Jump to content

Upgrading from the M9


Shameetman

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Since the release of the Leica M10 I've been thinking about upgrading my M9p. Overall I'm still happy with my M9 (ccd) and I'm in love with the images it produces in daylight. Though sometimes I miss the high iso capacity and that gives me some kind of excuse to convince myself into buying something else. There must be plenty M9 owners on this forum having similar thoughts about upgrading. Now my current options are:

 

#1 Buy the M10 and sell the M9, some say the M10 sensor has a charm. Economically not very attractive since the estimated resell value will drop a lot the first years. I will still miss my M9 a lot and just can't justify keeping both!

#2 Buy the M240 and keep the M9. Nice to play with a more modern Leica and have the ability to use a higher is. The downside is that big compared to the others, I don't like carrying 2 cameras all the time and the files from both cameras are to difficult two combine in one serie (ccd/cmos). 

#3 Keep the M9 and just be happy. Stop looking at everything which is new, it's becoming a addiction. I have to many film Leica's plus lenses and maybe it's time to stop buying things I don't need.. All this money could also be spent on trips where I can actually use everything. It's just that feeling of searching and buying something new which is so nice..

#4 Keep the M9 and buy a extra M9 body. It's good to have a spare body and I can start the hunt for a nice body. The M9 is the best.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

#4 Keep the M9 and buy a extra M9 body. It's good to have a spare body and I can start the hunt for a nice body. The M9 is the best.

 

That's been my choice. Like my iPhone3 I'll replace an M9 when its stopped working and not economic to repair it ;). They are excellent cameras and quite capable of great results - its the person behind them that is usually the weakest link in taking good images in my experience.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an M9 and an SL. As I do some wedding photography the M9 is becoming a bit marginal as the 2nd camera. I miss focus sometimes, whereas I never miss focus with the SL. And I can’t realistically use it except for effects in marginal indoor light. I should sell it. But I don’t expect I will. I’m certainly not rich so that’s not the answer. I think for me it’s just the feeling of the device and the files it produces. I’m thinking of getting a q as the back up camera, though that still doesn’t solve the problem of the M9. Oh well...

Edited by antigallican
Link to post
Share on other sites

It really depends on what you are doing. For most (not all - I have other, cheaper alternatives for other stuff) of my photography, the M9 is fine. If it was limiting then I might think about upgrading but as its not and I like it, I'm not going to.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shortly after getting M-E me :) purchased clean and low count M8. They were very close by functionality and ISO range. I sold M8 quickly, because it was no reason to have two identical cameras for me. I was using one and second was just sitting unused. My second digital camera is small DSLR. I use it then I like to have AF and higher ISO (3200/6400). 

I'm not so concerned about "high" ISO with M-E. It does its magic on low ISO and small, two AAA batteries Leica TTL flash even with its primitive TTL is very sufficient to balance this flash light and ambient light.

It just less convenient in handling, but nothing annoying.  Meitz made Leica flashes are on pair with Leica in terms of how nice it feels. Including packaging :) 

 

If I'll have money to update M-E, I'll just get that is possible for those money. Enough money for M240, I'll sell M-E and get M240. More money available - M10.

Because all digital M are great enough to have just one. IMO. 

But if it is for generating income and business depends on digital M, then two M makes sense. Or if second one is Monochrome. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the same issue - I love the M9 but with a couple issues:

1. Although my M9 tests to have perfect focus, and I've used Leica Ms for 5 decades, my old eyes have been missing focus on the M9. I find even my M6 easier to focus.

2. I do a lot of available light work. I don't like superfast lenses, so better high ISO capability would help. (As an old Kodachrome II guy, never thought I'd think the M9 ISO was limiting!)

I've kept the M9 & got an M10. Indoors the M10 is easier to hit focus, and my slow lenses have new life. I did't realize how good my 2.5 Summarits are, so I guess my issues were hand-held steadiness. (I am old...)

The M9 is still great in better light, and will be a backup and 2nd-lens body.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been in the same position, and have opted to keep the M9 and be happy with it. My reasons being:

 

If a camera was deemed more than good enough, even excellent, for "professional" use in the past, then chances are it is still good enough, even excellent, for even the most "professional" of all photographers now, unless the essence of photography itself has changed so drastically that only the latest and most technically advanced camera will satisfy its needs, which (I'm glad) is not the case. 

 

What have really been changing all the time along the advances in technology are simply the habits and skill sets of photographers. But these are often more flexible than people are willing to admit. 

 

It is far more rewarding to develop and use one's skills to make the most out of any given camera than to expect a camera to make up for whatever skill that one is yet to acquire. 

Edited by Rus
  • Like 8
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided to keep the M9 and search for a back up body. One day the prices of the M10 will drop like the prices of the M240 did as well. I'm not expecting to take much better photographs with a M10 or M240 so for now it's just fine. Let's hope that the new Ektachrome will be good, I hope to use my M7 more often. 

 

Overall I see most people happy with their M9's. Anyone here who had sold the M9 and bought it again after being dissapointed about the upgrade?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

While I didn't sell my M9 (it was like new after sensor replacement), for my use I find no advantages over the M10, and I enjoy using the M10 more. The M9 still takes great images, but with both available I see no reason to prefer it (except I miss the "apparent shooting aperture" in the exif).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I moved from the M9 to the M-240.  While its high ISO performance is roughly a stop better than the M9, I find I much prefer the results when shooting in the lower end of the ISO range.  A relatively noise-free image does not necessarily equate to a good image.  At higher ISOs colors are muted with reduced dynamic range, This is true of most cameras.  I used to be an available light, high ISO, junkie.  But I've learned that even my Nikon D4, which allows me to shoot at stratospheric ISO levels, produces much better images at lower ISO settings.  So in low light I use flash regularly.  With practice and good technique I can produce images that do not look like flash was used, but a shot taken in good light.

