rugyboogie
Newbie
Hey There
This is my first post here on RFF, please do not flame me.
Having been into photography since the mid 70s and having owned several 35MM cameras I am looking for a change to digital.
I am a General Contractor and we use small point and shoot digital's on the sites.
Several years ago I build a photo-studio for a client who became a friend.
His photos impressed me, asked what he uses for cameras.
Nikon , Canon and Leica.
He said that the Leica was his fav by a lot, showed me pictures of both formats, differences were clearly visible on the large photos.
So Leica it will be.
Now for me a new M9 is a stretch.
The M8 is a little easier on the wallet......BUT I only want to do this once and not have to worry about the "I wish I would have" syndrome.
A NOS for the M8 at around 3k vs new M9 at over 7K .
Is the 9 worth the extra change?
Once the decision is made on the camera then its on to the lenses. No lenses , so I will have to take a shovel to the wallet to get started.
One shovel at a time, so first the body.
Thank you for your time,
Rugy
This is my first post here on RFF, please do not flame me.
Having been into photography since the mid 70s and having owned several 35MM cameras I am looking for a change to digital.
I am a General Contractor and we use small point and shoot digital's on the sites.
Several years ago I build a photo-studio for a client who became a friend.
His photos impressed me, asked what he uses for cameras.
Nikon , Canon and Leica.
He said that the Leica was his fav by a lot, showed me pictures of both formats, differences were clearly visible on the large photos.
So Leica it will be.
Now for me a new M9 is a stretch.
The M8 is a little easier on the wallet......BUT I only want to do this once and not have to worry about the "I wish I would have" syndrome.
A NOS for the M8 at around 3k vs new M9 at over 7K .
Is the 9 worth the extra change?
Once the decision is made on the camera then its on to the lenses. No lenses , so I will have to take a shovel to the wallet to get started.
One shovel at a time, so first the body.
Thank you for your time,
Rugy
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Definitely the M9 is worth it, it's a different level, and with it you wouldn't worry about buying another one for many years, because it's a real M Leica: its sensor size allows you to use Leica lenses with their real focal length... And file sizes and consequent native sharpness are higher of course... It's expensive but it's one of a kind... You can get similar results from a lot cheaper DSLRs, but they're a lot bigger, and Leica wideangle lenses are better...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
Damaso
Photojournalist
If you have the money to spare it is probably worth it. If you don't then the M8 (one that works properly) is a good option. If using a rangefinder is what you enjoy then anything else is a distant second...
NathanJD
Well-known
The difference that matters the most is the fact that the M9 is a full frame camera which means it takes advantage of the characteristics of a lens from corner to corner as opposed to the middle 2/3 which is what the M8 does. This difference is due to the fact that the technology to go full frame wasn't developed at the time that the M8 was produced. Many people have been waiting for the M9's full frame sensor technology before making the jump from Leica film to Leica digital.
I don’t think ‘stopgap’ is quite the right way to describe the M8 but for me at least that word does spring to mind when I think of it.
I don’t think ‘stopgap’ is quite the right way to describe the M8 but for me at least that word does spring to mind when I think of it.
How about trying a used film leica first?
Stephen G
Well-known
Depends on your full budget. You gotta look at the "total system".
If you plan to spend $7k on the M9 and $1k on lenses..
Then get the M8.2 @ $3k and spend $5k on lenses.. (well maybe not 5k, but you get the picture.. something like $2-3k probably)
On the utility-for-money front, spending $7k on M9 and having only 1 good lens will probably feel more restrictive than an M8 with multiple good lenses.
It also depends on what you shoot-
Do you shoot more wide or telephoto? The crop factor of M8 can work in your favor if you shoot telephoto heavily. It hurts if you shoot wides primarily.
If you plan to spend $7k on the M9 and $1k on lenses..
Then get the M8.2 @ $3k and spend $5k on lenses.. (well maybe not 5k, but you get the picture.. something like $2-3k probably)
On the utility-for-money front, spending $7k on M9 and having only 1 good lens will probably feel more restrictive than an M8 with multiple good lenses.
It also depends on what you shoot-
Do you shoot more wide or telephoto? The crop factor of M8 can work in your favor if you shoot telephoto heavily. It hurts if you shoot wides primarily.
mervin106
Member
I agree with everyone that Leica lenses is where it's at, and the body only comes second, but in this case with the M9 being scarce I went with the body first. My approach was to spend the money on the M9, since it is the only full frame digital M at this point, plus the fact that M9's are hard to find in most places. When a store around me had it in stock, I quickly jumped on it. My next dilemma was where to get the money to buy expensive lenses, now that all my money was spent on the M9. I eventually went with the cheaper Voigtlander lenses and now patiently hunting for used Leica lenses.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Another vote for the M9. There's really no contest. The M8/8.2 are great until you've used the M9.
