Martin B Posted January 22, 2017 Share #21 Posted January 22, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have no idea why for some rear display is something they can't take quality pictures without. Never problem for me with Canon 5D (my first FF camera) and M-E (now). I know what I'm doing with focus, I know what DoF is, I know how pictures looks like on the screen with different ISO; all I need is one second to check exposure and framing. But I'm totally agree on 5D MKII, yes, display is good and this is all I could say positive about this camera, ditched it within couple of months. Agree - for me the display is not the most important either, but I simply had to make a pragmatic decision if the camera was worth $2400 for me. The display was the minor part of this decision-making process, biggest concern I had was the viewfinder which is the most essential part of the rangefinder camera. I have no doubt that the M9 has its benefits - just for me personally it was not worth the money compared to the gear which I already have and compared with. I would have taken the M9 for less than $1K though . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2017 Posted January 22, 2017 Hi Martin B, Take a look here M9 prices. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Gregm61 Posted January 22, 2017 Share #22 Posted January 22, 2017 You can forget that......all that might get you is an M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 22, 2017 Share #23 Posted January 22, 2017 I'm happy I bought my m9-P a year ago. The rear screen is good enough for setting menus etc but it's not for checking focus! I use mine as if it was a film M and once it's set up in the menu there really is no need to change anything other than aperture, speed or focus. I only use asa 200 or 640 and have really enjoyed getting away from DSLR's. I haven't touched my Nikons since purchase. I've found it takes a little effort to get used to the M9 but provided you put that in it will become a very capable camera. Price wise I actually think they have increased in the last year! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 22, 2017 Share #24 Posted January 22, 2017 I'm happy I bought my m9-P a year ago. The rear screen is good enough for setting menus etc but it's not for checking focus! I use mine as if it was a film M and once it's set up in the menu there really is no need to change anything other than aperture, speed or focus. I only use asa 200 or 640 and have really enjoyed getting away from DSLR's. I haven't touched my Nikons since purchase. I've found it takes a little effort to get used to the M9 but provided you put that in it will become a very capable camera. Price wise I actually think they have increased in the last year! Thanks for confirming the issue I have seen with the M9 display. Checking focus with it was indeed a pain to do. Yes, you can use the camera then similar to a film M camera....but why paying then more than $2K for it including the other limitations? Well, it is a very personal decision of course, but I rather continue to shoot with my film Ms and my A7R instead for digital. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted January 22, 2017 Share #25 Posted January 22, 2017 For each individual, individual camera. Personally, I can't sand A7 EVF, it makes me motion sick. Don't need this Sony product even for free. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 22, 2017 Share #26 Posted January 22, 2017 I'm confirming it's not there to check focus! As someone else said, I don't need to check focus and don't when using my M4 or indeed my other cameras. Checking focus is a new phenomenon by digital photographers who for whatever reason don't trust their own equipment or focusing ability. I bet you don't check focus on your M6! What limitations? You seem to have judged the camera before actually using one for any time because you can't justify the cost. Hardly an accurate indicator of it's capabilities. The Sony is a great camera but it's not an M and to get the user experience of an M you need to pay. As much as a lot don't like to admit it, it seems that so far the M9 has got great resale and if it doesn't suit your style of digital photography, ie checking every shot like you're using a point and shoot then you can sell for probably a small profit. I very much doubt that this is possible with Sony digicams. This is the second M9 I've had, the first I disliked because of purchase price and perceived worth and didn't give the camera enough time. I sold that one for 4500 very early on. The one I have now I paid the current going rate and would get that now if I wanted to sell. My digital Nikons on the other hand, as capable as they are in all conditions and all weathers continue to depriciate and still do not give me the M rangefinder experience I like. Set the camera up to behave like a film M using the menu screen then forget it. At current prices with the availability of new sensors the M9 starts to feel like a bargain! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 23, 2017 Share #27 Posted January 23, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm confirming it's not there to check focus! As someone else said, I don't need to check focus and don't when using my M4 or indeed my other cameras. Checking focus is a new phenomenon by digital photographers who for whatever reason don't trust their own equipment or focusing ability. I bet you don't check focus on your M6! What limitations? You seem to have judged the camera before actually using one for any time because you can't justify the cost. Hardly an accurate indicator of it's capabilities. The Sony is a great camera but it's not an M and to get the user experience of an M you need to pay. As much as a lot don't like to admit it, it seems that so far the M9 has got great resale and if it doesn't suit your style of digital photography, ie checking every shot like you're using a point and shoot then you can sell for probably a small profit. I very much doubt that this is possible with Sony digicams. This is the second M9 I've had, the first I disliked because of purchase price and perceived worth and didn't give the camera enough time. I sold that one for 4500 very early on. The one I have now I paid the current going rate and would get that now if I wanted to sell. My digital Nikons on the other hand, as capable as they are in all conditions and all weathers continue to depriciate and still do not give me the M rangefinder experience I like. Set the camera up to