Leica M9/M9-P

[eric23]

Good Day All,

I am thinking about getting a Leica M9 or M9-P?

I sold all my Nikon stuff last year when I done being a Pro.I now want to get one nice camera and a lens to take photos with.

I am not sure if I should pay the extra 1K to get the M9-P or not and what would be the best lens to start with? I was thinking of just getting the a 50mm F2.5 for now and saving up for a better one next year.

I use to have a M6 a lond time ago and wish I would have kept the glass.

Thanks,

Eric

[Jobin]

If I had the option I definitely would. I'd go for the m9 and save the extra money for some sweet glass.

[Mike Ip]

In my opinion the M9-p isn't worth the extra money. If you want the M9 and logo cover, used some gaffers tape. Get a giottos cover for the LCD and that's much less than $1000 - albeit not as nice looking.

50 2.5 is certainly a nice start. I prefer to go a little wider. I'd suggest a Zeiss 35 f/2 or a maybe a Leica 35 2.5

[eric23]

Originally Posted by Mike Ip

In my opinion the M9-p isn't worth the extra money. If you want the M9 and logo cover, used some gaffers tape. Get a giottos cover for the LCD and that's much less than $1000 - albeit not as nice looking.

50 2.5 is certainly a nice start. I prefer to go a little wider. I'd suggest a Zeiss 35 f/2 or a maybe a Leica 35 2.5

Hi Mike,

Thanks for all the info.

Does the Zeiss lens work with the M 8/9?

Are you talking about this one??

https://www.thecamerastore.com/produ...-t-35mm-f20-zm

Thanks,

Eric

[250swb]

The Zeiss isn't as compact as a 35mm Summicron, but the price alone has to make up for that.

There is no difference between the M9 and M9-P other than cosmetic and a posh glass LCD screen. Protect the M9 screen with a Giottos or iPhone screen protector and you are good to go for less money, the price of another CV lens or similar.

Steve

[jsrockit]

I can confirm that the M9 and a 50mm Summarit 2.5 is a great combo.

[SDK]

I’ve been using a Zeiss 35mm/2.8 C Biogon on my M9P and it’s a fantastic lens. I manually set the lens selection to 35mm/2 11310/11311. It’s slightly better than the Leica 35mm/2.5 Summarit (very slightly) but less convenient without the 6 bit code on the mount.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by SDK

I’ve been using a Zeiss 35mm/2.8 C Biogon on my M9P and it’s a fantastic lens. I manually set the lens selection to 35mm/2 11310/11311. It’s slightly better than the Leica 35mm/2.5 Summarit (very slightly) but less convenient without the 6 bit code on the mount.

or the focusing tab... (but I love the c-biogon too).

[eric23]

I am thking of getting a Leica Summarit 50mm F2.5 to start off with. Should I do that or spend the extra cash and get the F2.0 or F1.4?

[jaapv]

Depends what you want. Certainly the Summilux 50 asph is one of the best, maybe the best- lenses ever built, but if you will not use its potential it is money wasted. The Elmarit and Summicron are both amazing lenses in their own right with each a different concept. First decide what you need/want in a lens, then compare the prices with your financial reality and then decide.

[SDK]

Originally Posted by eric23

I am thking of getting a Leica Summarit 50mm F2.5 to start off with. Should I do that or spend the extra cash and get the F2.0 or F1.4?

That depends on how much low light shooting you want to do. If you plan to do a lot, you should consider a faster lens because the high ISO (>800 ISO) performance of the M9 gets rather noisy, and a faster lens will allow you to more easily handhold shots indoors at night, or under artificial light.

I haven’t used the 50mm/2.5 Summarit, but it’s a newer and better design than the 50mm/2 Summicron. The 50mm/1.4 Summilux ASPH is supposed to be fantastic, but it’s quite expensive. The older 50mm Summiluxes are an antique design which will give softer results wide open. This appeals to a lot of people but not me, and used 50mm Summiluxes are not cheap either.

Here is my experience with some 50mm RF lenses in a nutshell: I’ve been using an old Canon screw mount 50mm/1.8 in my M9P; the lens is quite nice, not too soft, though it won’t focus as close as modern M-mount 50mm lenses. I have also used the Zeiss 50mm/2 Planar ZM on film and that’s a fantastic lens. Also good is the 50mm/1.5 Sonnar ZM, which has a lot of character at wider apertures with a sharp central image, but does suffer from focus shift at some apertures that make it slower to use and require you to learn your lens and take the shift into account. For a while I had a Konica KM 50mm/2 Hexanon, but was not really impressed with it wide open, it showed some smearing of detail across the whole frame that I found unacceptable, but maybe that was just my sample of it. Overall the Planar 50mm was the best of the lot, and I might get another one some day as I regret selling it.

