Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    (...start saving cash?)

    I want an M9, and I want a Summilux 35/1.4.

    I donīt get paid to shoot, but I do sell a couple of larger frames every once in a while. Iīm now on an old-coming 1D mkII, and use pretty much only one lens (24/1.4). However much this actually is a great setup for me, itīs not in the least discreet, and screams photographer wherever I go. I donīt have any gripes with the weight, but I canīt deny that this can get heavy over longer periods of time.

    Iīve become enamoured with the size and inconspicuousness of the M9, and I hear that the 35 up there isnīt half bad either.

    I shoot two things - street candids and landscapes. I sell the landscapes, the street stuff is for my personal enjoyment. Both of these can often be shot in really bad weather, hence why I keep dragging the 1D around. Is the Leica as tough weather related as the 1D? Obviously, the lenses arenīt rubber gasketed to the amount of Canonīs L line, but I would hazard a guess that a certainly professional camera like the M9 would not be built like a toy, either?

    I would love running around in Paris with only a 600g black little camera that doesnīt look like much shooting like I did last fall, without the looks from certain folks eyeing the equipment from 10-20 metres afar.

    So, the cost. I would be able to get a new 1Ds mkIII and a 35/1.4, and a 70-200/2.8 for the price of the M9+35/1.4. Has anyone done this using my rationale? It should be taken into consideration that my non-photography work would be eaten up by about 35% after taxes the year Iīm putting out for this.

    Iīve almost been sleepless thinking about the beauty and simplicity of this camera, but I need sane people to bring me down. Thank you all.

  2. #2
    Senior Member dude163's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Brunswick , Canada
    Posts
    1,111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Ill calm you down, buy a used M8

    there....... saved you 4 thousand USD!

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    But, but, but!! I want a 135 frame! Haha.

  4. #4
    Senior Member stephengilbert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Santa Monica, CA
    Posts
    2,274
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    "But, but, but!! I want a 135 frame! Haha."

    Get a 28mm lens.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    You people being sensible and all. Iīll wait.

  6. #6
    Senior Member Per Ofverbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Quote Originally Posted by arild View Post
    But, but, but!! I want a 135 frame! Haha.
    Youīll find that 135 on the M9 (and other M bodies too) is quite difficult to use. First, itīs difficult to focus reliably; the tolerances are almost nonexistent, so a substantial percentage of the shots will be misfocussed, unless stopped down a lot (which calls for a sturdy tripod in most cases). Second, the 135 mm frame (except possibly on a M3) is so small that seeing and composing the image is a challenge.

    That said, both the discontinued Tele-Elmar 4/135 and the current 3.4/135 Apo are optically extremely good. But with the rangefinder, no... (I use my Tele-Elmar only on a Visoflex III housing).

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    1DS III + 35 1.4 + 70-200 2.8 IS II ~ 7000 + 1500 + 2380 = $10880

    Leica M9 + 35 1.4 ASPH FLE ~ 7000 + 5000 = $12000

    Above are new prices listed on bhphoto.

    But, a new 35 lux FLE will be a hard find and will pay more for used unless you are willing to wait for the new one.

    If buying used, I think the gap will increase even more. M9 hasn't dropped much in price relative to 1DS III, and the 35 lux FLE commands price even higher than new these days.
    Scott

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    I currently don't make a dime on my photography and have invested upwards of $25k, so maybe I'm not the right person to talk to either. It is an expensive hobby for me to say the least.
    Scott

  9. #9
    Senior Member dude163's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    New Brunswick , Canada
    Posts
    1,111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Arild, i wasnt trying to be a jerk, I was out and about using my hipster iPhone

    a m8.2 can be had for around 3500 , a vanilla m8 for close to 2250 , and if you grabbed a summicron 35 instead of a lux youd save a lot of cash and still get the leica experience!
    The M9 is definitely the belle of the ball, but the M8 isnt a piece of junk, I'm quite taken with mine, and I use old lenses on it, my NEW lens is from 1973 ( elmarit 135) and my main lens is a summicron 50/2 from 1964

    EDIT: Thinking more about it a 24mm summilux 1.4 would be a 32mm on the m8s crop sensor so that might be an option too.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    287
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    1Ds mkIII and a 35/1.4, and a 70-200/2.8 for the price of the M9+35/1.4
    I know which I'd rather have (and do) but that Canon setup is not something to be sneezed at. I think you should think long and hard about how important that telephoto capability is to what you currently use a camera for.