behave like a film M using the menu screen then forget it. At current prices with the availability of new sensors the M9 starts to feel like a bargain! But on my M6 the viewfinder is much wider and brighter than the one in the M9 - makes a big difference! If I need to set up the M9 like a film M then I also only want to pay the price for a film M......and not $2400. Not a bargain for me at all. I didn't see its value regarding other options I have. Agree that the first version of Sony A7 series cameras depreciated much faster - but I still love shooting with my A7R and all kind of M lenses attached. I use it in combination with my M6 and M7 cameras with film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 23, 2017 Share #28 Posted January 23, 2017 For each individual, individual camera. Personally, I can't sand A7 EVF, it makes me motion sick. Don't need this Sony product even for free. Yes, it is very subjective - I love the A7R EVF but also like the rangefinder in my M6 and M7 cameras. As mentioned earlier, I disliked the M9 rangefinder instantly in comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted January 23, 2017 Share #29 Posted January 23, 2017 I have diminishing eyesight and I can tell you that the M9 screen is good enough for evaluating focus, I did it for years and continue to do so for all lenses greater than 28mm. I would recommend you check the M9 focus with any lens you can't evaluate focus with. I remember my first M8 was a disappointment and sold because the lenses were not focusing properly with the body. Leica says the bodies are all calibrated the same but they are not and bodies can get out of calibration. Also, lenses are variably calibrated or bad samples can give the impression of inability to judge focus. My experience is that lenses need to be tested carefully for proper focus with each M body and for the type of shooting you do. Almost every lens I have has been sent to Leica for proper focus adjustment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 23, 2017 Share #30 Posted January 23, 2017 But on my M6 the viewfinder is much wider and brighter than the one in the M9 - makes a big difference! If I need to set up the M9 like a film M then I also only want to pay the price for a film M......and not $2400. Not a bargain for me at all. I didn't see its value regarding other options I have. Agree that the first version of Sony A7 series cameras depreciated much faster - but I still love shooting with my A7R and all kind of M lenses attached. I use it in combination with my M6 and M7 cameras with film. There are plenty of film M's that cost more than an M9 but given how you feel I think you are better sticking with your Sony. As for viewfinder brightness etc I've never noticed any significant difference and I've had multiple M3, M2, M4 and M6. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted January 23, 2017 Share #31 Posted January 23, 2017 I suspect M9 prices will soften especially if a large number of users move from 9 to 10. Give it 6-12 months and they will be a little cheaper but not hot that hard I don't think. The place in the evolution of the M digital line is much greater then the 240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 23, 2017 Share #32 Posted January 23, 2017 I just dug out my M4 to compare viewfinders with the M9 and can say definitively that the 9 is brighter than the 4 and also that there is more space around the 35 frame lines on the 9 than the 4. I don't have a 6 to hand however from memory I believe the 4 and 6 finders are near the same so I don't get what you mean about the finder not being as good. It is in fact better! Maybe you had a 28 on th M9 in the shop? As for frame line accuracy? My M9-P is very accurate with 35 frame lines at close ranges and I get exactly what I see. At more distant subjects i get a little extra outside of the frame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 23, 2017 Share #33 Posted January 23, 2017 I have diminishing eyesight and I can tell you that the M9 screen is good enough for evaluating focus, I did it for years and continue to do so for all lenses greater than 28mm. I would recommend you check the M9 focus with any lens you can't evaluate focus with. I remember my first M8 was a disappointment and sold because the lenses were not focusing properly with the body. Leica says the bodies are all calibrated the same but they are not and bodies can get out of calibration. Also, lenses are variably calibrated or bad samples can give the impression of inability to judge focus. My experience is that lenses need to be tested carefully for proper focus with each M body and for the type of shooting you do. Almost every lens I have has been sent to Leica for proper focus adjustment. Good point which I considered when testing the camera in the store - I used my own 35/2 version IV lens of which I know that it works perfectly fine. My impression was that the M9 which I tested was a bit out of calibration/focus - maybe the main reason why I found focusing so difficult with this camera. The lens works perfectly fine on my M6 and M7 bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 23, 2017 Share #34 Posted January 23, 2017 I just dug out my M4 to compare viewfinders with the M9 and can say definitively that the 9 is brighter than the 4 and also that there is more space around the 35 frame lines on the 9 than the 4. I don't have a 6 to hand however from memory I believe the 4 and 6 finders are near the same so I don't get what you mean about the finder not being as good. It is in fact better! Maybe you had a 28 on th M9 in the shop? As for frame line accuracy? My M9-P is very accurate with 35 frame lines at close ranges and I get exactly what I see. At more distant subjects i get a little extra outside of the frame. I cannot confirm this - I had my M6 with me in the store and compared the viewfinders side by side. The M6 viewfinder has much more space on all sides of the frame lines - the M9 also had an older 35/2 lens version attached to it which made the comparison easy. It was a big difference and instantly let me say "oh no" when looking through the M9. I suspect this is much better now with the M10 which is reviewed as having a M7 viewfinder type (M6 and M7 are the same - I use them with the standard 0.72 viewfinder magnification). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rus Posted January 23, 2017 Share #35 Posted January 23, 2017 I for one actually find the M9's rear LCD screen quite usable. This is of course not to say that it is brilliant and fast in any way, but that it serves all the main purposes of a LCD screen reasonably well, and should in no way impede any photo taking process. One of the most commonly quoted inadequacies of the M9's LCD is that its low resolution coupled with the slow writing speed and the temporary heavy pixelation makes it difficult to check whether the shot is in focus or not. But there is a way to get around this quite easily. If you shoot Raw or RAW + JPG you will find that the initial pixelation is actually quite useful for focus checking. What I find is that if the shot is in focus, then during the initial pixelation when the photos is zoomed in, the fine details usually show in what looks quite similar to a moire pattern. It is a bit difficult to describe, but you certainly see this most clearly if you take a shot focused well on small print. Once the pixelation is resolved, though, the LCD shows more of a blurred mush in the details which does give an impression of softness or bad focus. If you shoot only Jpeg it is actually easier to check focus, because after the pixelation resolves, you will see what looks quite close to a 100% magnification of the photo if you rotate the rear dial three clicks (instead of four clicks, which makes the zoom go beyond 100% I think). Ah and back to the original topic of the thread, I don't see the M9's price dropping by much in the near future, especially with the more corrosion-resistant sensor now available. I've also wondered about what seems to be a slight price increase of the M8 series in recent months too. As for the M10, that's a certainly a fine camera, but I suppose I should wait for a couple more years for its price to stabilise a bit more, and meanwhile just lock the capital up in the lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayne Posted January 23, 2017 Share #36 Posted January 23, 2017 The M9 is a great camera. Most of them that had problems with sensor have likely been corrected. With M9, I do not think it is just the fact that a new camera has been introduced that should be considered when contemplating M9 price fluctuation, but rather: 1. How many M9 owners will dump the M9 in favor of M10? 2. How many folks, who want a Leica digital rangefinder, but are not in a position to afford one, are looking for an opportunity to buy a good used M9? This group will likely grow, if anything. As far as current M9 owners/users go, you are probably talking about a population of people who are completely satisfied with M9, and not subject to the allure of the latest thing, and folks who were, previously, in group #2, and now own an M9, are not likely to move up from M9. I imagine the greatest migration to M10 will come from folks who already own one of the more recent or current M offerings from Leica. I would think, if anything, there is a greater chance that new/used M9s that come on the market are problem cameras. With introduction of M9, Leica really did supersede M8, M8.2 (full frame.) Since M9, as far as I am concerned, Leica had simply offered newer versions of M9, including more frills. I would say there is as good a chance that used M9 prices- considering only good cameras without problems, from reputable dealers- prices will go up, as down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 23, 2017 Share #37 Posted January 23, 2017 I cannot confirm this - I had my M6 with me in the store and compared the viewfinders side by side. The M6 viewfinder has much more space on all sides of the frame lines - the M9 also had an older 35/2 lens version attached to it which made the comparison easy. It was a big difference and instantly let me say "oh no" when looking through the M9. I suspect this is much better now with the M10 which is reviewed as having a M7 viewfinder type (M6 and M7 are the same - I use them with the standard 0.72 viewfinder magnification). Either something is wrong with the frame lines or the lenses were not both 35. The frame lines on both are very similar so if you have a lot of space between frameline and edge of finder on your M6 it's either showing 50 frame lines or it's not a .72! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin B Posted January 23, 2017 Share #38 Posted January 23, 2017 Either something is wrong with the frame lines or the lenses were not both 35. The frame lines on both are very similar so if you have a lot of space between frameline and edge of finder on your M6 it's either showing 50 frame lines or it's not a .72! Nops. I don't know what the viewfinder magnification of the M9 is, but there is a visible difference to the M6. I am sure that what I said above is correct. Frame lines of both cameras were the same (I composed on vertical lines in the picture to compare with, and both cameras showed the exact field of view within the frame lines. The difference was the space around them - and there the difference was big. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobbylon Posted January 23, 2017 Share #39 Posted January 23, 2017 Nops. I don't know what the viewfinder magnification of the M9 is, but there is a visible difference to the M6. I am sure that what I said above is correct. Frame lines of both cameras were the same (I composed on vertical lines in the picture to compare with, and both cameras showed the exact field of view within the frame lines. The difference was the space around them - and there the difference was big. not on mine! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregm61 Posted January 23, 2017 Share #40 Posted January 23, 2017 I cannot confirm this - I had my M6 with me in the store and compared the viewfinders side by side. The M6 viewfinder has much more space on all sides of the frame lines - the M9 also had an older 35/2 lens version attached to it which made the comparison easy. It was a big difference and instantly let me say "oh no" when looking through the M9. I suspect this is much better now with the M10 which is reviewed as having a M7 viewfinder type (M6 and M7 are the same - I use them with the standard 0.72 viewfinder magnification). Both the M9 and M6 rangefinders are inferior to the M4 with the proclivity to flare out at times. I just had my M6 rangefinder updated to the MP type to eliminate the flare issues and love it now. But given that, both the M9 and M6 finders are inferior to the newer M262 in terms of finder accuracy without having to use the manual's notes as to what the actual FOV is beyond what the finder frames indicate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.