Leica M9: experience so far

I'm sorry to say it but I'm totally underwhelmed by these shots.

There is nothing quality wise which cannot be achieved by even a 350D.

It may be a lot quieter than a DSLR - but my FF Canon 1Ds II doesn't seem overly noisy to me - but how often is that a real consideration ?

If you enjoy owning and using the camera that's fine but I don't think I'd claim the quality was better than any decent DSLR with FF and a good lens .

.
 
Thank goodness we're all different, then, else we'd all own 350D's and be done!

I'll bet not a single shot from your 1Ds couldn't have been done with a 350D and a good eye either, but I'm guessing your reasons for owning such a prestigious camera are valid ones, and I wouldn't presume to second-guess them. Tobers is pleased [as would I be] and that's the simplest fact of the matter, IMHO.
 
I think the question not just cost, most of would have to save and think hard if we spent this sort of money on a camera, what interest me more is the question, having spent the money does it live up to expectations?
 
I'd be interested to see a selection of shots from the Leica and the Canon (with exif removed) and to see if anyone can actually tell which came from which camera.
I fully understand the love of using something that's beautifully engineered and I also get the feelings for the history of the marque too...but I do wonder if under double blind testing conditions whether people could really tell the difference between the resulting photographs (especially at web resolutions).
 
You can produce great images with an iPhone, and pulitzers have been won with Holgas. Does it matter which camera produced what? What matters more is the eye that saw it.

350D, Leica M, 1Ds... I'm thinking less science, more art. All cameras can produce the same image, more or less, and what's important is the artists eye, the user's experience and the final image, viewed as a whole and not as a series of 100% crops.
 
this must be one of the most interesting and thought provoking threads I've ever read on TP, different veiwpoints all discussed rationally and politely, a really good read. There is something about wonderfully engineered products, whilst I'll probably never be in a position to buy an M9 I probably would if I was, trouble is I probably would have spent the money on another expensive watch first!
 
re 1D/s noise: have you tried SILENT mode? It is literally dead silent just slightly slower (like 400D would normally be) and somehow results in more stable shots.

As far as Leica is concerned, it has some great features, but I mostly regard it as collectors item, not so much as a tool of trade.
 
Another quick update. I have found the M9's sensor to be rather filthy. I've only just noticed as I've been shooting at f/2 most of the time. My Arctic Butterfly thing wont shift it so it looks like a damp swab clean is required. Sounds like a known issue as lube from the shutter spits about when the camera is new. Ho hum...

Woz! said:
I'd be interested to see a selection of shots from the Leica and the Canon (with exif removed) and to see if anyone can actually tell which came from which camera.
I fully understand the love of using something that's beautifully engineered and I also get the feelings for the history of the marque too...but I do wonder if under double blind testing conditions whether people could really tell the difference between the resulting photographs (especially at web resolutions).
Click to expand...

Good point. I reckon 99.9% of people wouldn't perceive a significant difference. I did something like this a few weeks back with a GF1 v 1DIV v M8. Have a look at this thread.

bigsmiff said:
this must be one of the most interesting and thought provoking threads I've ever read on TP, different veiwpoints all discussed rationally and politely, a really good read. There is something about wonderfully engineered products, whilst I'll probably never be in a position to buy an M9 I probably would if I was, trouble is I probably would have spent the money on another expensive watch first!
Click to expand...

Agreed - we're doing quite well so far I think, and you've probably hit the nail on the head. I did get the watch first. Saved up the equivalent of a Sky TV subscription every month for 10 years whilst on the waiting list, and now have a stainless Daytona, black face of course, worn 24x7 and getting a nice used patina. No Sky TV but I'm enjoying the watch more.

petersmart said:
I'm sorry to say it but I'm totally underwhelmed by these shots.

There is nothing quality wise which cannot be achieved by even a 350D.

It may be a lot quieter than a DSLR - but my FF Canon 1Ds II doesn't seem overly noisy to me - but how often is that a real consideration ?

If you enjoy owning and using the camera that's fine but I don't think I'd claim the quality was better than any decent DSLR with FF and a good lens .

.
Click to expand...

Sorry about the pics - that's the photographer not the camera. The 1Ds II is a quality piece of kit that's for sure. Price wise, it's successor the 1Ds III is more expensive than the M9 by a little bit. You pays your money etc. For me it's a tool at the end of the day and will have to earn its keep. I've got a 1DIV for fast action & high ISO stuff so I know top-end Canon kit pretty well.
 
