M9 ... time for a time-out

[Godfrey]

Copal have made Nikon focal-plane shutters from the year dot, and now make the shutters for digital 'M's.

I seem to recall the first Nikon SLRs with Copal shutters were the models with the vertically running shutter in the late 1960s/early 1970s ... Nikkormat, I guess. The Copal Square shutter of that time was the basis of many cameras, offering a higher flash sync speed and low cost with good quality. The horizontal running shutters in Nikon RF and F series cameras up to the F3 was a Nikon design, I think.

It makes sense for camera companies to go with a specialist vendor for the design and manufacture of the shutter.

G

 

[seakayaker]

FWIW, i called Leica NJ in December and arranged to have my M9 sent in for repair. They requested it arrive by January 15th for them to inspect. I received a letter this week stating that they will replace the sensor under the warranty program and the work should be completed by February 27th.

So I am happy that this is coming to a satisfactory conclusion. I hope to enjoy several more years of use with the M9.

 

[Godfrey]

My repair estimate for the M9 arrived yesterday. Yes, the sensor needs replacement. Free of charge, with a new leatherette body cover as well (evidently the same one used in the M9-P), and a full service CLA/adjustment/etc. They'll be able to have it done by March 6 or thereabouts.

I called this morning and asked about the exchange/update price to an M-P typ 240. That would cost $3750. Savings of $4200 off the new price of an M-P, two year warranty, etc. Downside: need new half case, new spare battery, etc.

So, now I have a decision to make. Hmm.

G

 

[ptomsu]

My repair estimate for the M9 arrived yesterday. Yes, the sensor needs replacement. Free of charge, with a new leatherette body cover as well (evidently the same one used in the M9-P), and a full service CLA/adjustment/etc. They'll be able to have it done by March 6 or thereabouts.

I called this morning and asked about the exchange/update price to an M-P typ 240. That would cost $3750. Savings of $4200 off the new price of an M-P, two year warranty, etc. Downside: need new half case, new spare battery, etc.

So, now I have a decision to make. Hmm.

G

Interesting ....

Today I visited Leica Store Vienna and they had a M9 on offer which is almost like new with only 1500 actuations for €3300. and maybe with some negotiations also for €3000.- I thought this might be a bargain entry back into Leica M, as I kept all my M lenses (around 15, all coded from my M8 times).

Now I wonder if it is worth to invest into a good M9 today or better wait and spend my money on a new (or almost new) M240. I know about all the new stuff in the M240, but maybe I could happily survive the next 2 years with a decent M9 and then sell it without much loss and wait for the M240 successor whatever it will be.

Peter

 

[Godfrey]

It's a bit of a toss up. The M9 and M typ 240 models are quite distinct in terms of what you're getting. If the M9 is what you want for its specific performance and rendering qualities, go for it. If the M is what you want for its advantages, go for it instead. If you make income from using it, whichever works best for your needs is all that matters.

I'm debating about it as I do like the M9 a lot, but I suspect I'd like the M even more based on its improved responsiveness. On the other hand, between the exchange price and the cost of a new battery and case, it's a good bit of money to spend. I no longer make income from my cameras and that makes it harder to decide. The M9 has certainly not constrained my photography. ;-)

G

 

[baudolino]

My $0.02 is now firmly behind the M240, having gone through the "M9->240->M9->M-P" sequence. It is my impression that the M240 LR colour profiles have improved since launch (and I've made my own profiles, too). And the high ISO capability is useful - the image below was shot at ISO6400 at f2.0, in "available darkness", in a basket weaver's hut in Rwanda, in the middle of an evening storm, the only light coming in was through the door (there were no windows in the room).

 

[Paratom]

I would go for the M type 240 because of
better buttons, better battery, weatherproof, improved rangefinder, better high ISO, more consistent color in mixed and artificial light (IMO), better DR.

What I dislike is slightly higher weight.

Of course you all know the CCD vs CMOS discussion and you know there are others who prefer the IQ of the M9. I dont see a clear low ISO IQ advantage for the M9.

 

[Godfrey]

I would go for the M type 240 because of
better buttons, better battery, weatherproof, improved rangefinder, better high ISO, more consistent color in mixed and artificial light (IMO), better DR.

What I dislike is slightly higher weight.

Of course you all know the CCD vs CMOS discussion and you know there are others who prefer the IQ of the M9. I dont see a clear low ISO IQ advantage for the M9.

All of those are good things too.

The whole "IQ" thing is completely opaque to me. The sensors are different so yes, the captures will be different. Better or worse? I don't see it. Besides, I like differences. That's why I still have the E-1 and E-PL1: they produce different output from the E-M1 and E-PL7, different again from the X2 and X, or from the GXR-M.

I think, in the end, which way I decide to go depends on whether I feel comfortable spending another $4000 for the M-P. Tossing around chunks of cash like that does make me stop and think a bit. I am able to afford it, but whether I should or not is an aesthetic decision.

G

 

[Hosermage]

Godfrey, it sounds like a good deal, directly from Leica. However, looking at the second hand market, you could probably do it (sell M9 + buy M240) for about $2500 extra investment, or less if you can fetch a good price for a M9 with new CCD.

I'm not sure what I would do if I was in your shoes.

