Is used Leica M9 is good for a first Leica or should I go to M10 for the newest and greatest?

[Eric727]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, I’m decided to join the Leica camp, and thinking to purchase my first Leica camera. 

As title, should I go for a used M9 or a new M10 for my first Leica? As for M10, I might need to save money for few more month before the purchase. 

Please help and would appreciate if anyone can provide to pros and cons for each. 

Thank you. 

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

You will be able to get great images from the M9, of similar IQ to the M10, but with different characteristics (CCD vs CMOs sensor). Few people would argue otherwise. 

What you get with the M10 are a whole load of things that make taking photos easier and more enjoyable: quieter shutter, direct ISO control, better LCD, EVF option, smaller, better viewfinder/rangefinder........the list goes on. The higher resolution makes surprisingly little difference to my images, but may do for you.

You lose little from the M9 by picking the M10, other than the CCD 'look' - if you value that - which I don't. And the M9 (IIRC) was much faster to wake up from sleep than the M240/M10, which (rightly or wrongly)  I put down to the characteristics of the CMOS sensor.

Edit: welcome to the forum!

Edited February 18, 2019 by LocalHero1953

[pgk]

M9s have taken a great deal of their depreciation whereas M10s have not. If you are new to Leica rangefinders then an M9 might be a cheaper option in the long run, because you can try the rangefinder way of taking images and lose something but not nearly as much as you may do buying an M10, if you either don't like rangefinder usage and sell the M9, or want to upgrade it to an M10 later. Buying current cameras if you haven't shot with rangefinders before can be an expensive way of discovering that other types of camera suit you better - rangefinders are not to everyone's taste. I still run M9s and see no fundamental reason to change them because they do what I want them to. I've handled an M10 and it felt good - nicer in some ways - but not better enough to sway me. 

[ianman]

I have been using my M9 since new for almost 10 years now and the only advantages of the M10, for me, are the quieter shutter and even then, although the M9 is noisy, there are solutions, and the quality of the screen. Apparently the viewfinder is better, that doesn't mean the M9's is bad by any means. The only reason I would ever buy a new digital M is if my M9 got broken beyond repair.

Major thing to remember though, if you go the M9 route, make sure the sensor has been changed to the latest version.

[Eric727]

40 minutes ago, ianman said:

I have been using my M9 since new for almost 10 years now and the only advantages of the M10, for me, are the quieter shutter and even then, although the M9 is noisy, there are solutions, and the quality of the screen. Apparently the viewfinder is better, that doesn't mean the M9's is bad by any means. The only reason I would ever buy a new digital M is if my M9 got broken beyond repair.

Major thing to remember though, if you go the M9 route, make sure the sensor has been changed to the latest version.

Hi ianman,

Thanks for the advise. 

May I know the latest sensor was produced in which Year?

I planned to purchase one while I travel to Japan in couple of months. 

Thank you. 

[Eric727]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

M9s have taken a great deal of their depreciation whereas M10s have not. If you are new to Leica rangefinders then an M9 might be a cheaper option in the long run, because you can try the rangefinder way of taking images and lose something but not nearly as much as you may do buying an M10, if you either don't like rangefinder usage and sell the M9, or want to upgrade it to an M10 later. Buying current cameras if you haven't shot with rangefinders before can be an expensive way of discovering that other types of camera suit you better - rangefinders are not to everyone's taste. I still run M9s and see no fundamental reason to change them because they do what I want them to. I've handled an M10 and it felt good - nicer in some ways - but not better enough to sway me. 

Hi pgk,

Thanks for the advise. 

This is what exactly I’m thinking. Try out an used M9 just in case I do not like it, I can resell it and minimise the damaged...

Btw, don’t you think those improvements on M10 are good enough to lure you over such as high ISO capability?

Thanks. 

[pgk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, Eric727 said:

Btw, don’t you think those improvements on M10 are good enough to lure you over such as high ISO capability?

Depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it. I tend to be a low ISO shooter so the lure of high ISO isn't strong (and I have other cameras good for high ISO anyway). I think that we all need to address some fundamental questions (which few of us do) about what we want from cameras when we are considering a new camera purchase, rather than assuming that we need one with all singing, all dancing specifications, and it must be the latest and greatest. Possibly not the most popular or used viewpoint, but its mine. (I'd probably get an M10 if money were no object, but in reality I continue to enjoy using my M9s and they produce excellent imagery).