Last edited:
A Leica could be seen as an esoteric and somewhat restrictive, outdated even, photography nerd, collector or rich boys toy but an equally valid view could be that it provides an almost unique set of features and capabilities that justify it's existence and price as having the market pretty much to itself justifies a price premium.

In coming years I think that the newer breed of more compact cameras with larger sensors just might eat away at the more technical reasons for choosing a Leica but they're not there yet.

PS. I have a nice collection of watches, and one digital watch... but I never wear it. Perhaps the definition of a gentleman could be someone who has a digital watch and chooses not to wear it?
 
Last edited:
Was lusting after these a bit when the M9 first came out, quite a few people here don't seem to get it but i totally do.

Its not about image quality, tho that it stands with current dslrs is handy
Its not that its small like an EVIL, tho that it is small is rather handy
Its not that its expensive and thus fairly exclusive, tho that not many other photographers have it, giving you some uniqueness is rather handy

Its the process of making the frame.

Give Tobers time to get the feel for the cam and he will post frames that you like but don't know why
 
Tobers said:
Another quick update. I have found the M9's sensor to be rather filthy. I've only just noticed as I've been shooting at f/2 most of the time. My Arctic Butterfly thing wont shift it so it looks like a damp swab clean is required. Sounds like a known issue as lube from the shutter spits about when the camera is new. Ho hum...

<snip>
Click to expand...

How will you go about cleaning the sensor, with no filter on top of it? Doesn't that make it ultra sensitive to getting scratched?


Tobers said:
<snip>



, and now have a stainless Daytona, black face of course, worn 24x7 ....

<snip>
Click to expand...

A man of good taste, if I may say :thumbs:
 
Wail said:
How will you go about cleaning the sensor, with no filter on top of it? Doesn't that make it ultra sensitive to getting scratched?
Click to expand...

Just use standard cleaning methods by all accounts. A "damp" clean with sensor swabs is on the cards. With sensors only costing about £1500 I'm not at all worried about this :eek:.
 
Tobers said:
Just use standard cleaning methods by all accounts. A "damp" clean with sensor swabs is on the cards. With sensors only costing about £1500 I'm not at all worried about this :eek:.
Click to expand...

:eek:

I'd like to know how that goes, if you don't mind.


On the matter of the M9; I hope you don't mind me asking a few questions?

Is this the Zeiss Planar you went for? If so, how come this over any of the Leica variant?

Are all the Zeiss ZM lenses compatible with the M9?

Last for now, if you don't mind the too many questions; are all these Leica M series lenses compatible?

Thanks :thumbs:
 
Well, I don't want to second guess Tobers, but having looked at the same potential shopping list I can offer some advice:

the major protagonists for M mount are Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica themselves. They're also increasingly expensive in that order, which may factor a decision:

Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 = £475 [there isn't an f/2]
Zeiss 35mm f/2 = £825
Leica 35mm f/2 = £1920

They're all also increasingly well engineered, although you'd struggle to see that if you examined the wonderfully tight tolerances of the Voigtlander 'Cheapie'!

However, regardless of costs, they all bring their own attributes to the table. The voigtlander is 'dreamy' and slightly soft wide open, the Zeiss has that vivid 'pop' and the Leica has that classic sharp-suited understatement which has powered a thousand iconic images.

So, it comes down to the myriad factors of cost, performance and character. I have to say, the Zeiss Planar produces some amazing images, and I'm drawn to its own draw characteristics myself.
 
Damn this thread. Its not the m9, its the zeiss lenses that I am lusting after! I have 3 for my contax g2 and the 'pop' is just so pronounced and the colour rendition is superb. I am now looking at the M6 in the classifieds and trying to work out how I could afford that and a zeiss 50mm for it. Gah!
 
menthel said:
Damn this thread. Its not the m9, its the zeiss lenses that I am lusting after! I have 3 for my contax g2 and the 'pop' is just so pronounced and the colour rendition is superb. I am now looking at the M6 in the classifieds and trying to work out how I could afford that and a zeiss 50mm for it. Gah!
Click to expand...

Oh dear! :D
 
menthel said:
Tell me about it! I can't even justify the G2 and 3 lenses I have really! :eek:
Click to expand...

LOL. Why do have to justify it Jim? It's no good telling the padre you wish you'd bought it when he's giving you the last rites. :D
 
CT said:
LOL. Why do have to justify it Jim? It's no good telling the padre you wish you'd bought it when he's giving you the last rites. :D
Click to expand...

