for a M9 camera. A used M8 digital for $6,000.00. No, I'll shoot my three Rs and 3 Ms. All serviced and working perfectly with a nice complement of lenses for both formats. I realize that this is a rant against Leica and their pricing, but the consumer(s) have to have voice and be heard.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 43
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Joachim123

Joachim123

Posted
Posted

I also contemplated taking the M9 plunge. However, I agree with the poster that going from film to digital would be very difficult for me.

 

The M9 is an excellent tool well worth the money. However, since I dont use any digital camera the money would be better spent on an M7 or another M6 as a backup

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ecaton

Ecaton

Posted
Posted
To begin, I really don't like digital photography. You can take a bad picture, sit at your computer and with Photoshop or some variant, produce a masterpiece for the Getty Museum

of Photographic art. What I enjoy about film is that it's demanding of you as the photographer. Shutter, aperture, and a few other minor things like a light meter for absolute precision; press the shutter release button and viola. If it's good or maybe great, it's primarily you. If it isn't, it's also you. Slide film leaves no room for errors, print film, yes to a degree. Black and White very much so. OK, I've been taking photos for government for 40 years. I started with a 4x5 Speed Graphic, then to a Polaroid, and finally 35mm film. After that came medium format in three of it's different formats. There is nothing more spectacular than a 4x5, or 8 x 10 direct contact print. I have digital and have also spent several hours on the computer manipulating prints. When one, most should not have been shot, two, with the multiplicity of special design and effects it boggles the mind. Is that the picture I took? Can I justify the 8 thousand dollars for a M9 camera. A used M8 digital for $6,000.00. No, I'll shoot my three Rs and 3 Ms. All serviced and working perfectly with a nice complement of lenses for both formats. I realize that this is a rant against Leica and their pricing, but the consumer(s) have to have voice and be heard.

 

You "really don't like digital photography". So what's the point of your rant against Leica's pricing of their digital RF camera. Enjoy shooting film. There are plenty of affordable used film M's available.

Link to post
Share on other sites
eleskin

eleskin

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There is no justification with the NEX 7 at $1,199.00!!! The M9 is just overpriced and too expensive. If it were the price of what the M8 was in 07 ($4,700) that would be more realistic. I bought a used M8 a year ago for $1,800 USD and in 2 years I would pay that for a used M9. In the meantime, I will be using a NEX 7 when it comes out!

Link to post
Share on other sites
jaapv

jaapv

Posted
Posted
There is no justification with the NEX 7 at $1,199.00!!! The M9 is just overpriced and too expensive. If it were the price of what the M8 was in 07 ($4,700) that would be more realistic. I bought a used M8 a year ago for $1,800 USD and in 2 years I would pay that for a used M9. In the meantime, I will be using a NEX 7 when it comes out!

 

Good luck with your wideangles...:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
lct

lct

Posted
Posted

Not sure to follow the OP here. Leica is one of the last brands to sell film and digital. We have the choice then. As for prices, the $7K M9 is not that far from a $5K M7 and a second hand M8 does not sell for $6K fortunately. One can get two M8s for this price.

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted
[...]What I enjoy about film is that it's demanding of you as the photographer. Shutter, aperture, and a few other minor things like a light meter for absolute precision; press the shutter release button and viola. If it's good or maybe great, it's primarily you. If it isn't, it's also you. [...]

 

So you are telling us that the technology brought to us by computing is endangering your paradigm of the pre-electronic era.

 

Good. I am of the pre-electonic era, and I still exist today.

 

Let us change this from a word dialog into pictures. I am ready. Now it is your turn. Post.

 

Oh, and also show us how Getty Images from, for example, pictures made in the forties or fifties have been obviated by digital photography. Hey, you were there, so tell us!

Link to post
Share on other sites
businessasusual

businessasusual

Posted
Posted
To begin, I really don't like digital photography. You can take a bad picture, sit at your computer and with Photoshop or some variant, produce a masterpiece for the Getty Museum

of Photographic art. What I enjoy about film is that it's demanding of you as the photographer. Shutter, aperture, and a few other minor things like a light meter for absolute precision; press the shutter release button and viola. If it's good or maybe great, it's primarily you. If it isn't, it's also you. Slide film leaves no room for errors, print film, yes to a degree. Black and White very much so. OK, I've been taking photos for government for 40 years. I started with a 4x5 Speed Graphic, then to a Polaroid, and finally 35mm film. After that came medium format in three of it's different formats. There is nothing more spectacular than a 4x5, or 8 x 10 direct contact print. I have digital and have also spent several hours on the computer manipulating prints. When one, most should not have been shot, two, with the multiplicity of special design and effects it boggles the mind. Is that the picture I took? Can I justify the 8 thousand dollars for a M9 camera. A used M8 digital for $6,000.00. No, I'll shoot my three Rs and 3 Ms. All serviced and working perfectly with a nice complement of lenses for both formats. I realize that this is a rant against Leica and their pricing, but the consumer(s) have to have voice and be heard.

