AndrewNYC
Established
Not sure what I'm going to do. I some equipment that will no longer be needed (mainly a scanner and some canon equipment). Might be able to swing an M9. Not sure what I'm to do. That's a lot of coin...
I feel the same way AndrewNYC. I know I can do it... but I'm not sure for a few reasons.
1) My M8.2 is very nice... prettier than the M9 with framelines optimized at a better distance (for me) than the M9.
2) Not sure how much better the M9 will be for my type of photography (not much better high ISO either).
3) Do I really want to walk around NYC with $7500 or more (body / lens) all the time?
4) $7000 seems insane to spend on a body.
Pros: No IR/UV Cut FILTERs!, Full Frame (using 50mm as 50mm), Better Overall Files
It's a rough choice.
1) My M8.2 is very nice... prettier than the M9 with framelines optimized at a better distance (for me) than the M9.
2) Not sure how much better the M9 will be for my type of photography (not much better high ISO either).
3) Do I really want to walk around NYC with $7500 or more (body / lens) all the time?
4) $7000 seems insane to spend on a body.
Pros: No IR/UV Cut FILTERs!, Full Frame (using 50mm as 50mm), Better Overall Files
It's a rough choice.
Vickko
Mentor
If you think you can afford it, you probably can.
But you'll be high up on the depreciation curve; on the other hand, you'll be shooting an M9.
If you get an M9, you won't even question whether you should have stayed with an M8.
If you go the other way (i.e. get an M8), you'll continually ask yourself..."if I only held out a bit longer, and sold off a bit more, I could have gotten an M9"
My advice? Get the M9.
But you'll be high up on the depreciation curve; on the other hand, you'll be shooting an M9.
If you get an M9, you won't even question whether you should have stayed with an M8.
If you go the other way (i.e. get an M8), you'll continually ask yourself..."if I only held out a bit longer, and sold off a bit more, I could have gotten an M9"
My advice? Get the M9.
richardvanle
Richard Van Le
I do this all the time. An M9 and a 35/2 is the perfect small combo to always have at your side. And what are cameras good for if they're not being used?
Besides, I regularly see folks carrying around Canon 1DSes or Nikon 1DXes (both similarly priced) -- occasionally I'll even see an S2.
I bought the M8 last January and used it long enough to know I like Digital Rangefinder Photography. It was $2500, under 400 clicks on it. This year, I sold equipment to buy the M9. It is a fantastic camera, you will not regret it.
Last edited:
thegman
Mentor
I'd say think on it a bit, the M9 is not going anywhere, they'll only get cheaper.
$7k is a crazy amount of money to spend on a camera, but then so is £230 on a plastic, crappy Lomo, but I did, so don't listen to me.
$7k is a crazy amount of money to spend on a camera, but then so is £230 on a plastic, crappy Lomo, but I did, so don't listen to me.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Same boat here. I just don't want to afford one right now.
I don't see it doing anything to improve my photography. I'd love to use a full frame Leica. But the 1/3 crop factor of my M8.2 isn't exactly a deal killer.
Last year, I moved from a D300 to a D700, partly because of the crop factor, but also because of the fantastic high ISO performance. If it weren't for the better low-light performance, I wouldn't be all that thrilled with my switch.
I figure I'll pick up an M9 when they drop below $4,000. I'm guessing that will happen sometime next year - about the time the M9.2 or M10 hits the scene.
I don't see it doing anything to improve my photography. I'd love to use a full frame Leica. But the 1/3 crop factor of my M8.2 isn't exactly a deal killer.
Last year, I moved from a D300 to a D700, partly because of the crop factor, but also because of the fantastic high ISO performance. If it weren't for the better low-light performance, I wouldn't be all that thrilled with my switch.
I figure I'll pick up an M9 when they drop below $4,000. I'm guessing that will happen sometime next year - about the time the M9.2 or M10 hits the scene.
Vickko
Mentor
But that kind of logic only works if it "isn't" a Leica.
It always floored me when I compared the price of the same focal length between Leica, and any other manufacturer, even Zeiss.
So, I stopped comparing. Less painful if I didn't know, and only knew that a Summilux would hurt more than a Summicron, a Noctilux would hurt the most, and Elmar or Summarit wouldn't hurt at all. APO or ASPH would also hurt.
Vick
It always floored me when I compared the price of the same focal length between Leica, and any other manufacturer, even Zeiss.
So, I stopped comparing. Less painful if I didn't know, and only knew that a Summilux would hurt more than a Summicron, a Noctilux would hurt the most, and Elmar or Summarit wouldn't hurt at all. APO or ASPH would also hurt.
Vick
thegman
Mentor
But that kind of logic only works if it "isn't" a Leica.
It always floored me when I compared the price of the same focal length between Leica, and any other manufacturer, even Zeiss.
So, I stopped comparing. Less painful if I didn't know, and only knew that a Summilux would hurt more than a Summicron, a Noctilux would hurt the most, and Elmar or Summarit wouldn't hurt at all. APO or ASPH would also hurt.
Vick
Fair enough, either the Leica magic gets you or it doesn't. I feel fortunate, that while I recently bought an M6, the Leica magic is not strong enough for me to make me buy a Noctilux instead of my Nokton.
I understand it though, sometimes you just *want* something, regardless of cost.
MCTuomey
Mentor
+1 I think this way: unless you have a substantial reason to need the M9 (you shoot a lot in available darkness, you print big, you crop more than a little), the M8 is a lot of value versus the M9.
Out to Lunch
Menteur
I suppose the M10 is around the corner...