The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Why the M9 is the near pefec camera for me

Paratom

Well-known member
t_streng

Do you feel strongly enough about the M9 that you'd consider a dSLR like a Pentax K5 unnecessary?

Mike
To be honest - for me personally: no

I have a small daughter, and I do like sports. So sometimes I feel the need to be able to use a 70-200/2.8 ish lens and AF.
Also sometimes when I need to just get fast and reliable images I prefer a Nikon and a zoom and a flash.

Now on the other side on my 2,5 weeks summer vacation I just brought the M9 with some lenses and the x1 and didntmiss anything.
So I would say it depends what you plan to "shoot".
 

PeterA

Well-known member
I am a tad forensic in my self analysis. I do a yearly review of how many shots I have bothered to make and keep and print. I have been silly enough to collect far too many cameras and lenses I care to talk about - because quite seriously I am embarrassed. I bought an M9 in February last year - when one became available.

Since that time I have made over 80% of my shots with the camera using 7 different lenses - but the great majority with the 50 lux I picked up at the same time to add to my 50mm collection - it seems to be the focal length that suits me the best. So useage means it is the best camera for me - and a lot of other stuff is gathering dust.

I note the following minor issues.

Accessories: I do need a thumbs up and it a most perfect device, I also believe that one should invest in one of those screw in buttons that go on top of the shutter release and I think a Luigi case is mandatory - especially the type that has access for card and battery

Post Processing: The M9 delivers files which require the least amount of post processing - compared to my Nikon D3 which requires extensive work - too much actually. I use Aperture/Lightroom/C1 and Adobe - and cant see much difference between any of them.

Lenses: It all depends on what type of shooting one does- but I rarely go longer than a 50mm or wider than 21mm. The 75 Elmarit is a very under rated lens.

So I guess my own usage and experience suggests to me that the M9 is my favourite camera too. It will be interesting to see if this remains the case when I get an S2.
 

MCTuomey

New member
To be honest - for me personally: no

I have a small daughter, and I do like sports. So sometimes I feel the need to be able to use a 70-200/2.8 ish lens and AF.
Also sometimes when I need to just get fast and reliable images I prefer a Nikon and a zoom and a flash.

Now on the other side on my 2,5 weeks summer vacation I just brought the M9 with some lenses and the x1 and didntmiss anything.
So I would say it depends what you plan to "shoot".
Thanks for responding, t_streng. I appreciate your point of view, not owning an M9 myself. What seems interesting is that some M9 users report that they feel comfortable selling their medium format film equipment after spending time with the Leica. On the other hand, like you, I shoot sports and, as long as I do so, will need a fast dSLR and a long tele lens, no question. But otherwise, it could just be an M9 and a couple lenses ...
 

Paratom

Well-known member
I am a tad forensic in my self analysis. I do a yearly review of how many shots I have bothered to make and keep and print. I have been silly enough to collect far too many cameras and lenses I care to talk about - because quite seriously I am embarrassed. I bought an M9 in February last year - when one became available.

Since that time I have made over 80% of my shots with the camera using 7 different lenses - but the great majority with the 50 lux I picked up at the same time to add to my 50mm collection - it seems to be the focal length that suits me the best. So useage means it is the best camera for me - and a lot of other stuff is gathering dust.

I note the following minor issues.

Accessories: I do need a thumbs up and it a most perfect device, I also believe that one should invest in one of those screw in buttons that go on top of the shutter release and I think a Luigi case is mandatory - especially the type that has access for card and battery

Post Processing: The M9 delivers files which require the least amount of post processing - compared to my Nikon D3 which requires extensive work - too much actually. I use Aperture/Lightroom/C1 and Adobe - and cant see much difference between any of them.

Lenses: It all depends on what type of shooting one does- but I rarely go longer than a 50mm or wider than 21mm. The 75 Elmarit is a very under rated lens.

So I guess my own usage and experience suggests to me that the M9 is my favourite camera too. It will be interesting to see if this remains the case when I get an S2.
I also did such an analyse some time ago.
Focal length I use most are 50 and then 24 and 35 (FOV).
I also like 75 here and then - I prefer it over 90 today.
21 sometimes but not very often-the WATE, which I used much on the M8 is not used any more at all.

When using a 70-200 on the Nikon I mostly shoot at the 70mm end or the 200m long end.
 

fotografz

Well-known member
For me, camera types and brands come and go ... the one constant has been a M rangefinder ... for 40+ years.

It doesn't matter what quantity of images were shot with what format, type or brand ... what matters is ... which are the best? Which ones make the portfolio, website and into print ... Year after year?

The combination of the rangefinder way of seeing with its skew toward content as opposed to "lens look", my personal vision or approach, and IQ makes any analyst of minor inconveniences irrelevant IMO ... unless they become a dominate factor in preventing you from shooting.

I don't want or need clutter in the viewfinder ... nor a camera like this to do much of the thinking. Use the camera enough and most of it becomes second nature.

Don't like CMOS sensors that need AA filtration degrading the IQ either.

Is the M9 perfect? Not quite. A short cut to setting manual WB with a one button exposure of an Xrite pocket WB card like my H4D does would be great. That's about it for me.

