Would you buy a used M9 today?

[Steve Ricoh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd buy an M-P

 

 

a film M-P

[ianman]

I'd buy an M-P

 

 

a film M-P

I did    A perfect combo with the best digital M.

[Advertisement]

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

[Ronazle]

If the price was right. Regards, Ron

[Jeff S]

I'd buy an M-P

 

 

a film M-P

No such thing.

 

Digital M-P

 

Film MP.

 

Jeff

[TomB_tx]

The M9 is still a fine camera, especially for old film shooters who are used to ISO under 1000. It was the first digital that got my interest, having shot film Ms since 1968, and I even thought it’s low light capability was great. After 7 years I had the sensor replaced last year, and am still thrilled with both the joy of using it and the results.

I did add an M10 last December, and appreciate the improvements, including its high ISO and resulting freedom to use smaller, slower lenses in low indoor lighting, but for most of my use the M9 is just as capable. Carrying both, with different lenses, works fine, but I often carry my M6 with either, and switching between them all is easy.

[Ko.Fe.]

The M9 is still a fine camera, especially for old film shooters who are used to ISO under 1000. It was the first digital that got my interest, having shot film Ms since 1968, and I even thought it’s low light capability was great. After 7 years I had the sensor replaced last year, and am still thrilled with both the joy of using it and the results.

I did add an M10 last December, and appreciate the improvements, including its high ISO and resulting freedom to use smaller, slower lenses in low indoor lighting, but for most of my use the M9 is just as capable. Carrying both, with different lenses, works fine, but I often carry my M6 with either, and switching between them all is easy.

 

 

M10 is no doubt gives less noise on much higher ISO, but film shooter must be old enough to be familiar with something like ISO25 emulsions. Yet, Garry Winogrand and his "street friends" were known to push Tri-X @1000 regularly. In seventies, if not earlier.

With HP5+ and TMAX emulsions which are for long time on the market, @1600 is common use.

 

I agree about M9 and film M similar experience,  but M9 sensor is very much usable @2500 for BW and Color. 

From film shooter perspective, not from modern high ISO digital cameras users.

[Raid Amin]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used for many years slide film with ISO 50 (set to 40) as my standard film while ISO 100 was my fastest film that was used with long zoom lenses. I would not touch ISO 400 film except the grainy Scotch 640 film that I loved using for night photography at the French Quarter in New Orleans. This makes me use the M9 at ISO 160 almost all of the time.

Edited July 29, 2018 by Raid Amin

[Ronazle]

A good portion of my early photography was with Kodachrome at ASA 10 (see #4051 in "The View Through Old Glass"); on a practical level B&W was pretty much limited to ASA 50 (Plus X) - you could almost see the grain without enlargement on Super XX at ASA 100. Out of fairness to the era, Super XX pretty much owned the Press world with their 4X5 Speed Graphics. So, yes, ISA 160 on an M-9 is not intolerable and the M-9 renders a quality image at ISO 640.  Yes old guy (and gal) frame of reference is a little different than the current generation .Regards, Ron

Edited July 29, 2018 by Ronazle

[Ko.Fe.]

So, to sum up - M9 sensor gives three different choices for film shooters.

 

1. Fred Herzog era of low ISO slide film and HCB era of low ISO BW film. I did it with ORWO as the only film for years in RF camera. Zooms were something next to not existing back where and then. I, as many like, how M9 sensor gives it close to slide film.

2. Those who were pushing TriX @1000 at the time of Winogrand, Meyerowitz film street photography. And don't mind ISO800 C-41 films.

3. Modern film photography with C-41 film pushed @1200 and BW @3200.

 

M9 does it all, it just which group you prefer to keep within. And just like with film M cameras, it works with flash in low light

I use my M-E with flash, just as M4-2 with flash and same simple flash works at both.

[Robert M Poole]

The M9 can be used at high ISO at a push even with only an 50 f2 Summicron

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!

Edited July 29, 2018 by Robert M Poole

[Myvalko]

I would not... because I still using mine I bought some 5 years ago...

 

So, yes, go for it. It will give you the possibility to invest on a good lens.

But I have to admit that technology evolved since and iso is sometimes a problem when ISO 1600 is not enough.

With "regular light", colours/black and white are still very nice. 

 

One last think... M9 has this special TChkDzzz shutter noise. Not the most discreet one, respect  to a M7 or even a Kodak Retina... But there is a ... discreet mode 

[TomB_tx]

Yes, discrete mode helps the shutter sound a lot, as the recocking takes place when you let up on the shutter button (single shot mode - all I use). I set my M9 to discrete when I got it in 2010, and have never taken it out of it.

[otto.f]

Yes, discrete mode helps the shutter sound a lot, as the recocking takes place when you let up on the shutter button (single shot mode - all I use). I set my M9 to discrete when I got it in 2010, and have never taken it out of it.

Me too. Discrete mode separates the Chkk from the Dzzz, you can do the Dzzz under your jacket. But if it becomes a habit to wait long before you release the Dzzzz, it’ll cost you battery life is my experience. This happens because you can study your image on the screen before releasing the Dzzz

[LichtUndDunkelheit]

HELL YES !!!

 

Leica with CCD makes much more sense to me than Leica with CMOS.

 

P.s.: But even more I'd like a R-D2 with full frame CCD.

Edited August 29, 2018 by LichtUndDunkelheit

[analog-digital]

HELL YES !!!

 

Leica with CCD makes much more sense to me than Leica with CMOS.

 

 

More sense?? Explain why!

 

R-D2??

Edited August 29, 2018 by analog-digital

[Ko.Fe.]

Epson-Cosina made one was great and very unusual made, yet practical dRF.

But it had very old sensor at very beginning. Every time I look at its images it shows it age.

Not the 5MP, but how low DR in colors it was.

If they could make one with Canon 5D sensor to match tradition, it will be great.

It is shame they never updated it.

[jmahto]

Well, let me give a slightly different perspective. I used M9 for two years and then sold it for M240 (GAS) and using it for last four years. Recently I started using M2 and having a blast and have not touched M240 since then (part of it is initial euphoria about M2).... but... if I had not sold M9, I would be more inclined to use it along with M2.

 

This is because:

- I don't care of too high ISO anymore. M9 is good enough for the light I shoot in.

- The look of M9 files is still fresh in my mind (and in my LR catalog). In my opinion, they are easier to work on than M240 to look good.

- M9 is closer to film experience than M240 is (don't know about M10)

 

Therefore if you are ok with i) 18mp, ii) 800 practical ISO ceiling and iii) have left over money for fast glass then by all means go for it.

 

Edit: (#3 is the key IMHO. It takes care of ISO issue.)

Edited August 30, 2018 by jmahto

[otto.f]

Can’t agree more

[ianman]

- M9 is closer to film experience than M240 is (don't know about M10)

 

Why?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

I do c-41 and e-6 films at home. M9 low ISO color reminds me my e-6 slides.

M9 high ISO is just as mushy as my C-41 negatives.

For some reason, I can't see it in CMOS generated files.