M9 with original sensor - still worth a shot?

[ianman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

Better or worse is subjective... 

Precisely my point.

3 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

I said that if the closest you can get to the M9 put is with a different M, ie the Mx is closer to the M9 than the Sony, Fuji etc.

Well of course, probably because the same lenses are being used. Three things will influence the output. Senor, lens and IC software. I thing it's safe to assume that comparisons between 2 M models would be done using similar lenses and that the IC software follows certain patterns developed by Leica (or the third party which develops the software). I don't understand the point of compairing Sony, Fuji. Even using M lenses - which I think wa van assume a fair number of Sony/Fuji users don't - there is still the software aspect to take into account. 

I just don't get these threads. They always follow the same path. Every so often we get someone asking if getting an M9 is a good idea or not. The first - and only really - answer should be, do you want a full frame CCD Leica? Yes or no? It's not as if there's a lot of choice if the answer is yes. But instead of getting that simple piece of information a bunch of members go on tirades about how "better" subsequent M models were/are. As you say "better" is subjective. And even though the VF of the subsequent Ms may be noticably better, it's not as if the M9 VF is utter crap. I don't recall any users complaing at how bad the VF was when the M9 came out. 

So yes, some of the features have been improved in subsequent Ms. Battery life, buffer speed, screen. Other features cannot be described as better, as it's just a case if the user needing them or not. LiveView, video, electronic framelines (is that what they are called?).

So instead of ranting on about "it's new so it must be better",  "you'll bet more value for money", perhaps it's doing the member who is asking a better service by finding out what they want. If LV is important, then the is no question.... don't get an M9. If being able to shoot in long bursts is important.... don't get an M9. If you want the CCD characteristics and video... you're out of luck.

As written above battery life, buffer, VF.... all and any improvements are meaningless compared to the sensor. Saying there is little or no difference is just like saying there is no difference between Portra 400 and Fuji Reala. One is not better than the other, they are different. Both are good and people will have they own preference. But if someone seeking advice about a film is given the answer "Portra is better" it's sharing one's own subjective preference and certainly not good advice.

Omitting to tell the questionner about, or downplaying the major difference between the M9 and subsequent models, the only that really matters in terms of image characteristics,... now that is doing them a major diservice.

[Adam Bonn]

Whether or not the 240 output is "completely different" to the m9 is subjective 

Personally I wouldn't include the word completely but OMMV

I agree with you about latest and  greatest but the thing that comes into play with the m9 in 2021 is that if it goes wrong Leica probably won't fix it

This is a far more relevant piece of info than the newer camera having XYZ feature or improvement

Whether or not spending (say) 2k on something that might be a paper weight 3 weeks later is a risk that each buyer must reconcile with themselves but they should be informed of the risk

 

 

Edited May 2, 2021 by Adam Bonn

[Advertisement]

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

[ianman]

The sensor IS different technology. (Sorry, I don’t know what percentage is required to allow the use of the word completely 🙄)

You seem to have very little faith in the longevity of the digital M line. Why would they stop working in 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years? I have classics analog synths - a 1972 Moog and a 1976 Polyphonic Korg - which still work perfectly and I see no reason why they would suddenly stop working any time soon. My 22 year old Nikon cool pix 950 still works perfectly. The battery which came with my M9 almost 12 years ago is still fine, I could go on. Even so, why do you seem to think the 240 would last any longer? There is always a risk with electronics devices, anyone buying a digital camera knows that.

It has been written many times before on this forum, it’s not because an M10, 11, 12 or 13 are released that previous models suddenly become obsolete or any less good than they were. The fact is the M9 is the only full frame CCD Leica. That makes it unique and that is why all the other so called improvements are irrelevant. If someone wants one, it’s still a good - the only - option.

[Graham (G4FUJ)]

Simple question, as somewhere along the line I've failed to keep up - was the last generation of replacement M9 sensor (the non-corrosion variety) still CCD?  Or were they of the same type (CMOS?) not the same sensor, as the M240/M262?