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Iīd not give up the telephoto or even think of using such a focal length on an RF. Iīd keep the Canon for those blinks of the eye. And itīs not like I donīt like using an SLR, I really do, but the size is rather cumbersome, and the smaller SLRs donīt have what I demand from an SLR. Yes, I am talking about the 5D mkII. If youīre going to have AF, make it right.

    Dude; I didnīt take you for being a jerk, donīt worry. I havenīt read much that says the M8 is an inferior camera to the M9, barring of course the frame size, and I have considered going that route quite often.

    Per: I wasnīt referring to 135mm, I was referring to the 135 film format (perhaps more commonly known as 36x24mm).

    Thank you all sincerely for your replies. Itīs been a fun evening here in Norway. I think Iīm just going to save up those $10k either way, and decide what to do then. Shouldnīt take me more than a year or two, and would be bomb proof from the future wife (getting hitched in nov). Have a good day, everyone!

  12. #12
    Senior Member Per Ofverbeck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    503
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    5

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Quote Originally Posted by arild View Post
    ...Per: I wasnīt referring to 135mm, I was referring to the 135 film format (perhaps more commonly known as 36x24mm).
    ....
    OK, get it...

    But youīll still be without those lovely sprocket holes.....

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    233
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Quote Originally Posted by SYGTAFOTO View Post
    I currently don't make a dime on my photography and have invested upwards of $25k, so maybe I'm not the right person to talk to either. It is an expensive hobby for me to say the least.
    I would argue that Photography is a very inexpensive hobby compared to many other things, and I am sure a lot of people here have made money on their Leica gears over the years so the net cost could well be zero or negative.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Itīs in most cases cheaper than collecting classic cars, for one thing.

  15. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    GTA, Canada
    Posts
    587
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Quote Originally Posted by Araakii View Post
    I would argue that Photography is a very inexpensive hobby compared to many other things, and I am sure a lot of people here have made money on their Leica gears over the years so the net cost could well be zero or negative.
    Your argument is valid and obvious at the same time. Indeed, there are more expensive hobbies as well as cheaper hobbies.
    Perspective of photography being expensive/inexpensive is based on each individual's circumstances. This part is obvious too.
    This is why I included "expensive for me" in my reply.

    You are also correct that in many cases, people make money buying/selling gears. Funny thing is that you have to sell to realize the gain, and it's hard to sell Leica gear once they are in your hands! So until you actually sell the items, it's cost to you.
    I now have 3x 35mm lenses which is nothing compared to some others here.
    Scott

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    Thanks again for all your replies. I got married last friday in Paris, and my best manīs +1 knew I was very interested in trying his camera, an M9, with the CV 35/1.2. Sufficient to say, that was a lot of fun. Some shots got misfocused, but thatīs due to my eyesight not having been corrected for quite some time. That was an amazing experience!

    Officially saving up for a black M9 with a Cron/Lux 35. I donīt think Iīd need much more. Thisīll probably take me two years or so, but until then, I can abuse whatīs left of the shutter on my Canon rigs.

    On the Lux 35, I do wonder about something. Does it resolve at itīs absolute best at f/1.4, or does it, like most other lenses, improve on stopping down? Varying information on the interwebs.. The reason I ask, is that this setup would be used for everything I do. Street and landscape, like the thread starting post says.

    I found a justifying factor in favour of the Leica.. Iīd need a smaller tripod, which is cheaper than a big one. In most cases.

  17. #17
    Subscriber Member weinschela's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    New York suburb
    Posts
    458
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    The 35 Summilux is like any other lens, better stopped down than wide open, but still excellent wide open. If you are taking 2 years to save up, you are also missing 2 years of fun, but by that time there will be a M10 and M9's may be less expensive -- and used ones more plentiful.
    Alan

    Selection of work: http://weinschela.zenfolio.com

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Tromsø, Norway
    Posts
    109
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should I(...)? (M9 related)

    I still have a camera or three, so Iīm not missing out on any photography, and besides, the things I shoot arenīt going anywhere.

    Thank you for confirming that about the Lux. Didnīt make much sense to me if this lens really was at itīs sharpest at f/1.4, but some sources actually say so.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •