M8 owners: Are you glad you held off on the M9 for the new M?

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
9:31 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
I had to ask this question. I myself am glad in that upgrading from the M8 to M9 for me made little sense. Why? First of all, even though the M9 was full frame, and I tested the M9 3 times, I felt the file quality was too close to justify the extra expense. My M8 was very expensive for me and i felt I needed to get more use and value out of it instead of upgrading to the next best thing all the time. Now comes the new M and I am very likely to buy it. Why? In one word, much better high ISO. This is a HUGE issue for me. I bought M lenses, especially f1.0-1.2-1.4 lenses for not only wonderful bokeh and sharpness, but for low light shooting. For me the Rangefinder was always superior for this, especially for wide angles. Now these fast optics have been liberated to do what they were designed to do. Better high ISO may have just saved rangefinder photography for pros as well. for them, high ISO was the deal breaker for them and now that problem is probably fixed. Halleluiah!!!!!!!!
 
I bought a demo M9 very cheap. If and when I sell it I will lose very little money. I've had two years of enjoying my M9, and when I get a new "M" I'll enjoy that too.

I bought and sold a few M8's as well, and made money on each one.

So there was no point "holding off". You'll be dead soon, buy what you want and enjoy it before you kick the bucket and the government or greedy relatives take everything you worked so hard for, and they sell your best stuff for fifty cents or throw your cameras in the garbage.
 
I'm mainly interested in the better hi-iso the M (hopefully) offers, other than that the M8 and M9 were/are perfect cameras for me
 
i'm still in love with my new-to-me M8.1....which i got 3 weeks ago. i'm not sure i will ever upgrade to the M9, unless it is the M Monochrome (which, in concept, i find utterly fantastic). I really like the new Leica M....but if i do ever get one, i'd like to keep the M8 as my 'simple' shooter....and the Leica M as the 'complex' shooter.

I love the basic simplicity and authenticity of the M8....it's a beautiful camera to use. I'm guessing the M9 is similar in its simplicity, albeit with upgrades like the FF sensor. At this time, my skills are less than the M8's abilities....when my skills catch up, I will think about the upgrading options!
 
Personally, I feel any M camera without a full frame sensor is a no-go.

I loved the Epson R-D1 and owned several. It made beautiful images but the crop sensor always annoyed me.

The M9 is just what I wanted.
 
My m8 still works fine. As I shoot only B&W, I actually prefer it to the M9 as its infrared spectral sensitivity gives very beautiful and unique B&W files, a look I much prefer to the files from an X100 or a d4
 
I Love Film said:
Personally, I feel any M camera without a full frame sensor is a no-go.

I loved the Epson R-D1 and owned several. It made beautiful images but the crop sensor always annoyed me.

The M9 is just what I wanted.
Click to expand...

imo it depends on the lenschoice alone, also the M8 1.33 crop is not as penalizing as 1.5 or 2.0 crop from other makers.

take a good 28 and you're almost in 35mm 'dreamland'
 
The Monochrome is the most interesting of the current Leica offerings for me. I loved my M8's but, have moved on after 3 good years with that camera.
The M is interesting but I can't justify the quirky system. I watched a video online of the camera in use. There is no limb to go out on to say… it's going to be awkward at best to use this camera as anything but a rangefinder.
Try putting 135mm or 180mm on a live view camera and see how comfy that wiggly jiggly focus action is. Acc. VF :rolleyes: Meh… Super clumsy.
All dressed up with all those accessories it looks just plain cumbersome.

I've used R lenses on my 5D's for years now. Usually focussing through the lens/VF not with live view. There is no need to spend $10k to use R reflex lenses on a 20mp+ cmos. Adpating to Canon or Nikon is easy and gives you a more native method of focussing those lenses.
A traditional SLR is much, much more stable for lenses over 135mm.


Monochrome images I'm viewing so far have a unique "Sizzle"! I will give one a try.
The new M…. Pass.
 
Last year i was going to buy an M8 to compliment my film M's instead i sold all my Nikon gear and went to a canon 5dII. i was so impressed with the full frame "difference". Going from a D300 to a 5dII was like 35mm to medium format to me, just amazing. This year when my daughter was born i resolved to sell my film m's for an M8 to get the faster work flow. My wife in her infinite wisdom convinced me to get the M9, she said "that's what you really want, remember the Canon..." she was right. having used an M8 i was sure the quality would be awesome but the cropped sensor meant i needed to think in terms of a cropped sensor when choosing lenses... in short i got a good deal on a used M9 and i love it. For my needs this camera is the last digital rangefinder i need, the only exception would be to get the Monochrom as it fascinates me. The new M doesn't bring anything i want. i know you were asking about the M8 and here is my point :) I do think if i had bought an M8 i would have eventually gone to a used M and skipped the M9 and i think i would have missed out on a wonderful camera that is exactly what i want.
 