 

Well, that was a waste of 5 minutes you're not gonna get back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Ronan

Ronan

Posted
Posted
Is there a question here? I think not.

 

You've had your rant, and attempted to speak for all consumer(s) against Leica and their pricing. Thank you for your concern, but your guardianship and protection is not needed, desired or welcome by this Leica consumer.

 

VBR,

Stephen

 

(Moderated for unacceptable language)

OP, you aren't alone in your thoughts of the M9 and digital cameras. I would suggest writing up a nice little blog and share you love/hate/concerns.

 

Cheers.

 

Really?

 

Really. Come take a look at the photos posted for the Festival Noire, Festival Photography (forgot its proper name) and heck come take a look at the banners of the Museum of Art in Montreal... Crappy compositions, horrible DOF, colors are meh... Nothing screams professional/art from them, just cheap and amateurish.

 

 

***Off Topic***

On a funny though i went to the Chinese Lantern exposition yesterday... The amount of people with D90/D300/D700 and Canon equivalent using a tripod + flash was overwhelming (i saw 2 M9 shooters)... I took a peak at a couple of them, blah. I'm guessing its 'shoot now with everything installed and on auto and photoshop later to make it somewhat acceptable'. The M9 shooters had horrible noise, i'm guessing a 0.95 IS needed to keep ISO low... Nice chaps though, one is a member here and had some strong feedback (+/-) of his M9 (I'm sorry i can't remember your username!).

 

I was shooting 1600 ISO f2-f4 very comfortably with my X100 (camera doesn't really matter). Pictures came out near perfect inside the camera, all i had to do is transfer them, very minor tweaking of black and voila done. Sharp, clean, perfectly night exposed pictures with near zero noise. Contrast was superb.

 

If people spent more time learning/studying than buying gear... their pictures would be so much better.

Link to post
Share on other sites
phancj

phancj

Posted
Posted

***Off Topic***

On a funny though i went to the Chinese Lantern exposition yesterday... The amount of people with D90/D300/D700 and Canon equivalent using a tripod + flash was overwhelming (i saw 2 M9 shooters)... I took a peak at a couple of them, blah. I'm guessing its 'shoot now with everything installed and on auto and photoshop later to make it somewhat acceptable'. The M9 shooters had horrible noise, i'm guessing a 0.95 IS needed to keep ISO low... Nice chaps though, one is a member here and had some strong feedback (+/-) of his M9 (I'm sorry i can't remember your username!).

 

I was shooting 1600 ISO f2-f4 very comfortably with my X100 (camera doesn't really matter). Pictures came out near perfect inside the camera, all i had to do is transfer them, very minor tweaking of black and voila done. Sharp, clean, perfectly night exposed pictures with near zero noise. Contrast was superb.

 

If people spent more time learning/studying than buying gear... their pictures would be so much better.

 

Hmmm...so for Nikon D700/D300 it is necessary to do post to make images "somewhat acceptable" but your x100 delivers great images out of the camera? ....hmmm...:rolleyes:

 

The x100 is a great camera but its aps-c sensor cannot deliver like a fullframe sensor can (D700/M9). I tried it and its images is good but not great(my personal opinion). The M9 produces images of a different class altogether. I did not go with the M9 coz I think I want AF but the camera delivers images like no other I have seen for its size.

 

And I have yet to discuss the difference in possibilities in an interchangeable lens camera like the M9 or the DXXX compared to the x100.

 

I would very much like to see the images you took with the x100 you spoke of, the zero noise near perfect images you described. Thanks.

 

Oh, one more thing, I find that when I buy new gear my images often magically become better.

 

CJ

Link to post
Share on other sites
erl

erl

Posted
Posted

Ronan, clearly your views are not shared by all, and vice versa. That is fine and democratic, however, the use of abusive language will not be tolerated when directed at another forum member, regardless of whether you agree with him/her or not.

 

Accordingly I have moderated your outburst.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...