[LocalHero1953]

22 minutes ago, Eric727 said:

Hi ianman,

Thanks for the advise. 

May I know the latest sensor was produced in which Year?

I planned to purchase one while I travel to Japan in couple of months. 

Thank you. 

If you haven't picked it up yet, the M9 developed a major problem with its original sensor, fitted to all M9s. Not all sensors were affected, but quite a lot - it goes by the name of 'corrosion' - more specifically it affected the cover glass. Leica instituted a free replacement programme for all affected sensors at the time, but the programme was time limited, so there are M9s out there with original sensor which may still develop the fault. Initially the programme replaced the sensor with a new identical one, and then later with a revised version that was not vulnerable to corrosion. When buying a M9, you need to find out what sensor it has: original, replaced with identical, or replaced with upgraded. Leica still replaces sensors, but at a cost, so you can factor this into your purchase price.

[NigelG]

36 minutes ago, Eric727 said:

I planned to purchase one while I travel to Japan in couple of months. 

 

FWIW Japan is not necessarily the best place to buy an M9 as I saw some rather "stiff" prices when I was last there - I think there was (and possibly still is) a bit of a cult 'bubble' on M9 prices in Japan. I'm not sure where you are based but returning the camera could be an issue.....

[NigelG]

Map Camera Tokyo currently list good M9Ps at c 550000yen which even after the tax is removed for export equates to $4850 / £ 3750 / €4300!

I paid less than £2500 for an absolutely mint one from a UK leica dealer with a brand new sensor/service and only 1500 frames and even Leica Mayfair just had one available for £2750....

[earleygallery]

I wouldn't buy a used M9 unless I was certain that it had been fitted with the last new type sensor which is not going to fall foul of the 'corrosion' issue (or maybe a very cheap one that meant the costs of a new sensor were covered).

[pgk]

15 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

I wouldn't buy a used M9 unless I was certain that it had been fitted with the last new type sensor which is not going to fall foul of the 'corrosion' issue (or maybe a very cheap one that meant the costs of a new sensor were covered).

I was offered an M9 for under £1k a couple of weeks ago - plenty of room for the cost of a new sensor and consequent warranty from Leica at this sort of price (I didn't buy it but I'm sure it sold so no pms please!). I have a friend with one bought new 7 years ago with o sensor problems - not all were affected so a cheap M9 can be a real bargain. All that said, I would not pay a high price for one unless the sensor had been sorted and proof offered simply because it is expensive to replace the sensor so an expensive M9 could become a very expensive M9.

[Stuart Richardson]

The M9 is a superb camera for people who like filmic color and who are mostly interested in photographing at ISO 160-400. The CCD look is excellent, and the images are still in some ways "better" than what I get out of the M10. If you are used to using film cameras and do not mind a slower, more manual workflow, I think the M9 is a great choice. If you do not have a lot of nostalgia for slide film colors and are coming from a more modern camera, you might find it less appealing. The M10 is, in my opinion, a lot nicer to use...it feels better in the hand, the VF is a bit better, the shutter is quieter, and live view can be very useful in a pinch. The ISO range is certainly a lot better, and the 24mp are indeed sharper than the 18mp in the M9. The battery is a lot better too. All that said, I still think the overall look of the files is better from the M9. It is not enough for me to go back to it, however. 

Basically, if you are not sure about whether you want a Leica, but you are used to film cameras or older digital cameras, I think an M9 is a reasonable first step (or even last step) into the Leica world. It was a truly great camera for its time, primarily on the strength of solving most of the problems of the M8 and pairing it with one of the best and last CCD´s found in a consumer camera. The downside is that it is now rather old, there are the sensor issues and the batteries are probably not going to last very long. 

The M10 is certainly the most refined digital M camera, and the most like a film M in use -- it is quiet, thinner, the battery lasts longer, and little things like the ISO wheel make the use convenient. It is also a better option for longer lenses or adapted lenses since you can use live view. I think the colors are the second best after the M9, and overall it is a exceptional camera. If you can handle the difference in price, it is certainly the M that will last you longer and be more comparable to modern cameras in terms of its ISO capabilities and features. 

