Leica M9 as the only camera?

[JasonPaulRoberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve been struggling with this as well. I’ve been shooting both Leica and Canon for years. Until the M9 came out, I shot 90% Canon/10% Leica. Now that percentage has been reversed. In fact, I haven’t used my 5dMkII in almost two months. So I’m tempted to sell my Canon gear and go 100% Leica.

 

I’ve used my m9 in the studio, and there are no technical issues with it. The image quality is superior to my 5dMkII and my girlfriend’s 1DsMkIII which I often borrow. The only issues I’ve experienced when using the M9 in the studio are: you can’t shoot tethered, framelines aren’t as exact as a DSLR, and sometimes new clients look at the camera as if it was a P&S. Not big issues for me. I rarely shoot tethered, and I give myself a little extra room around the edges so I can crop if necessary. For clients who question the size of the camera, a quick explanation of the system puts them at ease.

 

I am a concert photographer as well, although like you, I’m cutting back. I love using the M9 when the conditions are right. Someone linked to my blog post about concert photography and the Leica M9. Since I wrote that article I’ve been using the M9 even more for concerts. However, I have been burned. Specifically - showing up to a show that I was supposed to have pit access to, only to find that access was changed, and now I have to shoot from the soundboard. This is when I need a 200mm+ lens. Soundboard restrictions are becoming more and more common, along with crazy photo releases (I refuse to sign), which is why I cut back my concert shooting.

 

Regarding manual focusing on the M9. I feel much more comfortable manually focusing my M9 than I do relying on Canon autofocus. It took a while, but I can nail the focus on my M9 quick enough for most shooting scenarios. Not to mention that I’ve been burned by Canon autofocus on several commercial shoots. I’ve sent my 5dMkII in for service twice this year. My girlfriend has sent her 1DsMkIII in twice as well. All for focus issues.

 

Not being able to rely on gear is unacceptable. I’ve found my Canon to be unreliable. My M9 has never failed me. So what’s holding me back from going 100% Leica? The biggest factor is that I sometimes use my 200mm to compress the background when shooting portraits. That’s about it.

 

That being said, I can’t say that you should or shouldn’t get an M9. It’s a little like telling someone who has always driven an automatic transmission to switch to a manual transmission. The only way to know if you’ll like it is to try it for an extended period of time.

 

Here’s where I differ from what some of the others have said – I had a M8 and didn't like it. I can’t recommend the M8. Not trying to offend M8 users, just my opinion. I suggest renting an M9 for a week and shooting the heck out of it.

 

 

Jason Paul Roberts

 

[chris_tribble]

Jason - interesting comments. I just did another gig at the Queen Elizabeth Hall in London - Arild Anderson and Scottish National Jazz Orchestra. M9 + 28 / 50 for the collective + groups. Canon 5D2 + 70-200 for heads, details. Both excellent for the jobs they do. I'd have been able to do a lot with the M9 + 90/135, but it would have reduced flexibility. My experience is that the two systems have their value - though I've got rid of my Canon wides and have no regret.

[ophyls]

Hi, I had all the usual cameras, compacts, DSLRs but eventually got bored with the photos and kinda lost interest in photography. Was then introduced to the wonders of the Leica M9 by a friend (expensive friend!) and after reading Thorsten's blog, was convinced to start with M9P + 35lux and 50Lux.

Have been more than delighted with the M9 and have not begrudged any money spent. The pictures are so different, so unique that even the wife wants an M9 now and is not keen on the other cameras.

I still have my DSLR and compacts for the macro and tele shots but the M9 is ruling the roost....

Good luck!

[Paulus]

Hi, I had all the usual cameras, compacts, DSLRs but eventually got bored with the photos and kinda lost interest in photography. Was then introduced to the wonders of the Leica M9 by a friend (expensive friend!) and after reading Thorsten's blog, was convinced to start with M9P + 35lux and 50Lux.

Have been more than delighted with the M9 and have not begrudged any money spent. The pictures are so different, so unique that even the wife wants an M9 now and is not keen on the other cameras.

I still have my DSLR and compacts for the macro and tele shots but the M9 is ruling the roost....

Good luck!

 

Good for you! but I wonder how did you get a M9P 35lux and 50lux so fast? Where did you buy it? Was there no waiting list?

[tom0511]

I think it reall depends a lot on the needs.

How often do you run in situations with really low light?

For an indoor sports photographer or even more for a concert photographer no doubt you need very good low light capability.

