jdlaing Posted September 21, 2018 Share #61 Posted September 21, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) yes Maybe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 21, 2018 Posted September 21, 2018 Hi jdlaing, Take a look here Upgrading from the M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted September 22, 2018 Share #62 Posted September 22, 2018 I have five rolls of Kodak Chrome something left and once it is done, I'm done with slide film. M-E low ISO files are close enough to it. C-41 is very different story, but sometimes M-E feels not so far from it. L1000209.jpg I might be wrong and I have no idea how to control it. But I'm happy with M-E. It is just as good as my M4-2 is. It works best with fixed ISO and S16 or external meter and it just like film, pushable @1600 and very clean at low ISO. How are you going to get that Kodachrome developed? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted September 22, 2018 Share #63 Posted September 22, 2018 Couple of labs here do it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ko.Fe. Posted September 22, 2018 Share #64 Posted September 22, 2018 How are you going to get that Kodachrome developed? In E-6 at home. Maybe it is not Kodakchrome, I will recheck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianman Posted September 22, 2018 Share #65 Posted September 22, 2018 I'm considering to upgrade from M9 to a second hand M10 (or a new M10P) but have to sell the M9 first. I also wonder for how long the camera can still be serviced; the model is nearing its 10th anniversary. Will all electronic parts still be available in say 5 years? I don't understand how changing from an M9 to an M10 is considered an "upgrade". I would call it a sidegrade. You are abandoning a CCD for a CMOS sensor. Each has advantages and disadvantages. For me the only advantage of a CMOS would be the higher ISO availability, but would only need it very very rarely. Apparently the viewfinder is better on the M10, but it's not bad on the M9 either. 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverchrome Posted September 22, 2018 Share #66 Posted September 22, 2018 (edited) I don't understand how changing from an M9 to an M10 is considered an "upgrade". I would call it a sidegrade. You are abandoning a CCD for a CMOS sensor. Each has advantages and disadvantages. For me the only advantage of a CMOS would be the higher ISO availability, but would only need it very very rarely. Apparently the viewfinder is better on the M10, but it's not bad on the M9 either. The M10 is s successor model to the M9 and that reason alone is sufficient (for many) to classify the M10 as an "upgrade". The extent of the improvements is probably irrelevant as well provided there are some improvements. Edited September 22, 2018 by silverchrome 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WvE Posted September 24, 2018 Share #67 Posted September 24, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) The M10 is of course an upgrade but whether you need it that's indeed a personal matter. WIth regard to the CCD sensor I agree that under the right circustances the prictures can have something special but otherwise I believe the differences in IQ are not that noticeable (probably also a personal matter). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted October 11, 2018 Share #68 Posted October 11, 2018 Perhaps think of the M9 as a slightly slower film camera loaded with Kodachrome instantly switchable from ISOs 120 to 1600, 2500 at maximum. Lower ISOs can be pushed a few stops before the image degrades beyond usability. The M10 is a modern digital camera in a rangefinder body, with live view, good high ISO performance, good dynamic range and highlight recovery, but closer in size and feel to the M7 and MP. I'm still very happy with my M9, and am still in love with the images it can produce. A M10 might be great with all the added speed and better rangefinder, but the M9 is just a classic camera. 4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
schattenundlicht Posted October 11, 2018 Share #69 Posted October 11, 2018 (edited) I still use my M9 side by side with my M10. The latter imho is an improvement in haptics, user interface and overall useability. Looking at final prints (instead of 100% monitor pixel peeping), I am very happy with the results from both cameras. I tend to shoot the more modern lenses (and of course the more extreme focal lengths) on M10 and the more classic lenses and more conservative focal lenths on M9. I very much use my M9 like my film bodies these days. I will not retire my M9 unless it deserts me with a fatal technical flaw Edited October 11, 2018 by schattenundlicht 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WvE Posted November 7, 2018 Share #70 Posted November 7, 2018 (edited) Decided to stick with the M9, it serves me well and does often render stunning IQ results. Moreover, I can't really justify the price of the M10, not even second hand. Edited November 7, 2018 by WvE 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted November 7, 2018 Share #71 Posted November 7, 2018 (edited) 14 minutes ago, WvE said: Decided to stick with the M9, it serves me well and does often render stunning IQ results. Moreover, I can't really justify the price of the M10, even second hand. Exactly, whether you got the money or not Edited November 7, 2018 by otto.f 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted November 11, 2018 Share #72 Posted November 11, 2018 On 1/16/2018 at 9:04 AM, Luke_Miller said: 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. Buy a Leica for quality, then use high iso makes no sense. When I need 6400 I use a Nikon if flash is not permitted. Using flash properly makes better pic than making due with bad light including wrong direction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antigallican Posted November 11, 2018 Share #73 Posted November 11, 2018 2 hours ago, tobey bilek said: Buy a Leica for quality, then use high iso makes no sense. When I need 6400 I use a Nikon if flash is not permitted. Using flash properly makes better pic than making due with bad light including wrong direction. You will have trouble if you try to mix Nikon files and Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sacramento Posted November 13, 2018 Share #74 Posted November 13, 2018 To me its the Leica lenses that matter not the digital camera. I still have two M3s and an M6 I no longer use. They were mechanical marvels. I use the M9 a lot and love the images and love the camera. But it's the lenses I love more. Cameras these days are just computers, with electronic components most of which come from the far east. lncluding those in Leica. 1 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted January 21, 2019 Share #75 Posted January 21, 2019 (edited) I did upgrade to a M-P (240). It’s a very nice camera. For me, it was not worth the upgrade price. I had to work more to duplicate CCD color. Low light shooting: even though I shot with 50 1.4 ASPH and higher ISO, I was not comfortable with the results. The color “noise” is different with CMOS and effective removal can smear the colors. If you are happy with M9, stay with it. one thing else - when the 240 came out there were several people here on the forum who were over the moon with the CMOS sensor. Their enthusiasm was contagious. Maybe to a fault even. That is an inherent problem with visiting forums. They tend to ramp up the hype around a new product which the manufacturers just love. Cold showers work. Edited January 21, 2019 by Photoskeptic 2 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 23, 2019 Share #76 Posted January 23, 2019 On 10/12/2018 at 12:51 AM, schattenundlicht said: I still use my M9 side by side with my M10. The latter imho is an improvement in haptics, user interface and overall useability. Looking at final prints (instead of 100% monitor pixel peeping), I am very happy with the results from both cameras. I tend to shoot the more modern lenses (and of course the more extreme focal lengths) on M10 and the more classic lenses and more conservative focal lenths on M9. I very much use my M9 like my film bodies these days. I will not retire my M9 unless it deserts me with a fatal technical flaw Same here. I know it's not logical but I use a 35mm Summicron ASPH on my M10, and a 1969 35mm Summicron v1 on my M9. I prefer the M9 output best for B&W unless I need ISO greater than 1250. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
schattenundlicht Posted January 23, 2019 Share #77 Posted January 23, 2019 On 1/22/2019 at 12:20 AM, Photoskeptic said: Cold showers work. Alas, if it were that easy... 😂 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now