Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
  

Archive 2012 · 3 questions on Leica M9
  
 
allstarimaging
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 3 questions on Leica M9


Hello,

I've been on the fence for several months thinking about the purchase of a used Leica M9. The primary reason for purchase would be the portability, full frame sensor, and the ability to shoot limited depth of field images using high quality lenses. For those that have Leica experience I have a few questions.

1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?

2) Watching the buy/sell forum here on Fred Miranda it appears that in the last month or so a lot of the used Leica gear is not moving any thought on why?

3). If I were to purchase a used M9 and one lens what is the one Leica lens ( not the 50 noct) that you would suggest? Use of the camera would be general photography, portrait, and some street. I like to shoot from f2 to f4 and if I have f 1.4 then that's a plus

Thanks for your insights

Jack



Jul 28, 2012 at 11:21 AM
Bijltje
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
Hello,

I've been on the fence for several months thinking about the purchase of a used Leica M9. The primary reason for purchase would be the portability, full frame sensor, and the ability to shoot limited depth of field images using high quality lenses. For those that have Leica experience I have a few questions.

1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?

2) Watching the buy/sell
...Show more

First, you say the main reason to go for the leica is the full frame sensor in a small body. I don't think this is a good reason to start in the M system.
The M9 is a rangefinder camera and that gives it advantages and disadvantages.
Rangefinder are different from SLR's or mirrorless camera's. Be aware before buying. Try the camera first to see if you like working with a rangefindercamera before buying a expensive kit.
Don't expect a full frame NEX.

To awnser your questions:

1: Yes. first they are off course the only ones offering a full frame rangefinder. But also the CCD sensor gives stunning results, build is great, the lenses are really nice.
It cost a lot of money, but to me its more than worth it.

2: Some are waiting for the M10 and expect that FF Nex. I think if the M10 will have those features, it will still be a big step more expensive over the M9P, and it will take some time before the M10 will be in stock.
So if you want a M9, take advantage of it
The lenses are still really hard to get trought there is some stock now at some stores.

3: Depends on some factors. 1 budget, 2 focal length. 3, apenture.
As for leica lenses, for 1 lens kit I like 35 cron ASPH a lot on the M9. Nice small lens with stunning results. There is not much difference with the 35 lux ASPH exept the 1 stop extra speed and gives a more compact lens for much less cash.
Besides the 35 lux can't be found in shops with long waiting lists. The 35 cron can be found now and then.

The 50 cron (non apo) is quite affordable and gives great results, really sharp lens. The 50 lux ASPH is great to but off course more expensive.
I used both cron and lux and find myself being more attacked to the 50 cron.

If you want to spend less cash the summarits are great to. If you don't mind the leica drawing the ZM zeiss or voightlanders can be a good choice to.




Jul 28, 2012 at 11:55 AM
DaveOls
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 3 questions on Leica M9


I believe that the M8 and M8.2 are only 1.3x crop, so are close to FF. The prices are also quite a bit less. If you decide later to get an M9, you could probably sell it for about what you paid. If you sold the M9 because you didn't like it you might lose a lot more.


Jul 28, 2012 at 12:56 PM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Account locked
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 3 questions on Leica M9


1. yes. not a lot to say, if you get it you get it. if not, well there are other cameras out there.

2. the market is soft right now. prices are high for used gear and Leica has finally gotten some lenses to dealers. then there are economic factors.

3. 28/2 Cron ASPH, ZM 25/2.8 Biogon, 35/2 Cron ASPH or 50/1.4 Lux ASPH. pick the focal length you want first, then pick a lens. every current lens by Leica and Zeiss for the M mount is good.

don't bother with pre-ASPH lenses; you specifically state that you want to shoot between f2-4, that is where the ASPH lenses have the biggest advantage over their older counterparts. I would accept the v4 or v5 50mm summicron as an exception to this rule.



Jul 28, 2012 at 01:12 PM
Mike Tuomey
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 3 questions on Leica M9


If your interest in the M9 is primarily portability, and you think you would benefit from the *Leica rangefinder experience* (and its associated cost is not a concern), then there really isn't an alternative if you need full frame. The M9 is a pleasure to carry with a lens or two, so much that you will find yourself bringing it everywhere with you. At least that's my experience, for what it's worth.

