Leica M9

[Andy M]

Anybody taken the plunge and ordered an M9? I've been expecting somebody to post a 'new toy' thread, but nothing so far...

I'm seriously tempted, but - and this won't be news to most - Leica lenses are horrendously expensive!

M9 (£4217) + 24mm Summilux (£3162) + 35mm Summilux (£2110) + f0.95 Noctilux (£5375) + VAT =



For those not familiar with Leica M's, the M9 brochure is worth a download: http://uk.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.ph...

[GetCarter]

Andy... STOP IT!

[Andy M]

GetCarter said:

Andy... STOP IT!

You're tempted, aren't you?!

[pauljc]

Very nice.

I have Red Dot Cameras around the corner, too scared to go in.

[J111]

I wonder which fundamental element of the camera's design they'll have made a total bks of this time?

[furtive]

Jackal from Parabolique ( http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/profile.asp?mem... ) has got one. Here is is flickr stream:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/moogibang/

Edited by furtive on Tuesday 22 September 14:14

[CVP]

Tempted, but just look at the cost of the lenses

In theory could be a super reportage style package if one has the cash or if the bills pay for the kit. Until a lotery win comes my way this and the 959 on the drive will just have to remain a dream.

Chris

[beano500]

CVP said:

Tempted, but just look at the cost of the lenses

Ouch! Never mind the width, feel the quality!

I just had a mental daydream of someone shoving a £10 filter on the front (and then wondering why they weren't any better than your average common and garden kit lens) too

[_dobbo_]

Funnily enough I've just been offered an M8 for £1750. Must. Resist.

[Andy M]

_dobbo_ said:

Funnily enough I've just been offered an M8 for £1750. Must. Resist.

http://www.reddotcameras.co.uk/product_info.php?cPath=34_35&products_id=1629

[_dobbo_]

Interesting Andy - I guess that shows that's about the right price second hand and I shouldn't see it as a particularly good deal. I was only toying with the idea really, I can't possibly justify another camera to the wife.

[Simpo Two]

'Call that a Leica?'

If you want to be exclusive you need one of these - £19K just for the body:

[tog]

The S2 looks pretty cool actually - kind of a Pentax 67 for the digital era.

[GetCarter]

Simpo Two said:

£19K just for the body

That's just showing off.

Funny how this thread brings out the old guard

[Simpo Two]

GetCarter said:

Funny how this thread brings out the old guard

A fine compliment sir. More brandy?

I think most of us would admit that part of the attraction of Leica is the 'bragging rights' ('exclusivity' is probably how the marketing dept would prefer it to be called). You'd be less happy to spend £19K if it said 'BEKO' on the top

[GetCarter]

Between this lot, on this thread, there are nearly 80,000 posts.

I think we should all get out more.

Especially anyone with 30,000 posts or more.

[Rob13]

I've got a Leica myself....it just that someone kindly wrote Panasonic on it too

They look great photos, but what do you get with a Leica that you wouldnt get with a Canon or Nikon top end DSLR with top quality glass?

[_dobbo_]

Me too, but mine says Leica on it!



M series cameras are very very different beasts to top end SLRs.

They are smaller and lighter, as are the lenses, and the image quality is typically much better.

Quick question: Do I need two kidneys? If not, I've got a plan....

Edited by _dobbo_ on Tuesday 22 September 21:16

[RobDickinson]

Andy M said:

f0.95 Noctilux

Seen a test of that and , tbh, shocked at how soft it was, and how poorly focused the so called leica expert managed to get the shots too.

As for the M9, looks a great camera, what Leica should heve produced day 1 for digital. 18mp, great low ISO IQ, moire for free, but plenty of detail.

Enough quality and detail (low ISO) to compete with the high end FF SLR's

Shocking high ISO noise (even low ISO) because of the CCD sensor and a total lack of features you'd expect (decent LCD for one).

Its small for a full frame camera but not that small compared to some of the smaller SLRs

[tog]

Rob13 said:

what do you get with a Leica that you wouldnt get with a Canon or Nikon top end DSLR with top quality glass?

A different way of working and shooting. There's only minor differences between digital SLRs these days - all will basically give you sharp, well exposed photos, and good image quality at any ISO speed, compared with fast colour film. A rangefinder just offers a completely different way of photographing - a direct viewfinder with no blackout and much less shutter lag; small, fast lenses that cover the most useful focal lengths; and a quiet, unobtrusive action (this last point is less obvious today with electric shutters than it was with the film Leicas with their lovely cloth shutters that were almost silent). I don't consider the price excessive compared with Leica rangefinders of old. They have never been cheap and in the old days they were on a par with top-end SLRs, which they still are.

I still use my grandmother's old 1960s M4 from time to time, and would love a pair of M9s. All I'd need is a 35mm f1.4 and a 90mm f2