But in my case I only need that ocasionally and their are maybe 2-3 occasions a year where I would to take an image of something but can not do it because its too dark.

On the other side there are many occasions where I can take advantage of the IQ I get with the M9 - so I accept to get "compromised" results in maybe 10% of occasions but therefore better results (for my taste) in 90% of my photography.

Also I like the 35-90mm range and besides maybe the 50/1.2 Canon most 50mm SLR AF lenses wide open do not really convince.

So maybe the M9 high ISO are not that great, but therefore you can use the Summiluxes wide open and still get great IQ, whereas you would have to stop down other lenses.

[Double Negative]

The long and short of it is - it depends entirely on you and what you like to shoot.

 

Up until 2008 I used a Canon 1D Mark IIn primarily, along with a boatload of L lenses. Sure, it could do just about anything but the fact of the matter is, it's a large, heavy setup. I could go with a smaller body like the 5D Mark II but honestly, I don't care for it - and the L lenses still add up just the same. Then I got an M8...

 

Since then, the Canon gear has seen less and less use. I liked the M8 so much I bought an M9. Bought more lenses. These days, I use the M9 first and for the majority of my shooting. Unless I need the features that DSLRs offer (insert favorite here) I much prefer the M.

 

Of course, the M can't do everything. That's why I still have (and use) my Canon kit. But like I said, for the majority of what I shoot the M is perfect. Small, simple, to the point.

 

If you're a long tele or macro shooter, need video, fast frame rates or some high-tech feature then the M might not be the best choice. But if all you want is a simple camera (that you can operate blindfolded) that stays out of your way yet offers very high quality images...

[digitalpowershot]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I’ve been struggling with this as well. I’ve been shooting both Leica and Canon for years. Until the M9 came out, I shot 90% Canon/10% Leica. Now that percentage has been reversed. In fact, I haven’t used my 5dMkII in almost two months. So I’m tempted to sell my Canon gear and go 100% Leica.

 

I’ve used my m9 in the studio, and there are no technical issues with it. The image quality is superior to my 5dMkII and my girlfriend’s 1DsMkIII which I often borrow. The only issues I’ve experienced when using the M9 in the studio are: you can’t shoot tethered, framelines aren’t as exact as a DSLR, and sometimes new clients look at the camera as if it was a P&S. Not big issues for me. I rarely shoot tethered, and I give myself a little extra room around the edges so I can crop if necessary. For clients who question the size of the camera, a quick explanation of the system puts them at ease.

 

I am a concert photographer as well, although like you, I’m cutting back. I love using the M9 when the conditions are right. Someone linked to my blog post about concert photography and the Leica M9. Since I wrote that article I’ve been using the M9 even more for concerts. However, I have been burned. Specifically - showing up to a show that I was supposed to have pit access to, only to find that access was changed, and now I have to shoot from the soundboard. This is when I need a 200mm+ lens. Soundboard restrictions are becoming more and more common, along with crazy photo releases (I refuse to sign), which is why I cut back my concert shooting.

 

Regarding manual focusing on the M9. I feel much more comfortable manually focusing my M9 than I do relying on Canon autofocus. It took a while, but I can nail the focus on my M9 quick enough for most shooting scenarios. Not to mention that I’ve been burned by Canon autofocus on several commercial shoots. I’ve sent my 5dMkII in for service twice this year. My girlfriend has sent her 1DsMkIII in twice as well. All for focus issues.

 

Not being able to rely on gear is unacceptable. I’ve found my Canon to be unreliable. My M9 has never failed me. So what’s holding me back from going 100% Leica? The biggest factor is that I sometimes use my 200mm to compress the background when shooting portraits. That’s about it.

 

That being said, I can’t say that you should or shouldn’t get an M9. It’s a little like telling someone who has always driven an automatic transmission to switch to a manual transmission. The only way to know if you’ll like it is to try it for an extended period of time.

 

Here’s where I differ from what some of the others have said – I had a M8 and didn't like it. I can’t recommend the M8. Not trying to offend M8 users, just my opinion. I suggest renting an M9 for a week and shooting the heck out of it.

 

 

Jason Paul Roberts

 

 

Even with a 200mm lens you will have what... f/2,8?!? The background/bokeh will never look like a Canon 85mm f/1,2L.

 

Much better results: try a Summilux 50mm @f/1,4, or something like the 90mm and go all Leica

[JasonPaulRoberts]

I don't use the 200mm for the bokeh; I use it to compress the background. I have the Canon 85mm f1.2L, as well as the Summilux 50mm ASPH and 90mm Elmarit. Yes, the Summilux has the best bokeh. But that's different then background compression.