[earleygallery]

17 minutes ago, pgk said:

I was offered an M9 for under £1k a couple of weeks ago - plenty of room for the cost of a new sensor and consequent warranty from Leica at this sort of price (I didn't buy it but I'm sure it sold so no pms please!). I have a friend with one bought new 7 years ago with o sensor problems - not all were affected so a cheap M9 can be a real bargain. All that said, I would not pay a high price for one unless the sensor had been sorted and proof offered simply because it is expensive to replace the sensor so an expensive M9 could become a very expensive M9.

Yes I understand that not all M9's were affected by the 'corrosion' issue but it's a bit of a ticking time bomb as to whether it will or won't happen.

As I said, yes buy a cheap one knowing you have the savings to cover the potential cost of repair, or find one that's already had the latest sensor fitted.

[ianman]

1 hour ago, Eric727 said:

May I know the latest sensor was produced in which Year?

I planned to purchase one while I travel to Japan in couple of months.

I'm not sure about this but I think the new sensor started to be installed at the end of 2015. All cameras which had the sensor replaced should have the relevant paperwork from Leica. Make sure you get that if you buy one (it will be useful if you want to resell).

Are prices that much cheaper in Japan? I know that I would prefer to buy nearer to home in case there is an issue. A reputable reseller will give you some sort of warranty, and any issue would probably be easier to deal with if the reseller is local. 

[evikne]

My first Leica was an M9 bought in 2016. It had an old, original sensor, but I had no problems with it. I traded it for an M10 in 2017. I still prefer the colors from the M9, but I all in all prefer the M10 (for the same reasons as Stuart said) and I wouldn't go back.

[ianman]

 

48 minutes ago, evikne said:

I still prefer the colors from the M9, but I all in all prefer the M10 (for the same reasons as Stuart said) and I wouldn't go back.

I don't understand this. Is the photograph produced not more important than any other feature?

[Eric727]

Thank you everyone by giving such useful information and opinions.

Just to give some background about myself as I am new to Leica forum.

I am from Malaysia, which to me, this is a place that every difficult to find a good condition Leica, even there is, the price will be sky high. For my understanding, the only better place to look for used camera in Asia is Japan although their price are not cheap, but at least they are honest enough to explain the condition of the camera before we can make purchase decision. However, if you can provide a better place that I can obtain a Leica at reasonable price and that online shop is reliable and willing to offer international shipping, I am totally find with it.

I have been shooting DSLR for 10 years, and started with digital, currently (still) shooting with Canon EOS 1D Mark IV, 6D and owned few good glass such as 16-35mm f/4, 70-200mm f/2.8, 24-105 f/4 and few primes. Photography is just my hobby, and mainly in street photography and travel photography.

For the gears I owned, I think I can shoot fast if I want, but I wish to experience the Leica rangefinder camera, and I noticed that, this is not a "run-and-gun" camera. Camera is just a tool for me to take picture, a better camera won't help for me to take good picture! The experience is important to me, I believe the Leica should able to bring a very good experience to enjoy the photography.

From the Map Camera, a GOOD used M9 cost around usd4,800, a good M240 is around USD5,050 which even cheaper than a M9-P, and an used M10 cost around USD6,300.

My budget is below USD5,000 for a body only, since there are so many problem for M9, is it M9-P or M240 is a better option?

Would appreciated if you can give some advise.

Thank you.

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!

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

In your situation, for some reasons M9 costs next to same as M10. Which is odd, here in NA, M9 is twice less comparing to used M10.

Go for M10.

It has size of normal M and it has battery capacity which makes sense. 

M9 is great if you have nostalgia for slide film scans :). 

 

[ianman]

3 hours ago, Eric727 said:

since there are so many problem for M9

There was a well-known sensor glass corrosion issue. Get one with a new sensor and you zero problems. Where on earth do you get "so many problem" from?

The M9-P makes sense for some people. IIRC the sapphire glass is important to some. Personally, I wouldn't pay a premium for that. My M9, which I have been using, not babying, for almost 10 years doesn't have a mark on it's screen.

As for the M240, well as it's a CMOS rather than a CCD, it's different in so many ways. Do you need video? Do you need EVF, Do you need LiveView? Does the M9 re-cocking sound bother you? If the answer to any of those questions is "yes", then the M240 is for you. For me, the rendering of the CCD easily outweighs any of those.