I recently bought an M8, and now I am getting an M9.
I have no interest in another digital camera now. I must learn to use what I have.
 
I've never found the M9 IQ improvement over the M8 worth talking about, let alone worth the money. Crop factor didn't bother me, and I was used to the IR filters although the idiocy of needing them irritated me every time I took the camera out of the bag and saw the red glare off the front. Honestly the upgrade was a ridiculous extravagance on my part. But what's done is done.

I have zero interest in any of the new features of the "M" like live-view and especially video, nor any of those bulky add-ons. The only reason I use a Leica is because it's got high quality in a small package, and the physical add-ons take it in the wrong direction for my needs.

At this point though, there are two crucial things I need to know before proclaiming a decision: one is the image quality of the new sensor, and the other is what nasty little surprises might be lurking. The former might become known in a few months, but it may take a year from now to find out the latter. I gladly waited a year into both the M8 and M9 production before buying, and I will gladly do the same this time too.
 
You will be startled at how much more often you will want to pick up the M9 and use it as opposed to the M8.

The M8 was really a beta product, a stopgap not ready for prime time. The M9 is a mature camera with very few flaws.

raid said:
I recently bought an M8, and now I am getting an M9.
I have no interest in another digital camera now. I must learn to use what I have.
Click to expand...
 
The new Monochrome is my dream camera. It's as if Leica profiled me and made the M9M especially for me. I await delivery.

Cal
 
It's an interesting question. I have an M8 and really like it for black and white. I was never that bothered by the crop factor to seriously consider the M9 and I'm not sure the M Monochrom (though clearly interesting) would provide me with an incremental improvement as I do not often produce large images on paper. I'm also quite happy that my film kit can produce sufficiently high quality images for me, particularly my Hasselblad. I am more interested in low ISO films than high ISO digital performance anyway.

There are things that irritate me about the M8 - such as the camera's noises - which seem to be similar in the M9. If the new M resolves some of these irritations then I may consider it, but not for at least a year from now.

Then again, as I am more interested in film than digital I may end up selling the M8 and sticking with my Nex-3 for when I want to use digital and RF lenses, or need high-ISO performance.
 
My M8.2 is at Leica, NJ now getting the CLA deal. I'll be happy to use it for another year and let prices fall a bit on the full frames. With the M8.2 and the 35mm summilux at 320-640 iso, I manage to get a lot of professional work done, although at shallow depth of field. I also use the Skopar 28, which makes the package very small. Back in the days of 400 asa film, I shot with M bodies at an 1/8 of a second often and got results, in some ways better then now. But I look forward to a full frame digital M with clean 1600 iso.
 
I Love Film said:
You will be startled at how much more often you will want to pick up the M9 and use it as opposed to the M8.

The M8 was really a beta product, a stopgap not ready for prime time. The M9 is a mature camera with very few flaws.
Click to expand...

I used the M8, then used the M9 for a year, and then downgraded to a M8. It's not as big of a difference as many make it to be. The biggest thing I miss about the M9 is the 18mp... which I find better for printing big. I'll most likely wait for the M9 to come down in price and rebuy it used.
 
Sold the M8 for the M9. Wanted to use my lenses at their proper focal lengths, and I liked features on the M9 that the M8 didn't have ( I got tired of marking up all my lens mounts with a Sharpie just because I didn't want to pay Leica to "code up" my lenses , among other things).

But no regrets on my part. I'm not kicking myself for buying the M9, and am not now rushing out to buy the new M. I might get one down the road, but no hurry--nothing about the new M is so extraordinary that I MUST have one now (most of the new features it has are standard on cameras costing 1/7 the price of the new M--the Olympus EM-5 comes to mind--and a good camera it is, too). Just because the new M came out doesn't mean that my M9 suddenly became useless or defective, or doesn't take great pics anymore.

So for me, the M9 is good enough, and I'll soldier on with it till it's thoroughly worn out ( if that's possible), or I finally decide it's time for whatever new M model Leica has out then.
 
Before any sort of glad feeling can take hold of me for not buying an M9 instead of the now released M, I have to see how the M performs.

2 questions about the M:
- Will the new CMOS sensor really improve significantly on iso performance? While it must be hard to release a new camera nowadays that does worse than the M8/M9, I can't say the max 6400 iso is very convincing. Wouldn't be surprised if it only does about a stop better than the M9.
- Will the new CMOS sensor be as good as the M8/M9 CCD sensor? The M8 sensor is quirky and has it's flaws besides it's lacklustre iso, but it does have it's own special flair. It has it's own voice, so to speak. There is something special about it, that makes me like it more than for example the sensor in the D800.
I'm afraid that the CMOS sensor will be nearly identical in output to 99% of the sensors that have been released this year. Some people hope for a Sony-sensor in a Leica digital RF, but I would just buy a Sony RX1 if I wanted a Sony sensor.

Looking forward to reviews/raw files of the new M to make up my mind about being glad or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top