I guess I get guilty about spending such money on frivolities! Mind you for the quality of my photography, all of my gear is a frivolity! ;)

But just imagine, an m6, m9 and 28, 50 and 85mm zeiss lenses. Its that kind of dreaming that keeps distracting me at work!
 
It's a good job I don't get guilty feelings then - I'd be suicidal! :lol:

I'm not the biggest Leica fan in the world, but I do see the appeal and the attraction, but i wouldn't swap my G2 for one. It's the closest you're going to get to SLR convenience shooting a rangefinder, and I find it produces the goods shot after shot with superb lenses. I just love using mine. :love:

The only thing you should feel guilty about is not using it. ;)
 
CT said:
It's a good job I don't get guilty feelings then - I'd be suicidal! :lol:

I'm not the biggest Leica fan in the world, but I do see the appeal and the attraction, but i wouldn't swap my G2 for one. It's the closest you're going to get to SLR convenience shooting a rangefinder, and I find it produces the goods shot after shot with superb lenses. I just love using mine. :love:

The only thing you should feel guilty about is not using it. ;)
Click to expand...

Mine does get used. In fact I have a roll of velvia to send off at home. I love mine too but having £1k worth of film kit at home does seems a bit much for the 2-3 films a month max that go through it. I do love range finders though and really understand tober's M9 love. If only they resurrected the contax G digitally it would truely be a great day!
 
menthel said:
. If only they resurrected the contax G digitally it would truely be a great day!
Click to expand...
Wouldn't that be something?:cool: Whether you'd get the colour and pop you got with your flower Ektar shots might be another matter though. Film still rules in some areas even if it is a PITA waiting for the results.

Really nice film kit is probably a better investment at the moment than sticking the dosh away somewhere and watching it earn nothing.
 
Last edited:
CT said:
Wouldn't that be something?:cool: Whether you'd get the colour and pop you got with your flower Ektar shots might be another matter though. Film still rules in some area even if it is a PITA waiting for the results.
Click to expand...

True. I have become philosphical about the waiting and photoexpress are not too slow. That reminds me, i need to order more ektar whilst there is still summer left to use it!
 
My local Jessops do a 1 hour service for colour 35mm which is really far too handy. Makes me idle - I've got all the kit to do it myself.
 
danbroad said:
Well, I don't want to second guess Tobers, but having looked at the same potential shopping list I can offer some advice:

the major protagonists for M mount are Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica themselves. They're also increasingly expensive in that order, which may factor a decision:

Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 = £475 [there isn't an f/2]
Zeiss 35mm f/2 = £825
Leica 35mm f/2 = £1920

They're all also increasingly well engineered, although you'd struggle to see that if you examined the wonderfully tight tolerances of the Voigtlander 'Cheapie'!

However, regardless of costs, they all bring their own attributes to the table. The voigtlander is 'dreamy' and slightly soft wide open, the Zeiss has that vivid 'pop' and the Leica has that classic sharp-suited understatement which has powered a thousand iconic images.

So, it comes down to the myriad factors of cost, performance and character. I have to say, the Zeiss Planar produces some amazing images, and I'm drawn to its own draw characteristics myself.
Click to expand...


Thank you. I completely forgot about Voigtlander, even though I have a couple of their glass for Nikon, and I'd have to say they are fantastic, especially for their price. However, I am not sure how they measure up against the Zeiss & Leica?

Cost aside, I wonder how these three would measure up against one another at the same aperture?

If I'm to go for the M9 (or M10 as your profile indicates ;) ), ideally I'd go for the fastest lens (35mm and 50mm); so I guess it will be a toss-up between the Leica glass vs. the Voigtlander :shrug:



menthel said:
Damn this thread. Its not the m9, its the zeiss lenses that I am lusting after! I have 3 for my contax g2 and the 'pop' is just so pronounced and the colour rendition is superb. I am now looking at the M6 in the classifieds and trying to work out how I could afford that and a zeiss 50mm for it. Gah!
Click to expand...

I've not used Zeiss nor Leica glass; so I really can't decide on which way I'd go. Shame that no one in my part of the world develops film to good standards anymore, otherwise I'd go for a film body as price would be a factor, and I'd much rather make an "investment" into the fastest glass.



CT said:
Oh dear! :D
Click to expand...

Tell me about it!
 
Good to see so many venturing onto the slippery slope... :lol:

Wail said:
Shame that no one in my part of the world develops film to good standards anymore, otherwise I'd go for a film body as price would be a factor, and I'd much rather make an "investment" into the fastest glass.
Click to expand...