[wattsy]

Even with a 200mm lens you will have what... f/2,8?!? The background/bokeh will never look like a Canon 85mm f/1,2L.

 

Much better results: try a Summilux 50mm @f/1,4, or something like the 90mm and go all Leica

 

If you need the reach of a 200mm (most obviously where the photographer and subject cannot get closer together), a 90mm (let alone a 50mm) isn't going to help much.

[chris_tribble]

An interesting discussion - agreed with all on the horses for courses argument. But again, I'd stress that if you possibly can, hold on to one DSLR body and ONE good long professional lens (in my case the stellar Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS Mk2 - though I've also kept my old series 1 80 1.2 L). Case in point. 97 images from a shoot for Opera Up Close at the King's Head in Islington (La Boheme). 61 M9 images (28/50) + 36 Canon (70-200). For the set, see La Bohème. I needed both.

[wda]

My view is that it takes a few weeks to get used to the MF. Playing in a dealer or spending one day would not have helped me

I believe the OP had already experience with the M8, so a familiarisation day with access to a range of demo lenses would prove ideal to help him select a replacement set. That is something I would have welcomed when I entered the world of digital M cameras. At that time no dealer even had a demo camera! It is different today.

 

However I grant you that one never stops learning - and relearning - how to get the best out of any camera.

[germinaleke]

I really like all the replies in this topic.. most are very useful!

 

I still haven't been able to pull the trigger on getting an M9..

 

I have been reading alot on different sites so I could make an informed decision. The problem is there are very very mixed reviews..

 

I came to the conclusion that the M9 can't be used in all circumstances like a nikon D3s. It doesn't seem to be as reliable either.. (cold temperatues)

 

for example you can take 400 shots or so with the M9 but more than 10 times as much with the D3s on one battery charge..

 

I know an M9 is a rangefinder and that would be my main reason to get one.. because I love shooting with it (based on my X100 experience)

 

rest assured if I could buy another rangefinder without the pricetag I would jump on it.. I'm not a leica fan-boy by any means!

 

The reality is that Leica is the only option if you want a proper RF..

 

Reading all the reviews it seems that as long as you stay at ISO200-640 all is well for the M9. if you go higher the dynamic range falls apart very very quickly!

 

even at base iso the dynamic range isn't so great, even compared to the X100.

 

Let's face it, the sensor of the m9 certainly isn't one of the best out there... at least that's what I understand from reading everything there is to read on the m9

 

Then I come back to this post and read the post by JasonPaulRobert, a post that baffles me.

 

 

The image quality is superior to my 5dMkII and my girlfriend’s 1DsMkIII which I often borrow.

 

the 1Ds mk 3 is still a great machine with the best (35mm) sensor as far as I am concerned in the canon lineup..

 

The technical data don't seem to agree with the statement of JasonPaulRoberts.... but maybe it's the leica lenses that make all the difference...??

[jaapv]

I do not know what you have been reading - but if you want visibly better image quality than the M9 you must get out of the 135 format and go to medium format. Say an S2 or Phase One or similar. Actually the dynamic range holds up better at high ISO than the Canon and Nikon offerings - however the noise performance is behind those two, but not as far behind the Canon as the Canon behind Nikon. It is all a question of software, not the sensors themselves, apart from basic differences between CCD and CMos. Leica's output is virtually unmanipulated, DSLRs give noise-reduced files. It is all good and well, but Internet sources are partly highly unreliable, including pseudo-scientific ones like DxO. The only way is to rent an M9 and try for yourself, and make sure you get the technique right to process the files of each camera optimally.

Or try to get into something like this; The Leica Akademie organizes this kind of thing elsewhere as well.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/210735-leica-m9-interactive-workshop-leica-akademie.html#post1894491

[tom0511]

I believe the sensor of the M9 for my taste is better than any Nikon/Canon up to ISO640/maybe1000 (because it shows more detail/microdetail IMO).

If you go higher the Nikon/Canon will deliever cleaner images.

 

I hate it if my wife says "this print looks very "digital" ", and I get this comment much more often from images from my Nikon and from compacts vs those images from the M9.

I believe its AA filter and maybe also Nikon/Canon are a lot optimized in regards to low noise but therefore maybe loose some detail and color information?

[colonel]

I came to the conclusion that the M9 can't be used in all circumstances like a nikon D3s. It doesn't seem to be as reliable either.. (cold temperatues)

- incorrect - plenty have been to safari and the poles. Although NOT weather sealed

for example you can take 400 shots or so with the M9 but more than 10 times as much with the D3s on one battery charge..