 

[Ray Vonn]

1 hour ago, Graham (G4FUJ) said:

Simple question, as somewhere along the line I've failed to keep up - was the last generation of replacement M9 sensor (the non-corrosion variety) still CCD?  Or were they of the same type (CMOS?) not the same sensor, as the M240/M262?

 

All M9 models were/ are CCD.

 

On another note, the closest I’ve seen to M9 image output from a newer model than an M9 is when it’s paired with a Zeiss lens.

[ianman]

2 hours ago, Graham (G4FUJ) said:

Simple question, as somewhere along the line I've failed to keep up - was the last generation of replacement M9 sensor (the non-corrosion variety) still CCD?  Or were they of the same type (CMOS?) not the same sensor, as the M240/M262?

Are you trying to make me look like a bit of a tit Sir?    (he said desperately checking his M9 info screen...)

[Luke_Miller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The sensor is unchanged between the corroding and non-corroding versions.  Only the cover glass in different.  Sean Reid tested a body with the replacement sensor and found performance to be unchanged.

[pgk]

16 hours ago, ianman said:

You seem to have very little faith in the longevity of the digital M line. Why would they stop working in 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years?

FWIW. My older M9 has now been in use for nearly 10 years. Back in the day this was the life expectancy I used to have for 35mm cameras when I used them professionally. At 10 years they would be traded due to wear and tear and whilst they still had sufficient residual value to make them worth trading in. My M9s won't be traded. They will be used until they finally stop working, which I am not anticipating being any time soon. The M9 is probably my all time preferred camera as it delivers exatly what I want consistently. What more can I say (and yes I do have newer cameras aswell but they don't get the consitent day in, day out use that the M9s do)?

[Adam Bonn]

On 5/2/2021 at 9:48 PM, ianman said:

The sensor IS different technology. (Sorry, I don’t know what percentage is required to allow the use of the word completely 🙄)

You seem to have very little faith in the longevity of the digital M line. Why would they stop working in 3 weeks, 3 months or 3 years? I have classics analog synths - a 1972 Moog and a 1976 Polyphonic Korg - which still work perfectly and I see no reason why they would suddenly stop working any time soon. My 22 year old Nikon cool pix 950 still works perfectly. The battery which came with my M9 almost 12 years ago is still fine, I could go on. Even so, why do you seem to think the 240 would last any longer? There is always a risk with electronics devices, anyone buying a digital camera knows that.

It has been written many times before on this forum, it’s not because an M10, 11, 12 or 13 are released that previous models suddenly become obsolete or any less good than they were. The fact is the M9 is the only full frame CCD Leica. That makes it unique and that is why all the other so called improvements are irrelevant. If someone wants one, it’s still a good - the only - option.

Well nothing lasts forever. The risk with the m9 isn’t that it might break down, it’s that it might break down and Leica might not have the parts any longer. (Like with some m8 parts, eg the lcd)

The same will be true for the 240, the 10 and even the 11. But not any time soon as they’re newer cameras that Leica still have parts to repair them.

The m9 is not any more or any less likely to suffer an issue than other cameras. It’s just less likely to be repairable due to the age and in particular Leica’s proclivity not to keep an infinite number of spares for their models.

the m9 isn’t just the only ff CCD leica, AFAIK it’s the only ff CCD anywhere. So yes in that respect it’s the only gig in town. 
 

My 240 will go to wetzlar soon to have some pixels mapped out. I wonder if my m9 needed that work doing what they would say?

If I drop my 9 and break the lcd, I wonder if leica still have any to replace it?

There’s no reason the m9 WILL have a problem.. but all things CAN have a problem, and a complication with the m9 is the age and lack of support 

Remember, there’s no m9 sensors left because the supplier stopped making them, first Kodak, then the company that bought out Kodak’s sensor production. So Leica (like many companies) is at the mercy of its suppliers.

