Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
I used compressed dng in m-e 220 for almost five years. Switched to non just for curiosity. Absolutely no difference. If not enough light, bad image. Battery level has never been a problem.
Cards, either.
Cards, either.
Leica M9, ISO2500, 1/45s, 85/1.5 wide-open.
Lighting is by the Disco Lights only. Uncompressed DNG, LR6. I have no problems using my M9 at ISO2500 in low light. I did a number of tests when first getting the camera, with various speed SD cards and uncompressed vs compressed. Found an optimal combination, stuck with it. Did not have to spend $1M having the hardware redesigned to isolate analog circuitry from the digital side, but I've only had to do that once= in 1985.
Lighting is by the Disco Lights only. Uncompressed DNG, LR6. I have no problems using my M9 at ISO2500 in low light. I did a number of tests when first getting the camera, with various speed SD cards and uncompressed vs compressed. Found an optimal combination, stuck with it. Did not have to spend $1M having the hardware redesigned to isolate analog circuitry from the digital side, but I've only had to do that once= in 1985.
RussPhoto
Member
Old circuit board of M9 could be a cause of very noisy images at higher ISO or pixel error. I had circuit board exchanged on my M9 this year and I noticed some improvements in image quality, however I'm avoiding shooting at such higher ISO setting and don't exceed more than 1000 in order to keep unique CCD color rendition when shooting at low outdoor light. M9 is getting a vintage camera...
, designed in 2009 but it's definitely remarkable Leica camera.
, designed in 2009 but it's definitely remarkable Leica camera.
I bought my M9 in 2011 and M Monochrom in 2012. Both have the new CCD in them. Last of a breed, full-frame CCDs are not being manufactured anywhere. On-Semi and Dalsa both stopped manufacturing CCDs. I bought the M8 "Mint, 400 clicks" in Jan 2010 for $2500. I'm surprised on how much value the M8 has retained. The M9 with new sensor has been costing more than a similar condition M240. I've seen the latter dip close to $2000 at camera stores.
RussPhoto
Member
Unfortunately chase for large megapixels and better low light performance killed development and production of CCD sensors
phosci
Member
I bought an M-E (220) with new sensor last week. It's my fourth M9 (two M-Es, two OG M9s).
I could not be happier. I love the colours. I love the ergonomics (I also never loved the beefier 240 bodies). Ready to shoot it for a *long* time.
FWIW, I think availability of batteries is going to limit the M9's lifespan. I got two with the camera and bought two more brand new from B&H. Should be good to go for quite a while now.
I could not be happier. I love the colours. I love the ergonomics (I also never loved the beefier 240 bodies). Ready to shoot it for a *long* time.
FWIW, I think availability of batteries is going to limit the M9's lifespan. I got two with the camera and bought two more brand new from B&H. Should be good to go for quite a while now.
phosci
Member
Because a Fujifilm camera isn't a Leica (I've owned MANY of each brand).
Henry
Well-known
I had an original M-E (so basically an M9) for a while. It was a wonderful camera to shoot with. Fat pixels and great colors.
That said, I wouldn't got back to it. I've used an M240 for a while now and the single most grating thing about the M9 series was finally fixed with the M240. I'm talking about the shutter reset noise. It's the worst sound I've ever had a camera make. It pained me anytime I took a frame.
At first I felt like the M240 images weren't as "good" as the M9 series images, but once I learned how to work with them I gave up on that notion entirely. The M240 creates images that are just as "good" as the M9 series.
Would I go back or buy an M9 now? Not at all, wouldn't even consider it with a sensor replacement.
That said, I wouldn't got back to it. I've used an M240 for a while now and the single most grating thing about the M9 series was finally fixed with the M240. I'm talking about the shutter reset noise. It's the worst sound I've ever had a camera make. It pained me anytime I took a frame.
At first I felt like the M240 images weren't as "good" as the M9 series images, but once I learned how to work with them I gave up on that notion entirely. The M240 creates images that are just as "good" as the M9 series.