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
arnulf
Registered User
I've used both and I will definitely say that an m9 is really worth the extra money if you have them. The m8 is a very fine camera, don't get me wrong and if you, as Stephen says, use a lot of normal and tele then this could be an excellent choice. If you use a lot of wide-angle and want a fast lens, then you're gonna need to spend a lot of extra cash on lenses.
ashfaque
Learning
I'm saving as well. So I'll share my thoughts here:
(1) Since you have limited budget I'd say get a secondhand M8 or M8.2
(2) spend the rest on lenses
(3) Another reason why I wouldn't buy a new Leica M9, even if I had the money is that depreciation rate for the second owner will be very low when an update of M9 appears on the market (not sure if it will come soon though).
(4) And even if you disregard the last point (very high depreciation rate) you can still use that extra money for lenses, an good H-IPS monitor, printer and calibrator.
(5) But if you're still thinking of getting a new M9 then try to get it from Europe. Here I'm assuming you're outside Eu countries. That way you can save quite a large amount. Thus be able to spend money on other things or reduce your depreciation cost.
Oh see what Dirk has done with his M8.2 - just amazing: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91392
Regards
Ash
(1) Since you have limited budget I'd say get a secondhand M8 or M8.2
(2) spend the rest on lenses
(3) Another reason why I wouldn't buy a new Leica M9, even if I had the money is that depreciation rate for the second owner will be very low when an update of M9 appears on the market (not sure if it will come soon though).
(4) And even if you disregard the last point (very high depreciation rate) you can still use that extra money for lenses, an good H-IPS monitor, printer and calibrator.
(5) But if you're still thinking of getting a new M9 then try to get it from Europe. Here I'm assuming you're outside Eu countries. That way you can save quite a large amount. Thus be able to spend money on other things or reduce your depreciation cost.
Oh see what Dirk has done with his M8.2 - just amazing: http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91392
Regards
Ash
Roger Hicks
Mentor
If you don't want fast wide-angles the M8/M8.2 is nothing like as limited as if you do like fast wides, provided you don't mind the IR filters. But as I've been using the 35/1.4 for 30 years or so, it's a lot easier and more versatile to stick with my existing lenses (15-21-35-50-75-90-135) on the front of an M9 than to buy a 24/1.4. And I can borrow my wife's 18 and 18 as well, and still have them work the same way as they do on my film Leicas.
Also, the M9 pics really do look different. Much more film-like. I now use the MP for B+W and the M9 for colour.
Cheers,
R.
Also, the M9 pics really do look different. Much more film-like. I now use the MP for B+W and the M9 for colour.
Cheers,
R.
Mudman
Well-known
You don't want to shoot a bear with a 35 or 50mm. Waaay too close. 135 is even a bit close, but would do much better.
Ben Z
Mentor
That's a very reasoned and reasonable response, being that it's clearly stated is based on your own personal priorities. I liked it much better than your first response:
...which assumes your priorities are or should be adopted by everyone.
as to:
I would ask like which particular film? Even in this day there are still quite a number of different emulsions, many of which I'm sure you would agree exhibit vastly different characteristics from one another.
ferider
Mentor
Hi Rugy: If it's a stretch for you, stay away. It's debatable if the M9 is better, maybe different than other full format digital cameras. For sure, it's more expensive and part of it is the brand. And unless you have used RFs and/or Leicas before, it's a risky proposition to have the M9 be your only digital.
Roger Hicks
Mentor
Just about everyone who's tried both agrees with me about the advantages of the M9, so it's not just a personal, idiosyncratic view. There are only three reasons I can easily think of to buy an M8 or M8.2 instead of an M9. There's the 1/8000 shutter speed (M8 only), the possibility of shooting IR through a visually near-opaque IR filter, and (most compellingly) the price. As the OP has already indicated that he doesn't want to buy the M8 only to find he'd rather have an M9, we may fairly assume he is not that worried about the price.
As for emulsion differences, you can emulate just about any colour film via software in post-production -- real film still rules for mono -- but I was thinking more about the 'airbrushed' look that you get even with the M8/M8.2. (Slow, sharp) film renders texture much more convincingly. So does a high-megapixel camera.
Cheers,
R.
proenca
Proenca
I'm with Roger and the others.
I've used the M8 since day 3 it was announced : I was actually in Singapore and passed by a shop and there she was... all beautifull and my wife said "Leica M digital ? c'mon, so at least I will see the pictures sooner ! " and didnt thought twice and bought it ( I used MP / M7 usually and wife always complaining about the turnaround of film )
Used it night and day to the point that my film bodies start gathering dust and sold them just due to the lack of no use.