Edited by Luke_Miller
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am using my M8 and also a loaner M240 while Leica is replacing the sensor in my M9. Using a Loaner M240 has allowed me to use a Leica that is more modern than my M9, and it showed me advantages and some disadvantages as compared with using the M9. The M240 feels larger in size and also heavier than the M9. It uses a larger battery for a better battery life, and the camera can easily take back to back photos quickly without the need to wait until the M9 recovers. If you take photos slowly and without the need for back to back photos, then the M9 may actually be more fun to use than the M240. The M240 may be more useful in cold weather since the M9 battery can die quickly if the weather is very cold. If you want to take photos in dark scenes, the ISO sensitivity is much higher in the M240 than in the M9. I do not want or need a camera for dark scenes. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On the issue of ISO capability, my experience with the M240's comparative advantage has actually been a somewhat mixed one. It seems to me that it all depends on the way one shoots. 

 

If one shoots high iso images in the "usual" way, i.e. setting the ISO to a higher sensitivity and set the aperture and shutter speed for correct exposure, then the M240 is indeed about 1 stop to 1.5 stops better than the M9.

 

However, coming from the habits of using the M9, for low light situations I have always opted to lock the ISO at ISO 640, and expose at a shutter speed that I need, which usually results in underexposed RAW files that I then push in PP. I get very usable equivalent high ISO photos from the M9 in this way, especially if I convert the photos to B&W. The M240 used this way seems always to suffer from more severe banding. The M9's underexposed raw files seem to hold up against banding quite a bit better. 

 

So in a weird way, the M9 could sometimes allow me to shoot at a higher and more comfortable shutter speed in low-light situations than the M240. 

 

E.g. if the correct exposure for a night scene is 1/125sec, f2, ISO 3200. Using the M240 with these combinations will result in a well exposed and cleaner image than the M9. 

But if I need to expose at at least 1/250 sec, then the M240's files when pushed 1 stop may already start to show banding. This doesn't happen all the time, but erratically and frequently enough to put me off shooting the M240 in this way. Hence when I use the M240 I stick to slower shutter speed and aim for correct exposure.  

 

The M9's files for the same situation shot at 1/250 sec, f2, and ISO 640 are often still pretty usable when pushed 3 stops or so. They may be "noisier", but still more pleasing to the eyes without banding. 

 

So my experience has been that, although the M240 produces cleaner images (esp. for colour shots) than the M9 at the same ISO level, the M9 can sometimes allow a higher shutter speed in low-light situations thanks to its' files' better resistance to banding.  

 

Then again, banding can often be corrected easily in PP, so each to their own then, I suppose. :)

Edited by Rus
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure about the battery life issue. It may change depending how you use the camera. I only have two M9 batteries and I would feel confident about using the camera all day with two. I have three SL batteries and I definitely need them to shoot all day. I think I must be using the M9 more like a film camera.

 

I'm intrigued Rus to know how one gets rid of banding in post. I've never managed it and think of pictures with banding as duds. :mellow:

Edited by antigallican
Link to post
Share on other sites

 At higher ISOs colors are muted with reduced dynamic range, This is true of most cameras.  

 

This!!! I was thinking this morning about it and this is exactly what I see with any digital camera on high ISO. Would it be Canon 6D or Leica M10.

 

I just didn't know how to put it in the right words with my ESL :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

This!!! I was thinking this morning about it and this is exactly what I see with any digital camera on high ISO. Would it be Canon 6D or Leica M10.

 

I just didn't know how to put it in the right words with my ESL :)

 

Your ESL includes use of the subjunctive, which is pretty advanced

Link to post
Share on other sites

I decided to keep the M9 and search for a back up body. One day the prices of the M10 will drop like the prices of the M240 did as well. I'm not expecting to take much better photographs with a M10 or M240 so for now it's just fine. Let's hope that the new Ektachrome will be good, I hope to use my M7 more often. 

 

Overall I see most people happy with their M9's. Anyone here who had sold the M9 and bought it again after being dissapointed about the upgrade?

 

Here's someone who didn't like the M240.

 

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2014/10/31/from-the-leica-m9-to-the-leica-m240and-back-to-the-m9-by-ashwin-rao/

 

Not the only one either. Surfing through the net recently in preparation for getting my M9 sensor replaced, I came across quite a few people who preferred the M9. Most common complaint was colour reproduction on the M240. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The most attractive promise of the M10 to me is the improved viewfinder. The rest of its virtues are remarkable, but not if one cannot view and focus as well as possible.

 

Pico -- uses two M9s and many more film Leicas.

 

Nah, not buying an M10 until/unless my photography improves. (No emoticon for irony)

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO, where is absolutely nothing wrong with M240 colors reproduction, just as with any digital M. As long as you know the ISO limit and expose it right, the only issue is with personal preferences.

I'm not saying what M9 files are same with M240. But both are nice.

 

Where a lot of personal preferences spread and repeat on the internet. I'm here to bring something new and personal :).

First, I like M9 BW more than M8 BW and then, in provided link, I see no merit of how the M9 ISO practical limit is 640. What is practical in photography? Isn't it about getting visible and printable image? Since then pixel peeping and noise complains became practical?

 

M9 ISO2500 image. I'm finding it as practical as it could get :)

 

35516865943_0fd26c7617_o.jpg

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...