The risk of any old product that’s out of support needs to be offset by the desire of the buyer to own the product...

and that’s a person by person dialogue, whether or not CCD is worth the cost and the risk is up the individual.

[Ko.Fe.]

2 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

Well nothing lasts forever. The risk with the m9 isn’t that it might break down, it’s that it might break down and Leica might not have the parts any longer. (Like with some m8 parts, eg the lcd)

The same will be true for the 240, the 10 and even the 11. But not any time soon as they’re newer cameras that Leica still have parts to repair them.

The m9 is not any more or any less likely to suffer an issue than other cameras. It’s just less likely to be repairable due to the age and in particular Leica’s proclivity not to keep an infinite number of spares for their models.

the m9 isn’t just the only ff CCD leica, AFAIK it’s the only ff CCD anywhere. So yes in that respect it’s the only gig in town. 
 

My 240 will go to wetzlar soon to have some pixels mapped out. I wonder if my m9 needed that work doing what they would say?

If I drop my 9 and break the lcd, I wonder if leica still have any to replace it?

There’s no reason the m9 WILL have a problem.. but all things CAN have a problem, and a complication with the m9 is the age and lack of support 

Remember, there’s no m9 sensors left because the supplier stopped making them, first Kodak, then the company that bought out Kodak’s sensor production. So Leica (like many companies) is at the mercy of its suppliers.

The risk of any old product that’s out of support needs to be offset by the desire of the buyer to own the product...

and that’s a person by person dialogue, whether or not CCD is worth the cost and the risk is up the individual.

Where are other parts beet out now rather than just sensors for M9 series. 

It happened too soon after last M9 series cameras were made in late 2015 and been available for sale via official dealers well into 2016.

Not to mention, Leica Camera AG recent double dipping on M9 cameras which were  traded in due to sensors failure. Recent transactions under heavy price only to find out what camera is EOL and only solution in need of repair is to allow Leica Camera AG triple dipping and sell replacement for even more than initially was paid for refurb camera.    

My made in late 2015 M-E 220 went for sensor replacement and I have to wait several months. And no paper work on return. I will use this camera as pleasure toy until it craps out. I don't want to depend on tool which has no local, dependable service.

M240 support is unknown. It might be M9 V2 soon. M10 is not impressive on reliability. I'm waiting for commercially available conversion kit to use more common components an get my M4-2 to digital. DIY instructions already available for M3 with use of Sony made components.  

[maitoparta]

I say nothing whether it is good to buy M9 or not. I just say M9 is a great camera. Have no need to "upgrade" it.¹ M9 and pre-ASPH 50mm Summilux is a match made in heaven, giving me the files I like with very little post processing.

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!

 

Edit: /1/ You can't upgrade the top camera.

Edited May 6, 2021 by maitoparta

[Casey Jefferson]

After shooting the M9 for a while and compare it side by side with M240, I'm constantly torn between the two - with people in the frame, you probably can't beat the M9 for its rendering. For everything else, the newer M240 is a joy to shoot, but constantly struggle with portraits and family shots.

I'll probably upgrade to M10 and latest summilux lenses when my M9 finally break down and unable to repair. I can see M10 being closer to what the M9 do especially pairing with latest lenses.

As for the question of old vs new sensor...I did some comparison side by side between the two, one can see the old sensor has more saturations on certain color channel and seemingly cooler hue on orange and yellow (sliders to the right under HSL in LR). In real life shooting, I can't see any differences that are readily visible (there should be slight differences that's too miniscule to be pick up without side by side comparison).

However one huge advantage is Leica seem to also improve the edge color shift in general. My 35/2 asph v1 has quite visible magenta edges but no longer exist on new sensor (unless I push the DNG to see it). I'm not sure if it's a firmware thing or Leica somehow manage to find a filter glass that has less problem with the color shifts. That, alone, is the sole reason I reckon people to go with the new sensor.

[Casey Jefferson]

Addendum - if you read my initial post at the beginning of this thread, I didn't like the new sensor M9 upon first impression which I don't have idea why. Maybe I should go back to where I shot those test shot and shoot again. I hope there isn't copy variations among the sensors...