- correct, M9 battery is not as good as D3s

I know an M9 is a rangefinder and that would be my main reason to get one.. because I love shooting with it (based on my X100 experience)

- x100 is not a rangefinder.

The reality is that Leica is the only option if you want a proper RF..

- correct, if you want a new digital camera

Reading all the reviews it seems that as long as you stay at ISO200-640 all is well for the M9. if you go higher the dynamic range falls apart very very quickly!

- incorrect. dynamic range is not bad. noise however is worse above 640, but 1250 is good with the right noise reduction and some people use 2500

even at base iso the dynamic range isn't so great, even compared to the X100.

- incorrect. according to my eye. better then 5Dii and D700. However no numbers back me up here, just my eyes

Let's face it, the sensor of the m9 certainly isn't one of the best out there... at least that's what I understand from reading everything there is to read on the m9

- for base ISO, its studio quality and better the Nikon or Canon. But not as ISO increases

but maybe it's the leica lenses that make all the difference

- the lens is > 50% part of the equation. Leicas are the best photographic lenses in the world.

[Double Negative]

I'd have to agree with jaapv... If you want "better than the M9" there's not much else out there in the 35mm format. You're going to have to start looking into medium format. The M9 has several things going for it; a lovely sensor (which isn't hampered by an overzealous AA filter), really good glass and you get them with maybe the best feature - small size!

 

Of course higher-end models from Canon, Nikon, etc. can compete. But two drawbacks immediately come to mind; the aforementioned AA filter and an increase in size and weight. Medium format of course is also a step up in the latter, still lacks the former - and of course, goes up to 65MP (or more)!

 

No, rest assured - the M9 is in a real sweet spot if you ask me.

[JasonPaulRoberts]

I am giving you feedback based on years of shooting pro-body Canon DSLR’s, and one year shooting with an M9. Are the technical charts for the 1DsMkIII better than the M9? I don’t know; I look at pictures, not charts.

You seem to like Nikon as well as the Fuji X100. For the price of a good Leica setup you can buy a nice Nikon kit AND an X100. Based on your comments I think you’d be happier with the latter.

More important than sensor charts and battery life is having a camera system that you feel comfortable with. For me, it’s the Leica M system. For you it might be the Fuji X100. There is nothing wrong with that. In the end it’s about the pictures.

[colonel]

I have played around with the x100 recently.

Is a lovely camera and well made

 

But for me, the handling felt like using a normal compact, similar to my P300.

The only big difference was the aperture setting and the top dials. Its because of the whole menu systems, options, speed, etc. etc.

 

Its also not that small and I rather have the M9 with me. It doesn't seem to fill any sweet spot between the P300 and the M9.

 

I am keeping a Sony Nex with long zoom for occasionaly long zoom work (one half day every 2 months !!!)

 

I do miss the extra few stops of my 5Dii with the beautiful 50mm f1.2 lens, but I have no desire to go back. If I did, it would just stay at home.

The M9 comes with me everyday to work, most days I don't get a chance for any shooting but it still comes .....

[chris_tribble]

I am keeping a Sony Nex with long zoom for occasionaly long zoom work (one half day every 2 months !!!)

 

I do miss the extra few stops of my 5Dii with the beautiful 50mm f1.2 lens, but I have no desire to go back. If I did, it would just stay at home.

The M9 comes with me everyday to work, most days I don't get a chance for any shooting but it still comes .....

 

I think this sums it up - keep a DSLR for the (few) jobs that it alone can do well, and then be really pleased that you have this other camera that you can carry around with you all the time. The M9 with 35 cron asph is my pocketable point-and-shoot. And when my last camera is torn from my cold dead hand, it might not be an M9, but it will be an M, and it's very likely that it will have a 50 lux or 35 cron attached to it

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[kewpie]

YES. it is very possible to have the M9 as the only camera. i received my 35mm summilux a week before my son was born - having waited 7 months for it. i took my M9 and my D700 to the hospital when my wife was in labour. in the end, i chose to take the M9 into the delivery suite and i was blown away by the images i got.

 

i then tried shooting some shots at a friend's wedding. again, amazed.

 

then a portrait session with the M9. speechless.

 

last week i ditched my D3 and D700 and went on a shoot with just the M9. subtle, less attention attracting, i could go into restaurants to shoot without causing too much focus on my self and the couple.

 

so yes, it is very doable!