Why not look for a new or s/h film processor?
 
Wail said:
:eek:

I'd like to know how that goes, if you don't mind.

On the matter of the M9; I hope you don't mind me asking a few questions?

Is this the Zeiss Planar you went for? If so, how come this over any of the Leica variant?

Are all the Zeiss ZM lenses compatible with the M9?

Last for now, if you don't mind the too many questions; are all these Leica M series lenses compatible?

Thanks :thumbs:
Click to expand...

All Zeiss ZM lenses are compatible with Leica M cameras. I've got the Zeiss 50/2 Planar. The Leica version is 3x the price which explains why I got the Zeiss. It is wonderfully built, and quite a few (well, 3) Leica owners I've spoken to have switched to Zeiss and sold Leica glass. However, I do lust after a Leica 35 1.4, but that's really big money.

As said above, the general order is Voigtlander (cheap, decentish quality but can be soft wide open), Zeiss (sharp & crisp, possibly lacking some of the "clarity" of Leica), and the Leica lenses which start at Summarit for f/2.8, Summicron for f/2.0 and Summilux for f/1.4. If you have A LOT of money, a Noctilux gives you f/0.95.

Have a look at The Classic Camera which has a load of lustworthy stuff including all the Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica stuff.
 
Last edited:
Second professional paid outing today for the M9. I had a brochure and ad shoot for a nearby private school. This sort of work pays very nicely and the kids are just an absolute scream to work with.

In conjunction with the M9 and 50 f/2 I had my 1DIV with a 70-200 2.8 II and a 17-40, plus a 580 EXII.

I took about a third of my shots with the Leica. It was my second paid session with the Leica and I'm getting more comfortable with using it under pressure. Focusing remains tricky and I just need to practice a lot more. It's not the accuracy, which I am nailing very nicely now, but the time it takes me to get it spot on. Most of my shooting was at f/2 or f/2.8 so accuracy is essential. Rather than just getting straight to the correct focus, I tend to go past it and then back again which is a bit annoying. This means it takes about 1 second to focus and I'd like it to be faster.

I was mostly on manual but went to aperture priority a bit as the light was changing from sunny to cloudy. Aperture priority seems to work nicely.

Interestingly, when going through the pictures on the computer, I often couldn't immediately say if a pic had been taken with the 1D and 70-200 and a pic with the M9 without looking at the filename (I use different filename formats on each camera). I was using the 70-200 at 2.8 most of the time so had the same shallow depth of field and bokehtastic style. Note that I had used the Lightroom "punch" setting on the Leica shots so they matched the rather more saturated colour of the Canon.

Good news that one £5k combo was producing results that matched another £5k combo :D.

However, there were a fair number of shots that I just knew were taken with the M9. They had what I can only describe as a "look" or "wow factor". A couple in particular are just gorgeous - stonking. None of the Canon pics grabbed me in this way.

Usage wise, the Leica continues to cause much less of a stir amongst my subjects. They are definitely more relaxed when the Leica comes out. I tend to find a spot to sit, pre-focus, then sit and wait a bit before zapping the shot. I used the Canon for longer reach shots and most of the pics when the subject is moving, plus the wide shots with the 17-40. I also did some remote flash work with Pocket Wizards using the 1D as I haven't tried the PWs in anger on the Leica yet.

So in summary, the M9 is a delight to use and particularly effective at 2-5 meters with stationary or slow-moving subjects. Having both the Canon and the Leica really is having the best of both worlds. I would be hesitant to do a paid shoot with only one or the other. But after today I can comfortably say that I'm very happy with the whole set, and the majority of the really top notch pics came from the M9. Having taken 30% of shots with the M9, I'd say 80% of my 5* shots were from it.

Sorry - can't show any results from this shoot (kids involved) so you'll have to trust me on this :cool:.
 
Tobers said:
All Zeiss ZM lenses are compatible with Leica M cameras. I've got the Zeiss 50/2 Planar. The Leica version is 3x the price which explains why I got the Zeiss. It is wonderfully built, and quite a few (well, 3) Leica owners I've spoken to have switched to Zeiss and sold Leica glass. However, I do lust after a Leica 35 1.4, but that's really big money.

As said above, the general order is Voigtlander (cheap, decentish quality but can be soft wide open), Zeiss (sharp & crisp, possibly lacking some of the "clarity" of Leica), and the Leica lenses which start at Summarit for f/2.8, Summicron for f/2.0 and Summilux for f/1.4. If you have A LOT of money, a Noctilux gives you f/0.95.

