geoffreyg Posted July 1, 2014 Share #21 Posted July 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Had an M8, tried M9 - the benefits were there, but not so big a jump. The M240 had more (resolution and higher ISO), but didn't like the feel of it. OTOH, the MM was something special and well worth the jump. M9 sensor, but BW gives it a closer feel to medium format backs. Magical. On the OP, only you can judge. I found the 25-50% improvements not really that worth it. And as maddening as the M8 was, its BW images remain pretty special! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 1, 2014 Posted July 1, 2014 Hi geoffreyg, Take a look here M8 to M9 worth it?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
k_g_wolf ✝ Posted July 1, 2014 Share #22 Posted July 1, 2014 Yes! It´s worth it, once you get around to appreciate the improvements. Regards GEORG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted July 4, 2014 Author Share #23 Posted July 4, 2014 Thanks everyone for your input, It's cleared my mind; I am no longer in a funk. I was very surprised by the responses... But the intangibles cost/benefit for me means continuing enjoyment of the M8. Also the tangible benefits mentioned "M8...more bite" Monochrome, IR, etc I have confidence in the APS sensor size, and a couple of extra stops doesn't excite me. I have the lenses, and if I went M9, I'd have to shell out some big dough! Really, what's not to think??? cheers Dave S Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted July 4, 2014 Share #24 Posted July 4, 2014 You've decided. Who's to argue?! Enjoy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted July 8, 2014 Share #25 Posted July 8, 2014 Main reasons to upgrade from M8u for me was: 16bit raw files, much more headroom when doing PP ISO noise a bit lower, less noise at high ISO easy to lighten midtones without problems No UV/IR filters needed, I hate filters on digital cameras, often there will be a problem with the shiny sensor reflecting light back into the lens. Good deal on a used M9 so fairly cheap to upgrade Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nelly Posted July 9, 2014 Share #26 Posted July 9, 2014 Full frame sensor makes it worth it for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farel Posted July 9, 2014 Share #27 Posted July 9, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I converted since 6 mont now to the M-E, and yeah now regret. as im used to a 35mm film, having a crop factor did even change my work. Like in street photographie i will have more a spirit of a sniper(Having 35,50mm) than a close contact with my subject. Having back a FF i was then more confortable in my work, as i learn on 35mm film. My Sugest get a M9 for enought period of time in order to learn the work, and you will rediscover the beauty of your wide angle lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted July 11, 2014 Share #28 Posted July 11, 2014 I did something like 10k shots with my M8 and I'm on 16k with my M9-P, it was a very worthwhile upgrade. For me the list if benefits was very large, I have no interest in the 240 after comparing images. The much improved ISO and the fact that anything wide will be very expensive to achieve on the M8 in low light makes it worth it alone. Everyone has a story of their journey and they are all different but the M9 is notably better IMO, the M240 is not. That's just my view Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted July 12, 2014 Share #29 Posted July 12, 2014 Everyone has a story of their journey and they are all different but the M9 is notably better IMO, the M240 is not. That's just my view +1 mine too. And I own an M240. What convinced me to buy is the M240's jpegs are acceptible whereas the M9's were not. It's a relief not to have to screw around with LR and DNG conversion anymore. Otherwise the M9 was just what I wanted in a digital Leica, without the added features I do not use on the M240 that made it thicker and heavier. Sadly I must now part with my M9 to recoup finances. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 12, 2014 Share #30 Posted July 12, 2014 Thicker? Mine must be underfed.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted July 12, 2014 Share #31 Posted July 12, 2014 The M6 has perfect proportions for me, the M8/9 spread a little and the 240 a little more. No question the 240 has gone up a belt size or two, not a 'tuber' but not the athlete it was Just my opinion ofcourse Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
