raid
Dad Photographer
I minimized the cost by buying used digital M cameras, and offering trades. It helped.
uhoh7
Mentor
Sony crapped out. I could no longer hold out. LOL
raid
Dad Photographer
If there are limitations to the creativity, it usually is not the camera's fault. It is my fault. I am not anymore dwelling on type of camera used. I pay more attention to the lens choices.
x-ray
Mentor
I've used Leicas since 1968 and like RF's for some of my work. My commercial work is entirely digital and I thought I'd like to have an M9 to complement my Nikon and Hasselblad digital gear.
I read a lot and was aware of all the initial issues with the M9 but later in the cycle I read so much positive about It I thought most of the issues had been corrected. Unfortunately I believed what I read and purchased one. I'm sad to say it was a disaster of an experience. I've learned two things, never buy anything digital made by Leica ever and never believe internet hype. It was a very costly mistake but I've learned my lesson.
I read a lot and was aware of all the initial issues with the M9 but later in the cycle I read so much positive about It I thought most of the issues had been corrected. Unfortunately I believed what I read and purchased one. I'm sad to say it was a disaster of an experience. I've learned two things, never buy anything digital made by Leica ever and never believe internet hype. It was a very costly mistake but I've learned my lesson.
burancap
Mentor
Which one? LOL
airfrogusmc
Mentor
I use a F/L that matches my vision just like my choice of camera. The lens happens to be 35mm on FF.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I wanted to shoot digital shots with my Leica lenses, and I wanted to do it with an RF camera, for the compactness.
Richard G
Mentor
1. To save money, and time. See later... (and see Mike Johnston's Letter to George in his The Online Photographer blog. It's very funny and very true.)
2. Because I wanted it. I bought it perhaps a little on impulse, but it was a silver M9-P looking so much like a brand new M2 out of a time capsule, and I just had to have it.
The reference to the saving above is that I would otherwise have invested heavily in the Fuji system, X-Pro 1. That would have seen me buy two lenses immediately as well. And then more would come. Then there would be a successor like the latest Fuji, and so it would go on. By getting the M9-P I could shoot full frame with all my lenses. Up until March 2012 I was mainly using film (M5 mostly) and had the wonderful little Fuji X100. If I went Fuji interchangeable I was looking at holding a whole lot of unused M mount lenses as I wouldn't get rid of them, and I'd shoot film occasionally, maybe only very occasionally.
Getting the M9-P took me out of needing new lenses and took me out of the upgrade cycle. I had been happy with the 1970s M5, and was still using my 1950s M2. A ten year old M9-P if still useable would have been fine for me.
When the M240 came out I considered it in detail and realised that I would indeed by quite happy adding the Monochrom. With the recent sensor program news I think I am outside of the upgrade cycle for some time. This year the only new camera I bought was a Leica II (1932) and apart from the little Elmar that came with that I have bought no new lenses. Am I happy with my decisions? Yes.
2. Because I wanted it. I bought it perhaps a little on impulse, but it was a silver M9-P looking so much like a brand new M2 out of a time capsule, and I just had to have it.
The reference to the saving above is that I would otherwise have invested heavily in the Fuji system, X-Pro 1. That would have seen me buy two lenses immediately as well. And then more would come. Then there would be a successor like the latest Fuji, and so it would go on. By getting the M9-P I could shoot full frame with all my lenses. Up until March 2012 I was mainly using film (M5 mostly) and had the wonderful little Fuji X100. If I went Fuji interchangeable I was looking at holding a whole lot of unused M mount lenses as I wouldn't get rid of them, and I'd shoot film occasionally, maybe only very occasionally.
Getting the M9-P took me out of needing new lenses and took me out of the upgrade cycle. I had been happy with the 1970s M5, and was still using my 1950s M2. A ten year old M9-P if still useable would have been fine for me.
When the M240 came out I considered it in detail and realised that I would indeed by quite happy adding the Monochrom. With the recent sensor program news I think I am outside of the upgrade cycle for some time. This year the only new camera I bought was a Leica II (1932) and apart from the little Elmar that came with that I have bought no new lenses. Am I happy with my decisions? Yes.
x-ray
Mentor
I'm curious what would have made it a poor camera?
music_healing
Well-known
for many years.. I swore I wouldnt buy any of the super expensive Leica M digital (8-9-9P-ME-MM or 240)
for digital, i ve been using panasonic GF and Sony Nex for 3 years (all with M lens) ...
but most of the photos I took with analog M (+/- 70-80 % )
since in my country, there is only few color studio lab (C41)
and none of the lab ever provide me with the standard I want
and zero E6 lab
I always get dissapointed by the color of the labs...
I always wait each week as the first customer (fresh developer)
I consult to the scanner technician, etc..
but the color in my head... never match the output
...
so I lent many digital , A7 series, EM5, EM1, GX7, GR, Fuji X100, XT1 (every mirrorless available)...
but the shooting experiences and the output file is still not there yet
finally I give up
when a friend , get his ME serviced, with brand new sensor, brand new warranty, all body is fixed like new
he offer me that ME for very cheap price ..
I take the trigger
for color.. I shot ME now.. for black and white, i prefer M analog
in very good weather and air ... I shoot Portra , Rollei CN200 and Superia 800
so the reason is
- no good color lab available... the output of the available lab is not there to my standard.
- the experience , I used to RF focusing ... other mirrorless still cant match the RF experiences
So .. thats the story
Sincerely
William
for digital, i ve been using panasonic GF and Sony Nex for 3 years (all with M lens) ...
but most of the photos I took with analog M (+/- 70-80 % )
since in my country, there is only few color studio lab (C41)
and none of the lab ever provide me with the standard I want
and zero E6 lab
I always get dissapointed by the color of the labs...