[Casey Jefferson]

Addendum 2 - Checking through my shots, it appears that with the new sensor my 28/2 v1 now has less than perfect color shift profile, which corners have cyan/greenish cast instead. There are also people reporting 28/2.8 has the same problem too. The profile definitely messed up a little, my 28/2 being minimal cast on old sensor now appear to have problem on new sensor.

So in the end it's a wash...

[Adam Bonn]

I've taken some truly horrific skin tone pictures with the m9 under artificial light, I don't mean a pinkish hue, I mean Ferrari red faces and men looking like they have lipstick on!

IMHO the M9 photos look nice because the tonality of the limited DR (ie the contrast) makes the pictures 'pop' more

I'll probably get an M10 at some stage. I've downloaded all the available 10/p/d DNGs (DPR, Photographyblog etc) I can find (well over a 100) and played with them, I see nicer files than the M240 but not really that much like the M9. IMO The M10 files need more work than the M9 ones, but respond to editing nicely.

I have an M9p and an M240 that bought secondhand (from Leica ADs) cost less together than a mint low mileage secondhand M10 costs today. So I really need to be convinced that the M10 offers me something wonderful that I'm not getting with the other 2 cameras (I guess 2 stops more of ISO would be nice)

The 240 is nice enough IQ wise and I ended up even more happy with it after I made some custom profiles 

As forums are great at - we've drifted off the OP!!

M9 with original sensor - still worth a shot?

Well...

• There's a high chance that the sensor will have a problem with the cover glass
• There's a 100% chance that if it does it can't be fixed by Leica
• There's some possibility of having it fixed by a third party (seems to depend on M9 variant)

The answers to M9 with original sensor - still worth a shot? are all personal reflections IMHO

• How much is it, and is that a lot of money to you?
• How long would you expect to use it for without a problem to feel it was a good purchase?

Is the answers to the above questions are "a lot" and "a very long time" then I respectfully suggest, that no, an M9 with original sensor is not worth a shot.

(if the answers are , not really it's chump change, and well a couple of months, then sure why not? Go for it)

 

 

[Cobram]

2 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

I've taken some truly horrific skin tone pictures with the m9 under artificial light, I don't mean a pinkish hue, I mean Ferrari red faces and men looking like they have lipstick on!

IMHO the M9 photos look nice because the tonality of the limited DR (ie the contrast) makes the pictures 'pop' more

I'll probably get an M10 at some stage. I've downloaded all the available 10/p/d DNGs (DPR, Photographyblog etc) I can find (well over a 100) and played with them, I see nicer files than the M240 but not really that much like the M9. IMO The M10 files need more work than the M9 ones, but respond to editing nicely.

I have an M9p and an M240 that bought secondhand (from Leica ADs) cost less together than a mint low mileage secondhand M10 costs today. So I really need to be convinced that the M10 offers me something wonderful that I'm not getting with the other 2 cameras (I guess 2 stops more of ISO would be nice)

The 240 is nice enough IQ wise and I ended up even more happy with it after I made some custom profiles 

As forums are great at - we've drifted off the OP!!

M9 with original sensor - still worth a shot?

Well...

• There's a high chance that the sensor will have a problem with the cover glass
• There's a 100% chance that if it does it can't be fixed by Leica
• There's some possibility of having it fixed by a third party (seems to depend on M9 variant)

The answers to M9 with original sensor - still worth a shot? are all personal reflections IMHO

• How much is it, and is that a lot of money to you?
• How long would you expect to use it for without a problem to feel it was a good purchase?

Is the answers to the above questions are "a lot" and "a very long time" then I respectfully suggest, that no, an M9 with original sensor is not worth a shot.

(if the answers are , not really it's chump change, and well a couple of months, then sure why not? Go for it)

 

 

I agree with you Adam. M9 skin tone rendering is sometimes very odd. I have taken many photos of completely sober men with "drunk like" noses and cheeks. 🙂

Based on your advice I performed tests with M262, M240 and M10 dng files. 