M8 is a beautifull camera. But has many, many quirks. After a while you learn to live with it, with its flaws and like car enthusiasts ( Im one ) , they stop being flaws and start becoming personality .)
On January, my Leica Portugal dealer call me and said "oh you deserve a M9... ordered a couple extra ones - got a black one for you - interested ? "..
Well the wife was not so happy this time but I got it and veyr very very unfortunatly, I didnt had much time to shoot with the M9 because ... I'm adapting again !
Its a VERY VERY different camera - slower but better. High ISO really does makes a big big difference ( ISO 1250 and L3 is OK and in some situations 2000-2500 where before ISO 640 tops ) , focal lenghts changed, lens drawing change... all different.
But Roger made a beautifull comment : M8 or M8.2 are fantastic if you never see a M9.
They are just that good.
I've used the M8 since day 3 it was announced : I was actually in Singapore and passed by a shop and there she was... all beautifull and my wife said "Leica M digital ? c'mon, so at least I will see the pictures sooner ! " and didnt thought twice and bought it ( I used MP / M7 usually and wife always complaining about the turnaround of film )
Used it night and day to the point that my film bodies start gathering dust and sold them just due to the lack of no use.
M8 is a beautifull camera. But has many, many quirks. After a while you learn to live with it, with its flaws and like car enthusiasts ( Im one ) , they stop being flaws and start becoming personality .)
On January, my Leica Portugal dealer call me and said "oh you deserve a M9... ordered a couple extra ones - got a black one for you - interested ? "..
Well the wife was not so happy this time but I got it and veyr very very unfortunatly, I didnt had much time to shoot with the M9 because ... I'm adapting again !
Its a VERY VERY different camera - slower but better. High ISO really does makes a big big difference ( ISO 1250 and L3 is OK and in some situations 2000-2500 where before ISO 640 tops ) , focal lenghts changed, lens drawing change... all different.
But Roger made a beautifull comment : M8 or M8.2 are fantastic if you never see a M9.
They are just that good.
arnulf
Registered User
You have a wife who begged you to buy an m8?
You lucky, lucky boy!! ;-)
You lucky, lucky boy!! ;-)
rugyboogie
Newbie
To all of the respondents thank you for your comments and suggestions.
My range finder usage was limited to the Contax TVS and a Olympus XA.
Still have the XA, my 18 year old uses it .
The Leica will be used for interiors and exterior of the homes that I build.
I do not do wildlife, more family, vacations, architecture and landscape.
Sports we use my wife's Canon D20 or my old Nikon F2 AS which I bought new............how old am I ?
Because the wide angle is tres important for me I will save up for 9.
BUT..there is is deal close to me. Both items are new. Summarit 35 2.5 with a 8 for 3500 CDN. Sometimes a deal is a deal and I cannot resist.
Is this a deal?
Again thanks for the feedback really appreciate it.
Rugy
My range finder usage was limited to the Contax TVS and a Olympus XA.
Still have the XA, my 18 year old uses it .
The Leica will be used for interiors and exterior of the homes that I build.
I do not do wildlife, more family, vacations, architecture and landscape.
Sports we use my wife's Canon D20 or my old Nikon F2 AS which I bought new............how old am I ?
Because the wide angle is tres important for me I will save up for 9.
BUT..there is is deal close to me. Both items are new. Summarit 35 2.5 with a 8 for 3500 CDN. Sometimes a deal is a deal and I cannot resist.
Is this a deal?
Again thanks for the feedback really appreciate it.
Rugy
proenca
Proenca
Very simple :
- take a lot of pictures of her in vacation
- take the pictures of what she want
- take them on film ( Leica MP )
- wait a couple of weeks AFTER the vacation, to process them
- take another 2 weeks to scan them
- take extra 2 weeks to photoshop them and adjust
only after, show them for the first time.
rinse and repeat for 3 or 4 years.
trust me, she will BEG for you to buy a M digital - also helps if you remove wrinkles / pimples / imperfections and say that only happens with Leica glass. Get her P&S and take one picture of her, select face and put a wrong WB, strong sharpening mask. Works everytime.
She doesnt let me buy even Zeiss glass and was supportive when I bought a Noctilux :angel:
proenca
Proenca
M8 plus a Summarit 35 for 2750 euros or whereabouts ?
Sounds VERY pricey to me :
used M8 go for around 1500-1700 euros.
NEW summarits 35 2.5 go for 900-1050 euros ( dont know used )
So that is NOT a real deal... that is just me. at least these are the prices in Europe...
for that price you can buy a M8 plus a 35mm 2.0 preASPH.
But then again, if you REALLY love wide angles, buy a M9.
Or a M8 and a Heliar... Just remember that you wont have focus
