M9 - Convince me !

[TRSmith]

D&A:

It is exactly for the subtle reasons you list that I say I will someday purchase an M9. I love my M8 and will keep it until it crumbles. But those little extras in the M9, while not earth shatteringly better, are enough to make me want one.

Could a photographer make delightful images with an M8 and never bother with the added expense of an M9? Certainly! Many do. And it's one of the reasons posters are asked to label the shots they include in the thread for digital M images—it's pretty hard to tell a difference at screen resolution.

But for the little bit extra the M9 gives in color and resolution along with the real difference in lens focal length (the two lenses I now own will virtually become four if I have a choice of bodies on which to mount them) that I will, someday, spring for an M9.

 

[D&A]

Hi TRSmith,

I'm in complete agreement with you and thats why for certain applications (of mine), I too will eventually turn to the M9 more so than the M8. It's that extra bit of difference that can "make the difference"...but only in certain circumstances and I believe it's not all that often, no matter how demanding the requirements are when it comes to comparing the M8 to an M9. Even when comparing large format prints substantially larger than A2, there often is only a subtle difference at best (of course subject dependent).

As for doubling the number of focal lengths of two lenses into four.... by using an M8 along side and M9....somewhat true but not quite like using a Nikon D3 (full frame) and Nikon D300 (1.5x crop) side by side with lenses. There is the issue of UVIR filter use (or not use)when using M8 and M9 simultaniously and because the crop factor is 1.3 rather than the 1.5 in the NIkon example above, there is generally more overlap of apparent focal lenth...but of course it's dependent on the lenses one is using (but I understand your point). I think sometimes, regardles of brand, the evolutionary changes one finds in a just released upgraded camera, is often overstated. As fine a camera as the Nikon D2x was at the time, the D3 was a revolutionary and tremendous step forward. I'm not certain I can personally say the same thing comparing a M8 vs. an M9...although the changes depending on ones application, can be significant at least for certain endevors.

Dave (D&A)

 

[drxcm]

Well, thanks to all the posters - I'm convinced.

In fact, I just walked in the door with a nice new black M9. :thumbs:

 

[tom in mpls]

I just walked in the door with a nice new black M9. :thumbs:

Nice! You must tell us YOUR impression. But we'll give you an hour to play with it before you must report.:salute:

 

[mwalker]

you won't regret it... thats for sure

 

[stevem8]

I'm just about to pull the trigger on an M9 but can't help feel a little concerned about a few of the things I've read here and there on the net..

Could some M9 owners put my mind at rest and convince me that this camera is 'worth it' ...

A few of my concerns - in order on most concerning to me to least..

1. Dust magnet
2. Battery life
3. Shutter lag
4. Slow processor

I'm either thinking of an M9, or holding out and getting a 24 lux and an M8 to tide me over to the M9.2 or whatever it will be..

Any comments and opinions most welcome!

Cheers,
Stuart

1. This one is not really true. I have shot my M9 EVERY day for the last 70 days and have no dust issue. Use a rocket blower 2x per week and it will stay clean.

2. I get about 300 shots per charge.

3. Lag? Does not affect me at all.

4. Yes, it is slow, but so is an M7.

Best digital (IMO) on the market for IQ.

 

[drxcm]

Haven't had much of a chance to play yet, but have briefly tested the camera and will say that I have what seems to be a perfect copy.

One thing that is immediately noticeable - coming from an M3 and an M6TTL, I have to say that the shutter release has a rough, cheap feel to it. Certainly not the silky smooth travel that the film M's have. A minor detail. Similarly the dial on the back seems a bit more plasticky and rough in its travel than I would have expected. In comparing to my Canon 20d and my friends 5d the controls feel much 'cheaper'.

The body is extremely compact and light for a full frame camera however, and I am totally happy so far.

More opinions after I have shot with it a little...

 

[tom in mpls]

...the dial on the back seems a bit more plasticky and rough in its travel than I would have expected. In comparing to my Canon 20d and my friends 5d the controls feel much 'cheaper'.

If it's the same dial as my M8, I don't have the same impression. I have used 5D and other DSLR's and agree that it doesn't rotate as easily, and I would like it to turn more easily, but I don't thinks the quality feels any less (or more) than the others. Again, I do find it harder to turn. Better design would have been appreciated by me.

 

[jklotz]

I would like it to turn more easily, , I do find it harder to turn.

A clear sign that it has not been used enough!

 

[Stuart Richardson]

I think Daniel, Tim and James Klotz are really going down the right track here. The M9 is the closest experience yet to using a film M (this is a very good thing), and it is much easier to use in conjunction with film M's. It is full frame, so if you just want your standard two lens kits on a film and digital body, you do not need to bring four lenses. When you switch between cameras, the framelines are the same, your lenses draw the same on each camera, and you do not need IR filters, so you don't need to fuss with taking filters on and off. Shooting with the film M's, the cameras just tend to disappear -- I notice that the M9 seems to do this better than the M8 did for me -- the shutter is quieter (at least than the original one), the viewfinder is essentially identical to the M7 -- especially the framelines. This makes a huge difference for me.

If you like shooting with rangefinders and want a digital camera, this is the best game in town. If you also like shooting film, then I recommend it even more highly -- the whole shooting process is really streamlined when your 35mm is a 35mm on film and digital, the framelines are the same, and you don't need any special filters. Also, the ability to shoot without IR filters opens up a lot more lenses to be used more easily, and the wide angles are a lot easier to deal with -- a 21mm lens is really wide again, rather than a moderate wide.

This is also ignoring the gains that the M9 has made in high ISO and resolution. Overall it is just more appropriate heir to the film M's. I don't really feel that it is competing with the high meg SLR's -- they offer more flexibility, much larger and heavier systems, mostly inferior lenses (mostly...there are always exceptions), and more technical prowess. It is the old rangefinder versus SLR debate.

 

[drxcm]

The M9 is the closest experience yet to using a film M (this is a very good thing).

After spending a day or two with the camera, this is absolutely true.

I'm thrilled, what a wonderful camera.

 

[gogopix]

I must say that the procerssor is notably slower than the M8 - but then that may be due to the larger files and the fact that it uses 16bit vs 8bit (with log mapping) in the M8. It CAN hold up taking shots in sequence. Happened more than once in first 100 shots.

The shutter does not have lag, and may be quieter than the M8, but I find the "click....whrrrrrrr." really annoying. It is why I kept my M8 and did not go to the M8.2.

I am getting poor battery life, mostly running down when off (go figure) and the new charger doesnt get to 100% (more like 70%.

The IQ is great, but for me so was the M8. The 18/ vs 10MP and the non IR cut filter business are good ( I have a profile, and never had more than 1-2 Pix per 1000 with only small magentaissues anyway !),

...so I guess I am happy enoughwith the M9 . But I was just as happy with the M8!

If faced with the buy decision today I would likely just have kept the M8. If you find a good one, buy it!

Regards
Victor

 

[beamon]

I am getting poor battery life, mostly running down when off (go figure) and the new charger doesnt get to 100% (more like 70%.
Victor

That shouldn't be, Victor. Sounds like a battery issue rather than a problem with the charger. If it has undercharged from the beginning, and you can borrow another battery and find that it fully charges with your charger, then ask for a replacement battery.