The Leica M9.

Leica M9

I was thinking this morning, after surveying the current crop of digital cameras, that if a brand new camera was released today and it was called the CaNikoSoFujOlySigRicoPenta X1-Turbo, but it had the output of the M9 at base ISO, it would sell like crazy.

—Peter.

 

11 thoughts on “The Leica M9.

  1. Andrew says:

    I’d even buy one if I didn’t already own the M-E.

  2. Henry says:

    I now have two m9p’s and have no desire for another camera. Higher iso, wi-fi, image stabilizer, head-stands, or any other magic — forget it! My ccd renders so nicely, I need nothing more. Thanks for not succumbing to popular snapography, Peter. You’re the best.

    • Henry, consider yourself fortunate for having two M9P cameras! I will soon take possession of a 2nd M9… the world has moved on to other cameras but I still find the M9/M-E/M9Monochrom/M8 sensors capable of the most beautiful digital output.

  3. Olivier says:

    Well, according to you, the announcement of such a camera is just around the corner, isn’t it? Maybe just not from CaNikoSoFujOlySigRicoPenta…

    • Well, my source hasn’t given me any further information since my last post, so you can decide whether it’s “around the corner” or not.

      As for me, I’ve decided that all I need is already there in the M9 and M8 sensors.

      • Olivier says:

        Thanks for the update on that mystery camera!

        And I totally agree. I still enjoy my trusted M8 very much. If it wasn’t for the rangefinder’s inherent predisposition for misalignment and the hassle of having it aligned, I wouldn’t feel the need for something else.

        Leica recently patented an optoelectronic rangefinder that would most certainly remediate this issue. Let’s see what the future will hold. What’s certainly around the corner is Photokina!

        • The occasional misalignment of the rangefinder is the only thing that I loathe about these cameras. It’s the Achilles heel, so to speak. The one thing I requested from the company designing the new CCD-based rangefinder is a mechanism for the user to easily adjust rangefinder focus, as needed. I still don’t know if that was part of the final design… or if it’s even possible.

          • Olivier says:

            The problem is that sometimes, it’s also the lenses that need to be adjusted. And that’s not something that can be easily done by the user. If the rangefinder is fully mechanical, I don’t see an easy solution. I despise everything that is “by wire”, but in this case, I wouldn’t mind an electronic rangefinder that would allow for individual calibrations for several lenses. The focusing would still be fully mechanical, just not the patch alignment. I wouldn’t mind a smaller (M6-sized) body either.

  4. I prefer the high ISO performance of my M9, particularly when pushing 640 one to two stops …the new CCD RF should perform high ISO even better as more pixels tends to improve high ISO performance, all else being equal

  5. Wakingmist says:

    Hi Peter,

    I’ve jumped ship. Not because I wanted to. Got rid of the M9 as I was being plagued with too many issues. Sensor issues, corrupted cards, freezing. Loved the camera. Loved the “look” of the CCD. And most of all miss the dynamic range in the highlights.

    Upgraded to the M262, and to be honest, the colour it produces is quite nice. Similar feel with little post processing required for colour images. No blue Canon/Sony/Fuji/Nikon look. BUT bloody zero latitude in the highlights. Huge recovery in the shadows. Still getting used to the beast.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s