From easiest (almost none post-processing needed) to the files that need a lot of work in post-processing: M9>M10>M262>M240. 

I think that we have to accept reallity: the most suitable upgrade for us, M9 users, is M10. But it is still to expensive considering we already posess a marvelous FF Leica camera. Maybe M11 will affect M10 second hand prices. I personally "upgraded" to SL 601. Was afraid of the bulk but have to admit I'm more and more fascinated by SL line and I plan to invest in proper SL primes and/or zoom. Considering the price of the new M-Summicron 35 APO the SL version is "bargain".

To answer the basic question: NO. My recommendation is M10 and/or SL.

Edited May 10, 2021 by Cobram

[Adam Bonn]

59 minutes ago, Cobram said:

From easiest (almost none post-processing needed) to the files that need a lot of work in post-processing: M9>M10>M262>M240. 

When I made my custom M240 profiles I baked a custom tone curve into them which, more or less*, cuts down the editing work. The M9 colours are very nice (in sunlight anyway!) but IMHO what makes them really special is how they kinda glow and don't look flat. This is, as far as I can see, due to the tonality more than the colours.

(*there's always some rouge files with any camera that need a lot of work - I've M9 files where I've done nothing and they sing to me and M9 files that have contrast and clarity etc added)

1 hour ago, Cobram said:

I think that we have to accept reallity: the most suitable upgrade for us, M9 users, is M10

It's IMHO quite a tough sell though... the M10 at base ISO doesn't offer that much more DR than the M240 and the colours are closer than people like to think*

(*I mean really though aren't most cameras? I mean if you make a shot of an orange, you reasonably expect it to be orange, sure some orange is a little more red or yellowy, but it'll all be vaguely orange, and if it's not the orange you like, a little go in the HSL tool and then it is)

I suspect to own a secondhand M10 will basically cost me my M240 and about €3000... That's a huge chunk of change to me

I appreciate that the M10 is noticeably thinner, a bit lighter, has a nicer VF (not that I really noticed when I tried one) and yes - the files and the colours are easier to work with than the 240.

Maybe if 3k wasn't a lot to me....

In some ways I think the M10R might be more "M9 alike" than the M10, there's just something in the way it deals with highlights and the slightly grainy look to all those pixels that reminds me of the M9.

But that's even more money  

I think the answer to the M9 thing for the OP is that if one must have an M9, try and get one with the replacement sensor

 

 

[pedaes]

5 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

I think the answer to the M9 thing for the OP is that if one must have an M9, try and get one with the replacement sensor

See post #22 - the OP already bought one he started thread about.

In relation to CCD/CMOS colours, surprised no-one referenced this article, which is probably the definitive work on the topic. https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

[jaapv]

On 5/2/2021 at 6:23 PM, Adam Bonn said:

the thing that comes into play with the m9 in 2021 is that if it goes wrong Leica probably won't fix it

That is not true - Except for the sensor (which one wouldn't want replaced for financial reasons anyway) the camera is still fully serviced by Leica.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Adam Bonn]

15 minutes ago, pedaes said:

See post #22 - the OP already bought one he started thread about.

In relation to CCD/CMOS colours, surprised no-one referenced this article, which is probably the definitive work on the topic. https://www.reddotforum.com/content/2015/02/the-great-debate-ccd-vs-cmos-part-1/

Not sure something as personal as I like these colours can ever be definitive...

 

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!

 

Personally I never managed to get the Farkas preset to work quite how I wanted, but I'm sure it's made many people very happy

edit:

Not to subtract from Farkas's excellent work and gift to the community.. however

That's the same set of photos only this time on the 240 I selected the embedded profile, and no other edits, except WB'ing each to the same spot).

(I suspect that Leica did a FM update to help the 240 images along a bit since that article was written)

Edited May 10, 2021 by Adam Bonn