Would you go back from a m10 to a m9?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Strange question, but here me out. My m journey started with a second hand m8 after having a q. Soon a mm followed and then a new m10. In between a SL made its way which is really the camera for me, especially as I can combine lenses.

 I sold the m8, to fund a lens, but I loved its output. I like the m10, but could simplify life (batteries, loader) by going back to a m9. Money saved could be used for a trip or a lens.

would you go back? 
 

note: i hardly shoot in dark without additional lights, I don’t care about LV or the screen, nor the buffer. The m8 was quick enough, so the m9 will be for sure.

 

[Advertisement]

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

[rsh]

No.

[colint544]

You've covered a lot of ground there. What about film, have you considered trying a film M camera?

[pgk]

I'm still using M9s. They still produce great image and as a low ISO shooter I've never sen the need to upgrade them. If I compare the output to that from more recent and much higher specfied Sony cameras that I also use, I see nothing to suggest that I would benefit from changing my M9s for a more recent M. I suppose that theu are a good 'fit' for the sort of photography I do with them. I think that there is a lot to be said for enjoying equipment when it produces what yu want.

[Adam Bonn]

I own both 10 and 9.

going back and forth between them

(we'll leave the IQ, ISO differences etc out of this I think. They're either a personal choice "CCD look/magic, filmic, kodochrome yada yada" and all of that or so obvious which is superior that the spec sheet tells you without touching the camera)

I find the M10 nicer in the hand - the M9 does feel more fat ('cos it is) 

The M10 might have more things in the menu, but the menu is more organised... if I haven't used the 9 in a while, I sometimes find myself trying to remember is that in the main menu or the set menu when I want to change something

I personally find the 10 nicer to use, the aforementioned ergonomics but the shutter button is smoother, the buttons easier to press, the live view comes in handy a few times a year

If I had to pick between the two... well tricky.. head = M10 all day long, but heart... M9 was my first ever Leica, I lusted after one for a long time before I could have one...

If it was me (and it kinda is as I got the M10 and kept the M9) I'd try and get an M9 to supplement the M10 and see which you end up using more, then sell the one you don't use as much

[Huss]

Having owned an M9, then M240, now M10, I’d never even consider going back to the 9.  That was such a buggy not quite ready for prime time camera.  I made some great images with it, but did so with the others w/o any of the compromises and irritations.

[TomB_tx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I kept my M9 after getting an M10, but it's relegated to back-up use most of the time. One nice thing about the M9 is the very low battery drain when left off with the battery in place. It can go months and still have a good charge. The M10 battery drains faster in the same condition.

So I prefer the M10 - but still enjoy the 9.

[Olaf_ZG]

21 hours ago, colint544 said:

You've covered a lot of ground there. What about film, have you considered trying a film M camera?

Yes and no. Would love to, but in my country development of films is rather behind and very expensive. Therefore, digital it will remain.

[Olaf_ZG]

20 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

 

If it was me (and it kinda is as I got the M10 and kept the M9) I'd try and get an M9 to supplement the M10 and see which you end up using more, then sell the one you don't use as much

I want to reduce, not add, so this would not be an option.

 I enjoyed reading your answer though.

[84bravo]

The M10 is the keeper hands down. If for no other reason, the dynamic range alone is much better than the M9. The other upgrades in size, live view, etc is valuable, but not the deal breaker. The dynamic range is the sole reason.

I'm not a fan of the punchy colors from the M9, but it is a bit of a cult camera for it's color reproduction. I love the M8 for it's ability to produce beautiful BW images from the DNG files. Is that a result of the CCD sensor? I don't know because the BW I make from the M9 is not the same that I get from the M8. The BW that I make from the M10 is "too perfect" and lacks the Tri-X feel that I get from the M8. However, this is strictly a subjective opinion.

[Adam Bonn]

21 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

I want to reduce, not add, so this would not be an option.

 I enjoyed reading your answer though.

Then it becomes the decision of the accountant within you! Is the amount of money recovered worth it?

and selling camera A and buying camera B reduces nothing 😇 I believe the phrase for that is (or was pre metoo anyway) ‘man maths’ 😅

[pgk]

21 hours ago, 84bravo said:

The M10 is the keeper hands down. If for no other reason, the dynamic range alone is much better than the M9. ..... The dynamic range is the sole reason.

Interesting. On paper my Sonys have a far 'better' dynamic range than my M9s. In practice it is not as significant as might be expected. In fact the 'noise' produced by the M9s is far more 'filmic' or 'analogue' than that from the Sonys, which is one of the reasons I still like using the M9s. This does of course, depend on what and how you shoot. As a low ISO shooter the M9 remains a very affective tool for me.

[Adam Bonn]

I still love my M9. I’ve shot it back to back with my M10 and there’s definitely some shots that suit the M9’s rather quirky native (native in LR anyway) colour palette.

The M10 obviously has more DR, but in terms of exposure latitude it’s largely shadow recovery based, whereas the M9 offers the impression of a bit from the bottom and a bit from the top.

Despite the M9 often being touted as a ‘saturated and contrasty’ camera, compared to the M10 it’s often the latter that has a ton of contrast (well if you set both cameras to same exposure settings, viewed in isolation the M10 might very well be described as under exposed)

I find the M9 has it’s magic (OMMV) in the native tonality, the way that it seems to gently roll off into light areas can really add a look to the pictures (eg if the sky is quite light in colour it makes the sky appear as it is, far away and gives depth and actuance to the picture)

But I find the M10 far more versatile, nicer to use and a more consistent performer. And contrast/colours/tone curves can all be added or tweaked in post

Eventually I’ll get GAS and upgrade the M10, it’s just how it is (typically I buy store sourced second hand when the model’s been on the market for 5 or 6 years), but I’m far to emotively attached to my M9 to let that one go!

Edited October 14, 2022 by Adam Bonn

[rtai]

I had the M8 M9 M9M now M10M. I did buy an M8.2 as a companion to the M10M and while the color is exceptional being a cropped M9 I found the advantages of the M10 more compelling if you are going to shoot digital. Why do I think that? I love film and if I couldn’t shoot at high iso I wouldn’t need a digital camera. Stopping action in the street is why I have the M10M. If I had a digicam and to get the best performance out of it I need to shoot at 800 iso or below then I have no reason not to shoot Fuji 800 color film instead.

Edited October 14, 2022 by rtai

[rtai]

2 minutes ago, rtai said:

I had the M8 M9 M9M now M10M. I did buy an M8.2 as a companion to the M10M and while the color is exceptional being a cropped M9 I found the advantages of the M10 more compelling if you are going to shoot digital. Why do I think that? I love film and if I couldn’t shoot at high iso I wouldn’t need a digital camera. Stopping action in the street is why I have the M10M. If I had a digicam and to get the best performance out of it I need to shoot at 800 iso or below then I have no reason to have it when I can shoot Fuji 800 color film instead.

Don’t know what happen here.

Edited October 14, 2022 by rtai

[Jeff S]

On 10/12/2022 at 3:53 PM, Olaf_ZG said:

Strange question, but here me out. My m journey started with a second hand m8 after having a q. Soon a mm followed and then a new m10. In between a SL made its way which is really the camera for me, especially as I can combine lenses.

 I sold the m8, to fund a lens, but I loved its output. I like the m10, but could simplify life (batteries, loader) by going back to a m9. Money saved could be used for a trip or a lens.

would you go back? 
 

note: i hardly shoot in dark without additional lights, I don’t care about LV or the screen, nor the buffer. The m8 was quick enough, so the m9 will be for sure.

 

Did you keep or sell your M9 Monochrom?  
 

Jeff

[Olaf_ZG]

The m9m I still have. Was thinking the m9 might be a better fit than the m10 due to batteries and sound.

[Jeff S]

Only you can answer. Priorities and preferences vary greatly, but it helps to have them well established.  For me, a Monochrom (I have the MM and M10M) provides a different mindset/experience and I never carry my color-based camera (M10-R  or SL2) with it. Batteries are also a trivial expense in my overall photography.  Any of these cameras are capable of producing exceptional (or mediocre) pics/prints.  
 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Didn’t even considering buying an M10. If I want a more modern camera there are plenty of other choices, of which an M10 is certainly not the first. My M9 and MM1 are the perfect digital M for me. 

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, jaapv said:

My M9 and MM2 are the perfect digital M for me. 

MM, of course.  MM2 would be the M246.  There is nothing like the M10 Monochrom, however, if you ever get a chance to use it; far better sensor than in the M10, and much better build quality and VF than the MM (I have both). 

Jeff