I periodically do a check of Exif data of my most prized images ... it always surprises me. Some of my most used gear produces the least kept for samples. Mostly long lenses (beyond 85mm) and zooms on a DSLR ... be it Canon, Nikon, or Sony. A majority of shots from a wedding are from a 24-70 ... and the least "prized shots" are from a ... 24-70 :wtf: Basically I do all the manditory "donkey" work with the easiest solution ... which includes use of a speed-light. Lately less of that, which I assign to my second shooter, so I'm freed up to just shoot more available light with the M9.

This data also reveals ISO considerations. A vast majority are ISO 800 or below ... making high ISO yet another big expense for very little return. Dumped my D700 and never missed it for a second.

I do need AF for some work ... mostly the Donkey shots because I'm lazy ... I could easily set up the M9 to do them too ... but why?

Too bad Leica didn't make the R-10 with the same type sensor performance and some AF lenses ... then those requiring long lenses and zooms for their work could enjoy a similar IQ.

-Marc
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
"Don't like CMOS sensors that need AA filtration degrading the IQ either."

Marc, this is a Hall Of Fame Quote. I've fought that fight for way too long myself, and not going to be sad seeing it go. For me, nothing looks as close to film as a CCD sensor without an AA filter. Only Leica seems to agree with us.

Low ISO = Low Noise. I shoot as low as I can possibly get by with. Even using noise reduction processing techniques or noise removal plugins the color always goes to smush, so why bother?

Ditto on the ambient shooting and leaving the flash home. If I want blown out highlights or faces with big white circles on them, screaming white circles of light on background walls complete with hard edge black shadows, or crazy catch-lites in the eyes I will put 'em in myself in post. Or set them up deliberately if they are to be used as a creative technique. I don't need the surprises at the computer doing the post workup either that using a shoe flash always provides....

Get decent with practice at shooting hand-held down to 1/8th, and with a fast lens it won't matter a whit anyway. You may not nail many at 1/8th to start off with, and yes it does take time to learn and master the tricks to do it consistently, but the ones you do nail are pure magic. Also just think, once you get decent at 1/8 then at 1/25th you will nail most all of them, and that is where you end up the majority of the time in my experience anyway. One of those "tricks" I spoke of above. Learning how to breathe properly is another.

I've never gotten that many keeper shots running around advertising by shooting flash. Those posed flash shots never seem to rank above the atmospheric and emotional moments ambient light provides either, in my selection, or my clients.

I also hate even the words "good enough." WTF is "Good Enough" anyway? Autofocus that lands ears half the time when you shot eyes? f/1.4 sharp forehead wrinkles and soft lashes? Got plenty of those in my rejected selections when I shot Canon. Of course, always the best ones too.... <Grin>. Give me manual everything and easy to change up when I need to. I'm smart enough for both myself and my camera, I don't need it competing with my own ego trying to show off it's intelligence (stupidity) at my image's expense!
 

JimCollum

Member
have been playing with my M9 now for only a few weeks.. and have to agree with the majority of owners on this thread.. If i had to give up all cameras but one.. I'd be hanging onto the M9.
 

Chuck Jones

Subscriber Member
:cry: Doug, I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this brother, but don't go and drop that DMR in one of those swamps your always crawling around in. You'll not find anything from anyone else that really replaces it. Not with the same clarity, color, depth, or lens quality. I've used the lot of 'em, and as you know owned two DMR's myself. I'd take a DMR today over any of the others probably given the choice. Pretty sad commentary? No. I just love the CCD and Leica glass look, and find everything else thin in post. But given your own excellent images, I'm sure you already know that.

The M9, in my opinion, will pretty well replace the DMR body, but you'd have to go to a VisoFlex to get the kind of lens reach you need for your type of work. And that R glass simply can not be beat. I'm still using a couple of them on my 7D for video, and loving it. If you want to have an interesting day, next time it rains go through an old Leica catalog showing the Visoflex system. Take a look at the myriad assortment of gizmo's, attachments, adapters and do-dads they Rube Goldberged together over the years to get all of the parts to work together. They made that thing for almost fifty years! Imagine Leica quality designed by Salvador Dali while smoking some great weed, and you'd be close. :ROTFL:

That said, I can't see myself ever giving up my M9 as long as I can afford to keep a camera. It does everything very nicely that I want to do, while also providing me the enjoyment and the pleasure of working up it's files in post.... not working around their short comings. The M9 also has enough pixels I can crop whatever way I want, and still have plenty to print. Hard to argue with near perfection. Every camera has some warts, the M9 no exception. It's particular warts don't really bother me. The SLR's do.
 

doug

Well-known member
:cry: Doug, I'm sorry to have to be the one to tell you this brother, but don't go and drop that DMR in one of those swamps your always crawling around in. You'll not find anything from anyone else that really replaces it.
Yup that's why I have two.

If you want to have an interesting day, next time it rains go through an old Leica catalog showing the Visoflex system. Take a look at the myriad assortment of gizmo's, attachments, adapters and do-dads they Rube Goldberged together over the years to get all of the parts to work together. They made that thing for almost fifty years! Imagine Leica quality designed by Salvador Dali while smoking some great weed, and you'd be close. :ROTFL:
Amazing how much could be done with the Viso system. I experimented using myself as the test dummy to see how much automation I can do without, stepping back in time one feature at a time to see where I started to suffer. I found that AF I can do without, likewise auto exposure, but I drew the line at the auto diaphragm. I'd suffer with the Visoflex system, but not because of the M9 I'd attach to it. Going without the auto-diaphragm would cramp my style. Also there are no APO lenses for the Visoflex :(
 
Top