erl Posted July 12, 2014 Share #32 Posted July 12, 2014 Actually it's a fact, but you can adjust anything, with the will do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 12, 2014 Share #33 Posted July 12, 2014 I did something like 10k shots with my M8 and I'm on 16k with my M9-P, it was a very worthwhile upgrade. For me the list if benefits was very large, I have no interest in the 240 after comparing images. The much improved ISO and the fact that anything wide will be very expensive to achieve on the M8 in low light makes it worth it alone. Everyone has a story of their journey and they are all different but the M9 is notably better IMO, the M240 is not. That's just my view My 2.8/15 is due back from a CLA in Oberkochen, because I don't believe in having or creating problems. Then it will appear in the buy&sell (within Western Europe). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedi996sps Posted July 12, 2014 Share #34 Posted July 12, 2014 I skipped the M9, mainly due to the length of time it took for one to become available. I had an M8 and Sony A7r but the i could not use all of my leica glass on the A7r so i sold my M8 and now have an M240 and have kept the A7r Had the A7r worked with all my leica glass, i probably would have stayed with A7r and M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted July 12, 2014 Share #35 Posted July 12, 2014 I came late to the M8, but got a nice used one. Took me a while to get the nicer colors I had with film. The engineers should quit putting their personal bias in the colors. I don`t want a Kodachrome look, I want a true to life look. Profiling the camera took care of it. I have profiled all the cameras and the M9. They all render correctly or much closer to natural. No it not that my M8 was wrong, I tried several and there is a S2 and Nikon D800 on line and the S2 has the same cyan skies. You set ACR to a preset based on cameras serial and it is no work at all. 10 to 18 MP is 80% larger in area, not 80% in linear size. I am guessing 20% linear. I am used to full frame and the lenses work the same as before. The wides are really wide. The M8 is not a dog and I kept mine. It is used in conjunction with the M9 unless I need a bigger print or wide angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted July 12, 2014 Share #36 Posted July 12, 2014 Thicker? Mine must be underfed.... According to Leica's own specs, the M240 is 5mm thicker (42mm vs 37mm for the M9). A half cm is easy for me to feel. YMMV. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 12, 2014 Share #37 Posted July 12, 2014 According to Leica's own specs, the M240 is 5mm thicker (42mm vs 37mm for the M9). A half cm is easy for me to feel. YMMV. This has been discussed ad nauseam; the consensus, unless someone has used calipers, is that the bottom plate is the same, the top plate is about 1mm thicker (Stefan Daniel said in an interview that this was to accommodate the display), and the rest attributable to the protruding thumb rest/wheel. If so, most of the difference is in your head. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted July 12, 2014 Share #38 Posted July 12, 2014 This has been discussed ad nauseam; the consensus, unless someone has used calipers, is that the bottom plate is the same, the top plate is about 1mm thicker (Stefan Daniel said in an interview that this was to accommodate the display), and the rest attributable to the protruding thumb rest/wheel. If so, most of the difference is in your head. Jeff Yes this has been discussed and the M6 to M9 to M240 is circa 1mm each time from memory. The M9 feels thinker after the M6 ditto the M240 over the M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted July 12, 2014 Share #39 Posted July 12, 2014 This has been discussed ad nauseam; the consensus, unless someone has used calipers, is that the bottom plate is the same, the top plate is about 1mm thicker (Stefan Daniel said in an interview that this was to accommodate the display), and the rest attributable to the protruding thumb rest/wheel. If so, most of the difference is in your head. Jeff Just so happens I have a digital caliper. Top and Bottom plate of M9=36mm, of M240=37mm. It's definitely the thumb wheel and its shroud that make up the remaining 4mm listed in Leica's specs. And indeed that protrusion completely alters the feel of holding the two cameras (I just picked them up in sequence several times). I can't say whether the thumb thing makes the feel better or worse than the M9 for me, but it does make it feel thicker. Interestingly, by comparison it looks as if the LCD and dial on the back of the M9 actually protrude a bit farther than those on the M240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted July 13, 2014 Share #40 Posted July 13, 2014 I generally keep my thumb to the left of the thumb rest/wheel and my M feels basically the same as my M8.2 with the exception of the weight (likely attributable mostly to the larger battery). I wonder if you're translating weight into a sense of thickness. I think it's remarkable that Leica fit the bigger battery and added all the extra features in essentially the same body size. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.