The appeal of the M9?

[bhop]

Just a fun comparison pic.. The M9 is slightly taller I believe, but if you don't like carrying around big cameras, this could be a factor as well.

 

[chuasam]

A film Leica made sense in a film world, a Digital Leica is an obsolete trinket. The Fuji X Pro 1 is to a Leica what the Mazda MX-5 is to an old British MG Midget.

 

[bhop]

The Fuji X Pro 1 is to a Leica what the Mazda MX-5 is to an old British MG Midget.

Not quite the same, but really fun to take for a spin?

 

[Helen B]

Sam sounds rather like a closet Leicaphile. You can speak freely here Sam, we're not all prejudiced against the M9, and not everyone makes nonsensical sweeping generalisations, or assumptions about the motivations of people who have M9s.

I don't have an M9, but I have used M Leicas professionally since the mid 70's, mostly, but not exclusively, for documentary work. They all have drawbacks, and they don't suit everyone. It's nice to have a choice, however. I'm sticking to film Leicas for now, but I can see the appeal of the M9, imperfect as it is, for those who like the M and who want digital. Different people prefer different things, and we shouldn't try to homogenise them, or subject them to the tyrannical hegemony of the internet's self-appointed arbiters.

It's important to connect to your camera, and many find the M-series ideal for that. The M9 is a very simple, direct camera. It's not for everyone, but it shouldn't be put on some snobby pedestal of exclusivity - it's just a camera. In many ways the people who do refer to its cost and ultimate boy toy / male jewelry status are just as guilty of perpetuating that mystique as the people who buy one because of those reasons.

It has revitalised the whole M-series in terms of the development of lenses. We now have the best range of Leica and other brand M-lenses available to us that we've ever had. I'm grateful for that.

 

[Netskimmer]

This guy explains why the M9 appeals to him. I don't like how he's narrowing its use to people posing and looking at him 3-4 feet away. Surely he could come up with more possible situations? Anyway, this video is not just about the M9, but all "simplistic" cameras, as most rangefinders are.

I don't like this guy, he's dogging my D7k because it is too good? He admits that it is the superior camera in every way except for this vague concept of focus. His example of this comes with a few points:

1. He can easily change his aperture with the aperture ring.
Fair enough, it might be be more intuitive to use an aperture ring rather than turn a dial. Though this is only an issue when using a 'G' lens.

2. He claims it is easier to adjust his shutter speed by using a graphical dial rather than a command dial.
This makes little sense to me. I can change my shutter speed without lowering my camera or taking my hands off the lens while he has to lower his camera and play with an analog dial to do the same thing. Doesn't sound so hot to me.

3. He claims he can easily change his ISO in his little menu.
Once again, I can do the same thing, on the fly, with a command dial, without lowering my camera.

4. He talks about how easy it is to set his WB because his menu stays where he left it when he brings it up again.
Well, for starters, so does mine. So if I wanted to change my WB via the menu I could do as he does. I don't usually have to do that however, because, once again, I can do the same thing without taking my eye away from the viewfinder.

Maybe if he learned what all those buttons do instead of complaining about how many there are, it would change his feelings on the matter.

Not hating on the M9 or anything. I just don't get his argument.

 

[gsgary]

I'm shooting with a friend this afternoon that has every Lieca rangefinder except a 111c and he has 2 M9's, altogether he has over 300 cameras i love going to his house and looking through his collection he also has most of the Nikon F cameras

 

[Compaq]

I'm shooting with a friend this afternoon that has every Lieca rangefinder except a 111c and he has 2 M9's, altogether he has over 300 cameras i love going to his house and looking through his collection he also has most of the Nicon F cameras

I'm at your friend

 

[table1349]

Sam sounds rather like a closet Leicaphile.

Isn't that illegal in the US as well as most civilized countries around the world?? :lmao:

 

[chuasam]

I'm not a closet Leicaphile. I wanted to like it. I wanted to see what the hype was all about. I borrowed a M9 for a couple of days. Image quality aside, I found the interface to be very primitive and the ergonomics to be rubbish. I've found the Fuji X Pro 1 to be the camera Leica was trying to make...for a much better price. Leica got the camera right in the 1930s and spent the next 8 decades doing very little else.

 

[jake337]

The m9 is just a prelude to a m10, 11, 12, 13, 14, etc.It's a small camera, with a 35mm sensor, with amazing glass available. What's not to like?It will only get better, just likemall other technology.Would I pay the price tag for it right now? No! If I were wealthy..........I bet leica's prices will come down when other 35mm, small bodied cameras start coming to the market from all the other manufactures in the future.

 

[KmH]

I've heard people say "when you shoot with a leica, everything changes"

I've used alot of different camera gear, but I have never touched a leica. In the world of micro 4/3rds, i'm not really sure what the appeal of a digital Leica is anymore either.

For film, sure. Super high quality lenses, small body, near silent operation. If you want to be inconspicuous, it's a great tool for that.

I tell you what though, if I was to buy a leica right now, it would not be a digital one, waste of money the M8 and M9 are.

Oh ya?

Well I'll tell you what dude. I liked the other avatar better.

 

[bhop]

I'm not a closet Leicaphile. I wanted to like it. I wanted to see what the hype was all about. I borrowed a M9 for a couple of days. Image quality aside, I found the interface to be very primitive and the ergonomics to be rubbish. I've found the Fuji X Pro 1 to be the camera Leica was trying to make...for a much better price. Leica got the camera right in the 1930s and spent the next 8 decades doing very little else.

The X-Pro isn't what Leica was trying to make. The M9, is basically a regular M with a full frame digital sensor, with rangefinder and all that stuff in there. X-Pro is mostly an AF camera that looks like a rangefinder. They look similar, and both have interchangeable lenses, but that's pretty much where it ends. The M9 is exactly what it's supposed to be. Some people like it, some people don't. No big deal.. buy something else.

I get that you didn't like the Leica experience, but this makes me wonder, would you feel the same about other rangefinder cameras? They have the same type of "primitive" controls and ergonomics. (Zeiss Ikon, Yashicas, Bessas, for example) Maybe you're just not a manual focus, rangefinder guy, which is fine.

 

[gsgary]

I'm shooting with a friend this afternoon that has every Lieca rangefinder except a 111c and he has 2 M9's, altogether he has over 300 cameras i love going to his house and looking through his collection he also has most of the Nicon F cameras

I'm at your friend

We were shooting at a new hotel in our town and he turned up with 1 M9 and 1 M7 and a selection of lenses that i worked out to be about £12,000 worth of kit
Quick edit from today

 

[usayit]

Some may call it basic, primitive, or whatever but you cannot ignore the fact that Leica has built the camera that Leica shooters wanted; A camera that operates just like the original film body but with a digital sensor stuffed inside.

If that doesn't appeal to you, then it's simply not the camera for you. But to pass judgement on those that have found a connection with M9.. That's both immature and no better than those that do the opposite... Worship it as a piece of expensive jewelry.


And if one compares it to the Fuji xpro.... Then you are clueless. The two are nothing alike. Epson, not even a camera company, managed to build something closer.

 

[tirediron]

How many here who don't like the M9 have e Ed used a real range-finder (Which the Fuji is NOT!)? They are an entirely different beast from an SLR. If you never shot with a range-finder trying to explain it is almost impossible. Try a real range-finder, compare that to the M9, and then you will be qualified to comment. I'm not a Leicaphile, but I appreciate them.