Have a look at The Classic Camera which has a load of lustworthy stuff including all the Voigtlander, Zeiss and Leica stuff.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the feedback & clarifications.

I am a big fan of f/1.4 and that would be one of my key decisions if I go down this route. However, I don't have the funds right now for the M9, so it's all just me thinking seriously about getting one.

Ideally, I'd go for the 35 f/1.4 and the 50 f/0.95; not that I have lots of money, but it's something I'd keep for a lifetime and then hope to pass on to my daughter one day, along with my vintage pen collection.

However, cost is a factor, so I may go with the M9 and the Voigtlander lens. The 35mm and 50mm are not that far out of reach; but it would be a good few months before I can make that kind of purchase; which brings me another issue! As the M9 was launched in Sept. 2009, I wonder if its' successor is just around the corner?

By any chance, do you know anyone using the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.1; and if it's any good? Also, any idea on where to get the Screw to M-Bayonet adapter to mount the Voigtlander?

And thank you for the link ... you're not making things easy by the way :D :p
 
Ha ha! M9 plus 35 1.4 plus Noctilux is around £16k. Nice combo though.

Plenty of people use the Voigtlander 1.1 to good effect. Do a search for reviews on Google and there are at least a couple of groups on Flickr.

Is a successor around the corner? Probably. There usually is.
 
Tobers said:
Ha ha! M9 plus 35 1.4 plus Noctilux is around £16k. Nice combo though.

Plenty of people use the Voigtlander 1.1 to good effect. Do a search for reviews on Google and there are at least a couple of groups on Flickr.

Is a successor around the corner? Probably. There usually is.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Ideally, that would be a great combination, but spending that kind of money on a camera body and a couple of lenses that are just a hobby just isn't doable.

I see myself going down the M9 route, with the Voigtlander 35 f/1.4; and then build-up on the lenses from Zeiss or Leica as time goes by.



acs said:
If you follow these things... http://leicarumors.com/2011/05/14/is-this-the-new-digital-leica-mp-m9-p.aspx/



Try Ffordes or Robert White -- don't forget they are matched to the focal length.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link and the heads' up. I've been trying to see if RW gets the prices, but they don't seem to have them. I guess I'll need to call them once I decide to pull the plug.

On the flip side, I have seen Leica opening a store in West End of London; which is ideal for me if I decide to buy the M9, but I highly doubt they'll have anything other than Leica stuff in there.
 
One lens worth looking out for is a Leica Summicron-C 40mm f2. Stunning lens, very small and incredibly cheap for the IQ. I sold mine last week for £365 to an M9 owner who was amazed at how good it was. He said, and this is an exact quote, "gave it a run on my M9 to test it out and the results are jaw dropping, it has better edge to edge sharpness than my 3.5k Leica Summilux, its like razor sharp with great contrast."
 
paulcamcas said:
One lens worth looking out for is a Leica Summicron-C 40mm f2. Stunning lens, very small and incredibly cheap for the IQ. I sold mine last week for £365 to an M9 owner who was amazed at how good it was. He said, and this is an exact quote, "gave it a run on my M9 to test it out and the results are jaw dropping, it has better edge to edge sharpness than my 3.5k Leica Summilux, its like razor sharp with great contrast."
Click to expand...

That's interesting. A Summicron for £365 is a great deal. Quite a few people reckon the Summicrons are better than the Summiluxes apart from the slightly worse max-aperture obviously.

Another paid outing today - this time some specific sports work for another school. With me today was my 400 2.8 (though not for much longer) for the 1D with a 70-200, 17-40 and 1.4x extender, plus the M9 and Zeiss 2/50.

As it turned out, I only took 12 shots with the Leica against 101 with the Canon. It's official - the M9 sucks at cricket :D. However, I did nail a few very nice atmosphere type shots with the M9 which are lovely quality pictures.

Also, on the downside, an odd occurrence occurred. After taking two pictures, the Leica told me that it was "full". This was patently nonsense as I'd just formatted an 8GB card, and the info screen was giving me 320 shots to go. I reformatted the card, losing the two shots I'd taken, but it still thought it was full. It said "full" in the viewfinder. After removing & replacing the battery, all was well again. Odd. There are definitely a few firmware glitches lurking under the brass top plate I think. After that, it was fine, but it shouldn't happen.
 
Interesting to note this memory anomaly, since this isn't the 1st memory anomaly you've had! Are Leica aware of any issues, or could this be due to the non-braded battery :shrug:?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top