I always wait each week as the first customer (fresh developer)
I consult to the scanner technician, etc..
but the color in my head... never match the output
...
so I lent many digital , A7 series, EM5, EM1, GX7, GR, Fuji X100, XT1 (every mirrorless available)...
but the shooting experiences and the output file is still not there yet
finally I give up
when a friend , get his ME serviced, with brand new sensor, brand new warranty, all body is fixed like new
he offer me that ME for very cheap price ..
I take the trigger
for color.. I shot ME now.. for black and white, i prefer M analog
in very good weather and air ... I shoot Portra , Rollei CN200 and Superia 800
so the reason is
- no good color lab available... the output of the available lab is not there to my standard.
- the experience , I used to RF focusing ... other mirrorless still cant match the RF experiences
So .. thats the story
Sincerely
William
MCTuomey
Mentor
No other digital body that integrates as well with M glass.
raid
Dad Photographer
The M9 gives me beautiful colors in scenes where there are subtle colors. This is important to me. I can capture pastel colored beach scenes in low light with vintage Leica and Zeiss optics.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Off topic, but: that's why I'm just thinking either go back to film (which I'm doing now) or just sell the darn lenses.
ktmrider
Well-known
Have had M cameras since 1975 and thus several M mount lenses. Wanted to try digital so tried an X100 for travel. I was impressed with the technology for travel and about a year ago, I found a deal on an M9 which had just come from Leica, NJ, so I bit the bullet.
Am sure the M9 will be just fine for my needs for several years. Do not have any plans to upgrade any time soon. I may sell a couple lenses that do not see much use. During a 90 day trip to Europe this year, the 35mm focal length provided about 90 percent or better of the photos taken so future travel looks to be M9 with 35/90.
Am sure the M9 will be just fine for my needs for several years. Do not have any plans to upgrade any time soon. I may sell a couple lenses that do not see much use. During a 90 day trip to Europe this year, the 35mm focal length provided about 90 percent or better of the photos taken so future travel looks to be M9 with 35/90.
x-ray
Mentor
I've gone bak to film. No headaches with film.
Pioneer
Mentor
Sure there are. Just everyone knows what they are. No surprises.
MCTuomey
Mentor
Yeah, that's it. I spent a lot of time and effort getting my M glass together, not ready to let it go. I've shot more film in the last 6 weeks than in the last 2 years.
Sorry to go OT.
peterm1
Mentor
As hinted at on Raids other and similar thread I have been a long time film M shooter who had owned two M3s and an M4P plus a variety of M and LTM lenses and wanted something digital with a similar feel to film Ms now that I largely shoot digital not film.
It took me a few years to decide to purchase an M8 having previously tried a few different alternatives like the Panasonic L1 which although it is an SLR has a very RF look and feel to it. That camera was quite nice in its own way, in its day, but was big and bulky and did not take Leica M lenses although various SLR lenses would mount with adapters. It gave a sort of rangefinder feel. Later a Sony NEX and M4/3 cameras have followed and although they are easier to shoot that a Leica M in both AF (naturally) and MF mode they still don't have THAT feel.
Never the less as I have recounted on the other thread, I do feel somewhat disappointed with my M8 as it is not a mature product really and involves a number of compromises. Will I buy another M sometime? Probably not at least in the foreseeable future and of course now that there are revelations that M9 (and derivative cameras) sensors are faulty that option is, well not an option.
So I think it will have to be some other camera for me, maybe a Sony NEX 7 or maybe one of Fuji's great offerings if I want to further upgrade. I certainly like the results I get from my existing NEX camera but it is one that does not have an eye level finder and as I much prefer using an eye level finder it is a little deficient in that respect. Quite apart from this general preference, reliance on an LCD is not even an option when shooting in bright sunlight as reflections off the screen make it near as dammit impossible to view.
It took me a few years to decide to purchase an M8 having previously tried a few different alternatives like the Panasonic L1 which although it is an SLR has a very RF look and feel to it. That camera was quite nice in its own way, in its day, but was big and bulky and did not take Leica M lenses although various SLR lenses would mount with adapters. It gave a sort of rangefinder feel. Later a Sony NEX and M4/3 cameras have followed and although they are easier to shoot that a Leica M in both AF (naturally) and MF mode they still don't have THAT feel.
Never the less as I have recounted on the other thread, I do feel somewhat disappointed with my M8 as it is not a mature product really and involves a number of compromises. Will I buy another M sometime? Probably not at least in the foreseeable future and of course now that there are revelations that M9 (and derivative cameras) sensors are faulty that option is, well not an option.
So I think it will have to be some other camera for me, maybe a Sony NEX 7 or maybe one of Fuji's great offerings if I want to further upgrade. I certainly like the results I get from my existing NEX camera but it is one that does not have an eye level finder and as I much prefer using an eye level finder it is a little deficient in that respect. Quite apart from this general preference, reliance on an LCD is not even an option when shooting in bright sunlight as reflections off the screen make it near as dammit impossible to view.
Duane Pandorf
Well-known
Its real simple for me. I've found a synergy with the combination Leica glass on the Leica digital M that I never found with any other camera I've owned.
airfrogusmc
Mentor
I never cared for the M8. THe MM though is in my opinion Leica's finest digital effort and is the camera I shoot all of my personal work with. I tried some of the mirrorless cameras and tried a Fuji before buying and bought the MM. I prefer it over all of my digital camera's. I am an old film shooter (zone system for a time, yes I did all the tests)and this is the only camera digital or film that I had as much pleasure shooting as I did with my Blads or when I shot with an 8X10 Deardorff.