But if the "Leica experience* isn't important and/or cost is a concern, then portability can be addressed less expensively with the alternatives like NEX 7 etc.

So much can said about lens choice for M-mount cameras, much of it so specific and personal that it's just confusing. In my general experience, the Leica ASPH lenses are superior, but incrementally, such that their value in relation to cost is an individual decision. Zeiss ZM lenses are very good imagers, but having used them for several years I find them needing repairs (like lube failures and loose elements) that suggest comparatively poor manufacturing. Voigtlander M lenses can be very good imagers as well, but seem to have a lot of copy variation, which is especially annoying when in the used lens market.

Good luck in your decision-making.



Jul 28, 2012 at 01:29 PM
michael49
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 3 questions on Leica M9


Some love him, some hate him, but if you haven't read his blog before you may find Steve Huff's M9 info helpful....

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/08/04/my-updated-big-bad-ass-leica-m9-review/



Jul 28, 2012 at 02:55 PM
najibs
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 3 questions on Leica M9


1. If you value size, simplicity, craftsmanship, and overall quality then yes. If you want bells and whistles, no.
2. It's not that the market it's soft. Supply is finally catching up with demand, so those people still asking for close to retail price won't get it anymore, like last year.
3. It completely depends on your budget. You can't go wrong with any Leica lens. Ideally a Summicron, and if the budget allows it, a Summilux. If money was no issue, my 2 lens kit would be the 28/2 cron and the 50/1.4 summilux. Nothing else. Perfect kit, IMO.



Jul 28, 2012 at 03:53 PM
corposant
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
...The primary reason for purchase would be the portability, full frame sensor, and the ability to shoot limited depth of field images using high quality lenses...

1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?


Here's the best way to answer question 1:

Leica M9 + 50 Lux: $11,000 new, maybe $8,000 used if you are patient
OM-D + 25 PanaLeica: ~$1,600 new
NEX-7 + Sigma 30mm: ~$1,300 new

The Sigma 30mm was tested by lensrentals.com and outshone many other lenses in that range, and was surprisingly competitive with the 50 Lux. The 25 for m4/3 is known as being a top-flight lens too.

Seems full-frame and the "Leica experience" are worth 5x to 9x the competitors, who offer portability, high quality lenses (with many more for the OM-D), and more features and more modern sensors than the M9.

The x-factor to a lot of people are the lenses - they are in some senses incomparable in terms of rendering and "look." Only you can say if that's worth it!



Jul 28, 2012 at 04:54 PM
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 3 questions on Leica M9


michael49 wrote:
Some love him, some hate him, but if you haven't read his blog before you may find Steve Huff's M9 info helpful....

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2010/08/04/my-updated-big-bad-ass-leica-m9-review/


I've only came across Steve Huff a couple of times before (I've never used a Leica of any sort), but each time it's seriously made me want one. That post is no exception. That ISO2500 at night, in colour, is much better than I thought that thing could do. Alas, I have just spent the day lugging around two SLR's, fast lenses, and other stuff...



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:06 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
Hello,

I've been on the fence for several months thinking about the purchase of a used Leica M9. The primary reason for purchase would be the portability, full frame sensor, and the ability to shoot limited depth of field images using high quality lenses. For those that have Leica experience I have a few questions.

1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?


Worth it? It's a very individual determination. From a purely logical 'on-paper' perspective you get a much broader range of performance and 'value' from a DSLR kit with quality primes. Some of the mirrorless systems will have better sensor performance, such as the NEX-5N and 7, in terms of high ISO and dynamic range. Speaking for myself only, the primary reason I adopted an M9 system in my work was for the quality wide angle lenses and the ability to focus them accurately and quickly. Being a Canon user, I was becoming increasingly frustrated with AF picking background detail rather than the subject, the difficulty of focusing wide lenses by eye, the so-so wide angle performance, and just the sheer size of the kit if I was to go out with a bag of primes (well, the zooms are even larger). This was based on experience with the 1D series through to the IV. Though I have yet to try them, apparently AF precision with the 5DIII and 1DX is better. Had those cameras been available three years ago, and the AF worked perfectly with wide lenses, I perhaps wouldn't have partially moved to an M9 system. I was thinking about investing in a set of Zeiss ZE glass and using live view, but the thought of the size and weight completely discouraged me.

Size was definitely a consideration. My current daily M9 kit is the body with 21/28/50/90 lenses, which all fits in a small bag that otherwise would only fit a 70-200L zoom. Compare the size of a rangefinder 35 f/1.4, especially those from Leica, with SLR lenses. Lens build quality seems very solid. I have a mix of Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica and they're all very nice, though the price of the Leica lenses does not ensure they don't make questionable build decisions. For example, the 50 Lux ASPH lens hood assembly (which includes the filter ring and lens name ring) is fastened to the lens body with one tiny screw and what appears to be a few dabs of glue. And while the M9 is a very solid camera, I'm not entirely sure its components are the best possible. From a UI experience, it feels like using a digital camera from 2002, rather than 2012.

It will require a considerably different shooting approach than with a DSLR, otherwise it could become very frustrating in use.

An aspect of the Leica experience is achieving a well calibrated system. This becomes much more critical the faster the lenses are. At f/2, a slight mismatch can still be tolerated with wider lenses, but at f/1.4 calibration really needs to be spot on. It could mean one or two trips for the entire kit to Leica to achieve this, which is frustrating and often a point of criticism of the system, but once everything is in tune, it works amazingly well.

2) Watching the buy/sell forum here on Fred Miranda it appears that in the last month or so a lot of the used Leica gear is not moving any thought on why?

I suspect it's a variety of factors. People are waiting for Photokina, both to see what Leica announces and whether anyone else will offer a compact FF camera (which seems to be increasingly unlikely). Leica seems to have somewhat caught up with lens production (perhaps demand has also decreased) and there is better in-store inventory now than at the beginning of the year, meaning lens flippers are no longer able to resell at or above retail, especially certain lenses like the 35 Lux ASPH.

There are theories floating around about what this all means. The M9 is now almost 3 years old, so most of those who wanted to and could buy one, have already, and have finally built their lens systems. Some think the M10 will be announced and priced at or below the M9 price, and depending on its feature set, could spark a whole new round of Leica adopters to buy-in and cause another period of lens shortages. For example, if it includes live view, it would become the only FF 'mirrorless' platform capable of working with rangefinder lenses as well as a huge range of SLR and other lenses. Others think the M10 will be much more expensive and as a result many won't sell their M9s, which in turn will create a fairly strong market for used M9s, possibly keeping resale value higher than it should be, but also not really increasing demand for lenses.

I think a lot of alt shooters have realized that many of the mirrorless cameras are not ideally suited for use with many M series lenses. Some cameras have edge color shift and smearing problems while the smaller sensor systems such as m43 seem to get the best image quality from relatively inexpensive native glass designed specifically for those sensors and very fine pixel pitch. As those systems fill out their lens lines, alt lenses for everyday use makes less sense, especially very expensive Leica glass. I mean, people are complaining the new Olympus 75 f/1.8 is too expensive, and it's under $1000. If that's the case, there's no chance anyone would buy a slower 75 or 90 Summarit for $1800. While the 28 Cron supposedly is very nice on the NEX-7, how many are going to spend $4000 for a 40mm equivalent? Even 'cheap' Voigtlander lenses are relatively expensive compared to native lens options, and often compromised by slower maximum aperture and poor minimum focusing distance.

3). If I were to purchase a used M9 and one lens what is the one Leica lens ( not the 50 noct) that you would suggest? Use of the camera would be general photography, portrait, and some street. I like to shoot from f2 to f4 and if I have f 1.4 then that's a plus

If it's only one lens, then I think 35mm makes sense. The 35 Cron is quite small and appears to be a very nice performer. It would keep the M9 very compact. The Voigtlander 35 f/1.2 v.2 is an extremely impressive lens optically. Its only fault is its large size compared to the 3x more expensive Leica. Otherwise 50mm might be an option if you prefer that focal length, and it would be a better for portraits. For f/2 options I'd go with the Zeiss 50mm f/2 simply for the price vs. the 50 Cron. Both seem to be quite similar optically. The 50 Lux ASPH is a really nice lens, but you'll need a perfectly calibrated rangefinder with it.

If there is a remote chance you are traveling to Europe this summer, see about buying a lens there and getting a VAT refund (though the VAT refund at the airport will never be for the full VAT amount). Current pre-VAT Leica pricing in Germany is about 15-20% less than in the USA thanks in part to the weak Euro.




Edited on Jul 28, 2012 at 05:17 PM · View previous versions



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:07 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



allstarimaging
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 3 questions on Leica M9


Thank you for all your insights and suggestions. I briefly had an x100 for a while and really liked the portability and the image quality was excellent. However, I got a little frustrated with one focal and found I would prefer a slightly longer focal length and a better build quality. That is what got me thinking Leica. I know there options like the Sony Nex but to be honest I just don't like the way they look. The more traditional and classic design of Leica is appealing to me. As an alternate I was surprised there has not been mention of the X Pro 1. I know it's totally different than Leica

Jack



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:08 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
As an alternate I was surprised there has not been mention of the X Pro 1. I know it's totally different than Leica


The XP1 has kind of fallen into a gray zone. It's not a true rangefinder alternative for the purists, and use of RF lenses on it pretty much necessitates the EVF unless one intends to scale focus. And, from early reviews, it appears to suffer from considerable loss of image edge sharpness with many RF lenses, therefore making it yet another mirrorless system that works best with native lenses.

For the mirrorless crowd it sits at the high end of the pricing spectrum with a host of beta-like quirks that seem to put it at a disadvantage compared to the more polished NEX and m43 systems.

Then there is the question of proper RAW support. It seems most RAW converters currently struggle to even match its SOOC Jpeg performance. And it's clearly evident that Fuji applies a significant dose of 'secret sauce' to those Jpeg files to enhance lens performance and offset what is apparently somewhat higher chroma noise from the non-Bayer CFA.

I think it's an interesting system and one to keep an eye on for future consideration, but as stated, it's not a true rangefinder alternative, and as a mirrorless alt platform, there are better options available.



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:38 PM
douglasf13
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
Thank you for all your insights and suggestions. I briefly had an x100 for a while and really liked the portability and the image quality was excellent. However, I got a little frustrated with one focal and found I would prefer a slightly longer focal length and a better build quality. That is what got me thinking Leica. I know there options like the Sony Nex but to be honest I just don't like the way they look. The more traditional and classic design of Leica is appealing to me. As an alternate I was surprised there has not been
...Show more

You really need to spend time shooting with a rangefinder to make sure you'll like the shooting method, because I see that as the primary reason to be interested in such a camera. If you do like it, you might look into an M8, as was mentioned above. They're going for less than $2K on get dpi.



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:40 PM
redisburning
Offline
• • •
Account locked
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · 3 questions on Leica M9


ignore talk about the Nex.

at the end of the day it's still made for autofocus and retrofocus lenses. a rangefinder lets you put the plane of best focus on your subject even using super-ultra-wide lenses and use symmetric lenses, and do so without relying on a computer.

you have 3 choices, frankly. rd-1, M8/M8.2 or the M9. the discussion over whether the M9 is worth it should be framed in context of those cameras, not gadget cameras.

besides, if you buy Leica lenses it's trivial to get a film camera to give you some extra versatility. and they are not only good film cameras but very durable ones that have proven their worth over 5 decades.

2c warning : I am incredibly biased against autofocus.



Jul 28, 2012 at 05:55 PM
jamach
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · 3 questions on Leica M9


I read an article somewhere that Leica wanted $5500 to repair one man's M8, ouch! That put me off from buying a used 8.2, out of my price range


Jul 28, 2012 at 05:59 PM
mawz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · 3 questions on Leica M9


redisburning wrote:
ignore talk about the Nex.

at the end of the day it's still made for autofocus and retrofocus lenses. a rangefinder lets you put the plane of best focus on your subject even using super-ultra-wide lenses and use symmetric lenses, and do so without relying on a computer.


The NEX-7 is a better manual focus camera than it is an auto-focus camera. Good AF, incredible platform for MF.

RF's share the same limitations as the NEX here, you can focus ultra-wide lenses marginally more accurately with a Mirrorless camera than with an RF. Functionally, they're miniature view cameras in this regard, you have a 100% accurate idea of the focus point, even an RF can't give you that although RF's do extremely well with accurately focusing wide lenses. The main difference is that RF's have issues focusing longer lenses, LV-based cameras do not. Both stomp all over what can be reliably achieved with a DSLR without using LV in terms of accurate focus of wide or ultra-wide lenses.

Oh, and all digital RF's have some level of issues with symmetric lenses. The Leica's simply have hardware and software compensations already built-in where the NEX-7 requires compensation in post via CornerFix or CaptureOne Pro's LCC facility. Recall that CornerFix was written with the M8 and M9 in mind, not the NEXen. The issues are in fact inherent with the use of digital sensors and symmetric lenses, not with RF's vs Mirrorless.



you have 3 choices, frankly. rd-1, M8/M8.2 or the M9. the discussion over whether the M9 is worth it should be framed in context of those cameras, not gadget cameras.

besides, if you buy Leica lenses it's trivial to get a film camera to give you some extra versatility. and they are not only good film cameras but very durable ones that have proven their worth over 5 decades.

2c warning : I am incredibly biased against autofocus.


If you think Mirrorless cameras are 'Gadget Cameras', you're fundamentally not in a position to discuss their merits vs. RF's. Frankly the NEX-7 is just about the best digital I've used for purely manual shooting (Manual focus, manual exposure) since it actually can give you all three basic exposure controls exposed at the same time on control wheels (ISO, Aperture and Shutter) and a true indication of exposure (Live Histogram) rather than a meter guess for middle grey. The gadgetry is entirely ignorable on the better Mirrorless options, I never even see it on the 7 and rarely did on the 5N.

The ability to shoot a film camera with essentially the same UI is a MAJOR win for the M9 if paired with an M7 or M6 TTL, older Leica bodies have some potentially abrasive UI differences (the reversed shutter dial), it's not really a possibility with other compact high-end digital options including all other Mirrorless options except the R-D1 series (which are essentially digital Voigtlander Bessa R2a's)

If you want FF, the M9 is where it's at if you can live with the limitations of the Rangefinder viewing system and don't shoot really high ISO work (which few actually do). It really is a unique system, the lenses are superb and you simply can't find a better compact wide-angle shooting system out there (the only other option for real ultra-wide work in a truly compact system is the OM-D E-M5 combined with the Panasonic 7-14/4. It beats the M9 in capability and DR, but the M9 is significantly ahead in overall IQ at lower ISO's if combined with a good wide prime or the WATE).



Jul 28, 2012 at 08:59 PM
ricardovaste
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · 3 questions on Leica M9


jamach wrote:
I read an article somewhere that Leica wanted $5500 to repair one man's M8, ouch! That put me off from buying a used 8.2, out of my price range


Well, there is yet another idiot w/o equipment insurance (the person you talk of, not yourself).



Jul 28, 2012 at 09:02 PM
thedigitalbean
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
Hello,

I've been on the fence for several months thinking about the purchase of a used Leica M9. The primary reason for purchase would be the portability, full frame sensor, and the ability to shoot limited depth of field images using high quality lenses. For those that have Leica experience I have a few questions.

1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?


For most people, no, its definitely NOT worth it and thats largely because of the price. For me, the M9 is the camera I enjoy shooting the most (though I'm also finding myself really enjoying the OM-D EM-5 as well). The #1 reason for using the M9 for me is the lenses, the 50 Noct, the 35 'lux the 21 super elmar. These are world class optics and deliver beautiful images.

I can compare to the EM-5 and the NEX series. In terms of sensor image quality the M9 is behind these newest crop sensors, hoping that will change with the M10. In terms of lens image quality, IMO there isn't much in the m4/3 and NEX lineup that matches the best of Leica optics (though there are stellar m4/3 lenses). The build of the M9 and all the Leica lenses I've tried are simply unmatched by anything in the m4/3, NEX or Fuji X-Pro1 world. In terms of handling, the NEX is something of a mess. The M9, now almost 4 years old feels like a camera designed by a photographer. Its simple but extremely functional. The EM-5 is also quite good (certainly better than the NEX) but is not quite as intuitive as the M and certainly not as simple.



2) Watching the buy/sell forum here on Fred Miranda it appears that in the last month or so a lot of the used Leica gear is not moving any thought on why?


Largely because the stuff is priced more than what people are wiling to pay. M lenses have been in severe shortage since about the beginning of last year. That led a LOT of people to take advantage of it by putting new lenses on sale for over retail as soon as they got it from the dealer. Supply has caught up and people no longer want to pay retail for a second hand lens. As for used M9 bodies, I suspect potential buyers are waiting to see what the M10 will bring (and at what price tag). They are also probably hoping that once the M10 drops (i.e. Photokina), there will be a flood of upgraders dropping the price even more.


3). If I were to purchase a used M9 and one lens what is the one Leica lens ( not the 50 noct) that you would suggest? Use of the camera would be general photography, portrait, and some street. I like to shoot from f2 to f4 and if I have f 1.4 then that's a plus

Thanks for your insights

Jack


If I could only have one lens it would be the new 35 Summilux. The only bummer is that it costs $5k. For a more economical choice look for a used 28 Summicron (which used you may be able to get for around $3300). For get a 50 Summicron (the old one) for around $1600 used along with a 28 Elmarit.



Jul 28, 2012 at 10:08 PM
denoir
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · 3 questions on Leica M9


allstarimaging wrote:
1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?


As Ron pointed out, there is no general answer to that. It depends on your priorities and resources. For me the answer is definitely a 'yes' (the way the camera feels to use, FF in small body, Leica glass...) but that's just me. If you find out that you don't like using rangefinder cameras (and quite a few people don't) then the answer will be definitely 'no'.

2) Watching the buy/sell forum here on Fred Miranda it appears that in the last month or so a lot of the used Leica gear is not moving any thought on why?

People waiting for the M10 and Leica finally starting to meet demand. There's been a massive shortage of lenses and people have gotten used to making a profit on used lenses. With new lenses in stock the desire to pay a higher price for a new lens has been reduced.


3). If I were to purchase a used M9 and one lens what is the one Leica lens ( not the 50 noct) that you would suggest? Use of the camera would be general photography, portrait, and some street. I like to shoot from f2 to f4 and if I have f 1.4 then that's a plus


35 Lux ASPH. V1 or V2 (FLE) doesn't matter all that much but that's IMO the ultimate solo lens for the M9.



Jul 28, 2012 at 10:34 PM
charles.K
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · 3 questions on Leica M9



allstarimaging wrote:
1) Is Leica worth it? I know that Leica is the only full frame option in a small body but is the "Leica experience" worth the extra money over other options with crop sensors in terms of image quality, equipment build, and handling?


IMO, yes. Value for money, is another question, as there are many excellent options in the market. For me, the lens quality and variety, combined with an ergonomic FF does make it worthwhile. The range of Leica lenses are amazing, spanning over decades, not just a few years, are still very useable on the M9 with each of their own unique IQ. It is a photographer's camera, and does make you think more about your shots. The M9 does have its niche, but it will not replace a DSLR when telephoto lenses are needed or for action photography.

Only present issue I have is that the M9's on board. processor could do with a serious upgrade.

I know Ron, and Luka preference is for a 35 FL, but I prefer the 50FL. Opting for a Lux pre or asph, will give a unique lens signature with low light ability.

Good luck





Jul 28, 2012 at 11:57 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Alternative Gear & Lenses | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password