Jacob D wrote:
As for NEX vs Leica... I really could care less. I would think most M9 users probably don\'t care about the NEX either. I\'m not bashing on anyone for comparing the two, I just feel like it\'s a redundant theme that probably only a very few people actually care about and if I had to guess I think those folks would fit the description of gearhead NEX owners (or the fewer that actually own both cameras).
With respect, could not disagree more
Nex is gateway drug, first to cheap LTM/M glass, then to cheap leica/ zm. then to leica lenses.
The abiltiy to use that glass is what the nex has going it for that the 5D can never touch. It\'s the whole impetus behind the success of the camera--sony itself says this outright.
You act as if the M9 is unreachable. That is changing--fast. I see them go for 5200. In 3 years it\'s likely to be worth at least say 3.9k--prolly higher. So the actual cost of use is not as high as the buy in would have you think.
The arguement could easily be made that the M9 is THE camera to which the nex is properly compared
A year ago I thought the M9 was ridiculous. Now I scheme to finance one. Hopefully some big camera corp will come to my rescue soon with their new FF
Jacob D wrote:
As for NEX vs Leica... I really could care less. I would think most M9 users probably don\'t care about the NEX either. I\'m not bashing on anyone for comparing the two, I just feel like it\'s a redundant theme that probably only a very few people actually care about and if I had to guess I think those folks would fit the description of gearhead NEX owners (or the fewer that actually own both cameras).
With respect, could not disagree more
Nex is gateway drug, first to cheap LTM/M glass, then to cheap leica/ zm. then to leica lenses.
The abiltiy to use that glass is what the nex has going it for that the 5D can never touch. It\'s the whole impetus behind the success of the camera--sony itself says this outright.
You act as if the M9 is unreachable. That is changing--fast. I see them go for 5200. In 3 years it\'s likely to be worth at least say 3.9k--prolly higher. So the actual cost of use is not as high as the buy in would have you think.
The arguement could easily be made that the M9 is THE camera to which the nex is properly compared
Jacob D wrote:
As for NEX vs Leica... I really could care less. I would think most M9 users probably don\'t care about the NEX either. I\'m not bashing on anyone for comparing the two, I just feel like it\'s a redundant theme that probably only a very few people actually care about and if I had to guess I think those folks would fit the description of gearhead NEX owners (or the fewer that actually own both cameras).
With respect, could not disagree more
Nex is gateway drug, first to cheap LTM/M glass, then to cheap leica/ zm. then to leica lenses.
The abiltiy to use that glass is what the nex has going it for that the 5D can never touch. It\'s the whole impetus behind the success of the camera--sony itself says this outright.
You act as if the M9 is unreachable. That is changing--fast. I think its out of the question to find one for 5200. In 3 years it\'s likely to be worth at least say 3.9k--prolly higher. So the actual cost of use is not as high as the buy in would have you think.
The arguement could easily be made that the M9 is THE camera to which the nex is properly compared
Dec 06, 2011 at 11:27 PM
Previous versions of uhoh7's message #10146334 « Nex 5N vs Leica M9 »
