Another 'which one' query... M9/M9P or M240!

[rafikiphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On my recent trip to Paris I took my Monochrom and my Fujifilm X-E2. I decided to take only my Leica glass and a Metabones adapter for the X-E2. I love my MM but I need colour too and so far I have considered the rig I took with me to be the dream team.

 

During my trip I realised how much I prefer the rangefinder compared to focus peaking on the X-E2. So I am toying with ditching my Fujifilm system and going 100% Leica with an M9/M9-P or an M240. My gut tells me to get a low mileage M9-P but my head tells me to consider the terrific high ISO performance of the X-E2 which I have come to rely on. I have the big Fuji flash and the big Leica flash and with the current setup I hardly ever use either.

 

I regularly cover local events here in Spain both during the day and at night. The MM and the X-E2 have both been great. If I go 100% Leica how much better is the ISO performance of the M240 over the M9-P? For the sort of photography I mentioned which would you recommend?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Printmaker]

I'm a M9 shooter but when I asked a similar question to my drug (camera) dealer, he told me I would be gaining at least a full stop and maybe two stops if I didn't look too closely. I shoot mostly at ISO 320 to 640 so I kept my M9.

 

FWIW: The M9 (P) is exactly the same size and takes the same batteries as your MM and a silver M9P is probably destined to become a Leica classic.

[friedeye]

Your MM has a good 2 stop advantage over an M9 -- my guess is that you'll be disappointed with the M9 or M9P as a companion. Of course, the M9 and the MM have the same CCD sensor and body-- so you could call them sister cameras. I, however, would personally opt for the M 240 for its low light performance and live view capabilities.

 

Full disclosure: I have an M9 and love it, with no plans to upgrade soon. (Although an MM is mighty tempting).

[rafikiphoto]

Thank you both.

 

Just in case I wan't entirely clear in my OP I will keep the MM whatever. I am debating whether to replace my X-E2 with either M9/M9-P or an M240.

[IWC Doppel]

Thank you both.

 

Just in case I wan't entirely clear in my OP I will keep the MM whatever. I am debating whether to replace my X-E2 with either M9/M9-P or an M240.

 

I have never been tempted by the M over my M-9P, my fist impressions still stick with me and I still maintain a preference of the M9 look over the M look. The advantages appear or be high ISO, processing speed and the shutter, feel etc. if the speed of your Monochrome is not an issue, then I'd look at images in flicker and see how you feel about M9 vs M images and consider ISO, I rarely go above 800 with my M9-P

 

If you consider the Monochrom as your evening camera in any case, perhaps with the exception of low light colour with the Noctilux which is sublime, then I'd add an M9-P, but that's just me

[NightSun]

I have an M9P and at the same time I admit that never handled an MM or M240. But I still find it's enough for my needs when it comes to ISO performance. Of course it boils down to personal preference, as I tend to make photos in daylight circumstances, mostly in ISO 160-400 range. If you have some fast lenses (f/1.4 or faster), then even in dimmer conditions an M9(P) will serve you well and you can find topics here that discuss the optimal way of using it when this is the case (basically not pushing ISO over 640, setting manual exposure time and then rely on post-process noise reduction).

 

So, if you tend towards low-ISO photography most of the time and you need high ISO only occasionally (and not for professional purposes), then an M9P is still an excellent choice, and you might pair it with an other mirrorless EVF-based camera, e.g. Sony A7 or its variants, if sometimes you want very good high ISO performance as well. This is going to be more cost effective than buying an M240.

However, if you are really into twilight/night photography, then probably you would be disappointed with an M9P, so in that case M240 will be a much more preferred choice.

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You might find this useful Noise MM vs M9-P, apologies for the shadow and crop, M9-P Blue, MM Green

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[tom0511]

I use all three (MM,M9p and new M) and after using M9p and new M a little side by side I decided to sell the M9p.

In the beginning I was slightly not satisfied with the new M color under certain conditions-then I ran various anscientific comparisons and sometimes I prefer M9p output and sometimes new M output.

However I see various advantages in the new M:

a) faster handling, no problems with full buffer etc.

weatherproof (not so important but doesnt hurt)

c) I can set shorter max exp time in auto iso (I can choose 1/250 while I think it is just 1/125 and longer in the M9p)

d) I prefer rangefinder most of the time but for 135mm or for UWA I sometimes do use the EVF

e) shutter is more silent

f) more freedom/DOF-control with higher ISO; I dont have to open the lens to full f-stop in low light any more if I dont want to;

g) better DR

h)better battery life

 

advantages I would see for the M9p: -

-its more beautiful camera

-same user interface and same battery like your MM

-sometimes slightly "better" color (sometimes worse color)

-slightly more pop of out of camera DNG-files

-lower price

[jcraf]

I have been shooting an MM and M for nearly a year. The MM is used most of the time, as most of what I do is B&W.

 

I have never warmed to the M. Yes, it is a technological step forward from the M9, but having used M9 and M9-P before, I found myself hankering after another one. As someone has pointed out in this thread the DNGs have more pop, and I just prefer the images from it. Subjective probably, but that's how I feel.

 

I have just acquired a low mileage black M9, which has just been serviced by Leica, has some warranty from the dealer and is nr mint and boxed. And I'm enjoying it. And it cost a lot less then you'd pay even for a used M. So my M, currently at least, is used even less.....

 

I'd go for the M9, and if you want to spend more, put it into glass.

[Ulev]

On my recent trip to Paris I took my Monochrom and my Fujifilm X-E2. I decided to take only my Leica glass and a Metabones adapter for the X-E2. I love my MM but I need colour too and so far I have considered the rig I took with me to be the dream team.