 

[Vivek]

My $0.02 is now firmly behind the M240, having gone through the "M9->240->M9->M-P" sequence. It is my impression that the M240 LR colour profiles have improved since launch (and I've made my own profiles, too). And the high ISO capability is useful - the image below was shot at ISO6400 at f2.0, in "available darkness", in a basket weaver's hut in Rwanda, in the middle of an evening storm, the only light coming in was through the door (there were no windows in the room).

Nice capture! A pity that there is banding, even at ISO6400.

 

[Godfrey]

Nice capture! A pity that there is banding, even at ISO6400.

Please point out the banding in the photo. I can't see it.

G

 

[jonoslack]

Nice capture! A pity that there is banding, even at ISO6400.

....... spoiling the image?

which doesn't mean I think it's okay

 

[Godfrey]

Godfrey, it sounds like a good deal, directly from Leica. However, looking at the second hand market, you could probably do it (sell M9 + buy M240) for about $2500 extra investment, or less if you can fetch a good price for a M9 with new CCD.

I'm not sure what I would do if I was in your shoes.

Looking about at Ebay completed auctions and other vendors, $4200 seems pretty close to average market value for a clean M9 at present. I see a couple of units selling for up to $700 more, and quite a few selling for a little to a lot less. That says, to me, that Leica has done their homework and is offering a fair market value. I might do a little better with a private sale, but I doubt by a $1700 difference unless I also went for a used M typ 240. The few M-P typ 240s I see are $400-600 under list price.

If I go this route, I'll go for the Leica deal. A new M-P with warranty at $3750 is worth it; add cost of case and spare battery, subtract sale of current M9 case and spare batteries, and I suspect it's $4000 out of pocket regardless. It's a good deal.

The decision is whether I want to spend the money for it. That's the aesthetic decision. I think I'll stop up to the camera shop tomorrow and play with the M typ 240 again...

G

 

[Vivek]

Please point out the banding in the photo. I can't see it.

G

If you can not see it what good would it do if i point it to you?

 

[Vivek]

....... spoiling the image?

which doesn't mean I think it's okay

I am a fan of your writing style but that does not mean I like the contents.

 

[Godfrey]

If you can not see it what good would it do if i point it to you?

The same good it will do for anyone else who does not see some detail of a photo that you see: possibly educating that person towards what you're seeing.

What's the point of making such a statement if you won't articulate what you're saying when someone doesn't see what you do? Just to be snarky? I asked you to point out the banding you're seeing in good faith because I don't see it. Is there something about that disturbing to you?

I nipped a copy of the JPEG and tweaked a curves adjustment layer over it in Photoshop. I can see noise and other artifacts when I push it far enough, sure, but I could do the same with any JPEG presented on line. But what do you see given the photograph as shown here in the thread?

G

 

[Vivek]

Hold your horses there! May be your monitor can not reveal it. So, there is no point in pointing out where the banding is.

 

[Godfrey]

Hold your horses there! May be your monitor can not reveal it. So, there is no point in pointing out where the banding is.

Sorry, Vivek, but that means you're just being snarky. I am using a perfectly good, high resolution display. Either point out the defect you see, or drop the subject.

Maybe your display is banding...

G

 

[Godfrey]

Okay ... made my decision.

I stopped in at the camera shop and spent an hour and some with an M typ 240 and the three lenses that are the bulk of what I've been using on the M9—Summilux 35/1.4 v2, Nokton 50/1.5 (LTM), and Ultron 28/2. I set the 240 to JPEG+raw.

For each lens, I set the lens code to OFF and made twenty exposures are varying apertures, then set the lens code to the one I've been using on the M9 and made another 20 exposures. Then I made exposures to test all ISO settings with the Nokton 50. I turned on Live View and experimented with the focusing.

My impressions:

- The M 240 shutter and overall responsiveness is FAR better than the M9. Feels right, doesn't feel laggy or get blocked up with multiple single shots.

- The new viewfinder frame line illuminator is clean, crisp, and clear. Somehow, the view through viewfinder feels less cluttered. The rangefinder seemed about as crisp to align as with the M9, but overall the viewfinder experience is better.

- Now at home, I've imported all the exposures into Lightroom 5.7.1. Auto white balance in the JPEGs and raws is improved over the M9 in all the various shots, it's right on the money in most cases.

- All the shots where I was critically careful to set the focus and used ISO 1600 (high enough shutter speed) are bang on the money sharp, crisp, clean and noiseless. There is no banding apparent in any of the photos I made, even to the highest ISO setting.

- There's neither degradation nor loss in the rendering character of the 'Lux 35 v2 or Nokton 50. (They're no better than I see on film or on the M9, and no worse either.) Didn't really look hard for the Ultron, but it seems to be a less prone to color shifting.

- None of these three lenses, even with lens code set to OFF, show any color shifting. (The 28 and 35 show a very small amount with the M9.)

To me, this is a no-brainer. The M typ 240 is simply a better Leica M than the M9. As one ought to expect from an updated model ...

I've called Leica USA and confirmed that I'll take a black M-P on the exchange program. I'm mailing the check for it this afternoon ... They'll likely hold the check for two weeks or so, but eh? I don't use credit cards, and I'm not in a rush.

onwards!

G

 

[cam]

Don't know what I'm going to do, Godfrey, but I really appreciate you sharing the process you've gone.are going through.

(I'm gutless, still haven't sent my M9 in)