Would I go back or buy an M9 now? Not at all, wouldn't even consider it with a sensor replacement.
boojum
Mentor
I bought an M8.2 to try it out. And I liked it, warts and all. Then an M9, and then a couple of M240's. The M9 is the one I take out mostly followed by the M8.2. Occasionally an M240 but more often the A7M III. The M9 has the factory replaced sensor. I do not know how to check if any electronics were replaced. They all costed between $2,500 and $3,000. All in very good shape. I like the CCD sensor better than the CMOS. I have no regret buying the the M8.2 and the M9 and would do it again. Despite their shortcomings the give me good images. They far exceed my talent.
A Canon 28mm f/2.8 LTM lives on the M8.2. The M9 wears a CV 35 or 40mm and a Canon f/1.4 LTM or Jupiter 8. The M240's wear any of these in addition to a SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4. There is also a Jupiter 9 and a Jupiter 11. All the lenses play well with the cameras.
A Canon 28mm f/2.8 LTM lives on the M8.2. The M9 wears a CV 35 or 40mm and a Canon f/1.4 LTM or Jupiter 8. The M240's wear any of these in addition to a SMC Pentax-M 50mm f/1.4. There is also a Jupiter 9 and a Jupiter 11. All the lenses play well with the cameras.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
You do realize that the M typ 240 is virtually identical in size to the M9? It's about 0.5mm larger, front to back, at the baseplate, because the baseplate is made of thicker metal. My M9 half case would have fit my M-P 240 perfectly were it not for controls and such being configured just slightly differently. Which had me grumbling because I liked my M9 half case and that company didn't make one with the M240 configuration.
The additional weight of the M240 was virtually all due to the much, much better battery.
I didn't hate my M9, but I liked the M-P240 and M-D262 far, far more. They also made superior photos in my testing, with more dynamic range and greater sensitivity to work with.
G
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
I know it may be controversial, but the only thing I dislike about my m240 is the very obvious thicker body. People have told me it's almost the same as my M9, but my tactile experience holding one of each in each hand says otherwise. It's the primary reason I'm going to get an M10. I recognize that others may have a different take on this... Other than the thickness, the M240 is everything I need from a digital M.
Still really like my M9 too and I use it often. Still like my film Ms too, but I'm not going through much film these days. I probably wouldn't use any film but for my enjoyment of the M bodies.
Still really like my M9 too and I use it often
. Still like my film Ms too, but I'm not going through much film these days. I probably wouldn't use any film but for my enjoyment of the M bodies.
rfaspen
[insert pithy phrase here]
By the way, it was Godfrey that finally convinced me to "write the check, take a deep breath" and get that M240. Glad I listened to him.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Well... I see Monochrome in the line...
I had three film M and two digital M at some point. Down to one M-E 220 from the last batch and M4-2, which is not in real use anymore, but waiting for the right thing.
At some point someone will figure out how to make retrofittable film M to digital conversion kits with FF global shutter.
This will eliminate flaky film M shutter and will not depend on any digital M inner parts.
I would think video is even more of the culprit.
Range-rover
Mentor
John the look of the sensor is really different I just got a M8 at a great price and really love it, I kept my Fuji X-T1 because the colors in that
and the glass is really great, the Sony I sold again have to stay away from those there nice but there's something about the bodies.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I've compared my M9 and M-P 240 photos quite a lot. I captured only raw files with either ... with the M9 because the colors looked so odd, with the M-P 240 because my workflow was firmly established and reliable as an all-raw workflow.
I see virtually no difference in my rendered photographs of the same subjects. The M-P 240 files are cleaner at high ISO settings and have a little bit more resolution. The same is true comparing the M-D 262 images with the M9 images.
Whatever the CCD vs CMOS difference might be, it has not been particularly evident or significant in anything I've been doing.
Frankly, if I miss any of them, I miss the M-D 262 the most. But I sold it because it was worth a lot of money and the CL does the same or better job for what I was looking for. The M10 Monochrom is appealing to me, but my bank balance says "no no no..." at the moment.
G
I am not disputing that Bob, I have had the M8 and the M9. However, the move to CMOS was because of video mostly. I mean just look at the major innovations in cameras since then…
boojum
Mentor
Then why has video been dropped if it was the reason for migration from CCD to CMOS? I am lost here, help me out.
Range-rover
Mentor
I know, since CMOS they all went a bit more crazy, I guess I'm an old school photographer.
raid
Dad Photographer
I am still using my M9 (and I should use also the M8) along the M10. They are all good tools.