 

During my trip I realised how much I prefer the rangefinder compared to focus peaking on the X-E2. So I am toying with ditching my Fujifilm system and going 100% Leica with an M9/M9-P or an M240. My gut tells me to get a low mileage M9-P but my head tells me to consider the terrific high ISO performance of the X-E2 which I have come to rely on. I have the big Fuji flash and the big Leica flash and with the current setup I hardly ever use either.

 

I regularly cover local events here in Spain both during the day and at night. The MM and the X-E2 have both been great. If I go 100% Leica how much better is the ISO performance of the M240 over the M9-P? For the sort of photography I mentioned which would you recommend?

 

Important question ... what kind of glass do you own ?

[Jeff S]

However I see various advantages in the new M:

a) faster handling, no problems with full buffer etc.

weatherproof (not so important but doesnt hurt)

c) I can set shorter max exp time in auto iso (I can choose 1/250 while I think it is just 1/125 and longer in the M9p)

d) I prefer rangefinder most of the time but for 135mm or for UWA I sometimes do use the EVF

e) shutter is more silent

f) more freedom/DOF-control with higher ISO; I dont have to open the lens to full f-stop in low light any more if I dont want to;

g) better DR

h)better battery life

 

advantages I would see for the M9p: -

-its more beautiful camera

-same user interface and same battery like your MM

-sometimes slightly "better" color (sometimes worse color)

-slightly more pop of out of camera DNG-files

-lower price

 

M also has a better shutter release feel, not just quieter re-cock sound. And better RF mechanism (in part due to internal rather than external frame line illumination for improved contrast, and is likely built to closer tolerances.) I also like the 2m frame lines. CCD vs CMOS may be debatable by some, but more pixels is not. Live View, even if it's never used for shooting, greatly assists for lens/camera focus calibration testing.

 

On the flip side, besides the quoted advantages, the M9-P has the frame preview lever and a sapphire screen.

 

Jeff

[rafikiphoto]

Important question ... what kind of glass do you own ?

 

Elmarit 21mm

Summicrons 28mm, 50mm, 90mm

[doolittle]

If you get an M9 you only need to bring one charger on holidays.

[rafikiphoto]

If you get an M9 you only need to bring one charger on holidays.

 

Very true and not overlooked.

[tom0511]

regarding look of ccd vs cmos. I think you have to look at images yourself and make your own opinion.

When I had the M and had sold the M9 I thought to see quite a difference. After I rebought an M9 and did run some direct comparisons the difference was much smaller and not always clear.

You could also browse the web, for example a "fun with digital M images" thread , look at images and guess if it is from one or the other camera.

Read the LFI magazine, look at images and then guess if it is from one M9 or M.

Sometimes I can guess right, sometimes not. Sometimes images where I am sure its from M9 it is form the M and the other way around.

I think maybe in optimal conditions the M9 can sometimes shine and beat the M by a slight margin, but the M seems a more solid performer for me which seems to work fine in most/different kinds of light.

I could ne happy with each of them by the way.

[colonel]

On my recent trip to Paris I took my Monochrom and my Fujifilm X-E2. I decided to take only my Leica glass and a Metabones adapter for the X-E2. I love my MM but I need colour too and so far I have considered the rig I took with me to be the dream team.

 

During my trip I realised how much I prefer the rangefinder compared to focus peaking on the X-E2. So I am toying with ditching my Fujifilm system and going 100% Leica with an M9/M9-P or an M240. My gut tells me to get a low mileage M9-P but my head tells me to consider the terrific high ISO performance of the X-E2 which I have come to rely on. I have the big Fuji flash and the big Leica flash and with the current setup I hardly ever use either.

 

I regularly cover local events here in Spain both during the day and at night. The MM and the X-E2 have both been great. If I go 100% Leica how much better is the ISO performance of the M240 over the M9-P? For the sort of photography I mentioned which would you recommend?

 

real world ?

 

I find ISO 3200 on the M240 as good as either ISO 640-1250 on the M9 depending on the type of light

 

There is a trick with an M9 (recorded in a few threads here), shoot at ISO 640, even if underexposed in low light, and push up a few stops. Effectively you can get around 2500 almost as good as perhaps the M240 on 3200. Its a technique that takes time to hone. I am not sure why it works, something about lightroom being better at extracting detail from the raw then the software and cpu in the M9.

 

Some info on M9 technique here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/292708-m9-colors-night-best-way-shoot.html

 

Here are a few samples where I used this technique on an M9. The first is a 1 stop push, the second is 2 or 2.5, can't remember:

 

Harvey Nichols Bar

 

Romanian Embassy, London

[Photoskeptic]

I have owned an M9-P (and still treasure an M8.2) and several weeks ago I rented an M240. No question in my mind - the M240. I'm trying to decide whether to pull the trigger or not before I head for Italy.

[rafikiphoto]

I have owned an M9-P (and still treasure an M8.2) and several weeks ago I rented an M240. No question in my mind - the M240. I'm trying to decide whether to pull the trigger or not before I head for Italy.

 

Thanks John. What was it that particularly 'turned your head' towards the M240?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Zhaba]

I have an M9 and an M9P. I am very happy with both cameras, but recently I've been thinking of trading the M9P in and getting an M 240. Good idea, or not?

 

Thanks.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Photoskeptic]

Thanks John. What was it that particularly 'turned your head' towards the M240?

The shutter sound, the higher ISO, the higher resolution, battery life and the range finder seemed a bit better. And also the bw conversions (done my own personal way ) were just terrific. While the WA lenses still have some problems WO, stopped down they were everything I expected.

The thing is, when I go out to shoot, I want the highest quality files I can come home with. Heading to Italy soon, the best quality is very important. I would love to take my D800, Zeiss 55 1.4 combo, but it weighs more than all my Leica gear combined! If I must I will take the M8.2, but I'd rather have more resolution. Just saying...