[eric23]

Originally Posted by SDK

That depends on how much low light shooting you want to do. If you plan to do a lot, you should consider a faster lens because the high ISO (>800 ISO) performance of the M9 gets rather noisy, and a faster lens will allow you to more easily handhold shots indoors at night, or under artificial light.

I haven’t used the 50mm/2.5 Summarit, but it’s a newer and better design than the 50mm/2 Summicron. The 50mm/1.4 Summilux ASPH is supposed to be fantastic, but it’s quite expensive. The older 50mm Summiluxes are an antique design which will give softer results wide open. This appeals to a lot of people but not me, and used 50mm Summiluxes are not cheap either.

Here is my experience with some 50mm RF lenses in a nutshell: I’ve been using an old Canon screw mount 50mm/1.8 in my M9P; the lens is quite nice, not too soft, though it won’t focus as close as modern M-mount 50mm lenses. I have also used the Zeiss 50mm/2 Planar ZM on film and that’s a fantastic lens. Also good is the 50mm/1.5 Sonnar ZM, which has a lot of character at wider apertures with a sharp central image, but does suffer from focus shift at some apertures that make it slower to use and require you to learn your lens and take the shift into account. For a while I had a Konica KM 50mm/2 Hexanon, but was not really impressed with it wide open, it showed some smearing of detail across the whole frame that I found unacceptable, but maybe that was just my sample of it. Overall the Planar 50mm was the best of the lot, and I might get another one some day as I regret selling it.

Thanks for the info, I did not know about the ISO not working the best on 800.

I might look at the 50mm F2 or 35mm F2 to start then.

[jaapv]

The M9 is fine up to 1600 and even 2000 is quite acceptable, 2500 usable - if you expose correctly and use the latest version of LR or Photoshop. Many tests put it on par or just below the 5D2.
It is just a matter of technique to get excellent results.
Last night, ISO 1600 handheld. (=ISO 2000 on Canon) Summilux 50 asph.
The M9 may show a slight noise structure, but the Canon will lose detail and shift color in shots like this.

[Andrea Taurisano]

Originally Posted by jaapv

The M9 is fine up to 1600 and even 2000 is quite acceptable, 2500 usable - if you expose correctly and use the latest version of LR or Photoshop.

Totally agree. But as you say it's pretty decisive to get the exposure right to not end up too grainy. But definitely usable at high ISO. Nice night shot BTW.

[eric23]

Originally Posted by jaapv

The M9 is fine up to 1600 and even 2000 is quite acceptable, 2500 usable - if you expose correctly and use the latest version of LR or Photoshop. Many tests put it on par or just below the 5D2.
It is just a matter of technique to get excellent results.
Last night, ISO 1600 handheld. (=ISO 2000 on Canon) Summilux 50 asph.
The M9 may show a slight noise structure, but the Canon will lose detail and shift color in shots like this.

Great photo, thanks for sharing.

[Richard G]

Originally Posted by eric23

I am thking of getting a Leica Summarit 50mm F2.5 to start off with. Should I do that or spend the extra cash and get the F2.0 or F1.4?

This is where an f 2.5 or 2.8 lens would be fine given the higher ISO capability of a digital M. You can shoot colour at 800 with confidence and black and white at even higher ISOs with an M9. There's a stop at least you don't need to pay for in a lens. If I was starting I would favour the 50 Summarit you're considering because of its size. When I last looked in detail at this I think it was 11mm shorter than my Summicron. It would be great on the M9. I'm finding I am using my Summicron more than ever, having not yet got over my love of the Zeiss C Sonnar. Compactness in a Leica camera lens combination is crucial. I carry a camera every day and my Fuji is currently out of action so an M Leica is it.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by Richard G

If I was starting I would favour the 50 Summarit you're considering because of its size. When I last looked in detail at this I think it was 11mm shorter than my Summicron. It would be great on the M9. I'm finding I am using my Summicron more than ever, having not yet got over my love of the Zeiss C Sonnar. Compactness in a Leica camera lens combination is crucial. I carry a camera every day and my Fuji is currently out of action so an M Leica is it.

The 50mm Summarit is one of my favorite lenses if not my favorite. It works great on the M9. Don't let the "budget" part of these lenses fool you... they are great.

[kbg32]

The M9 and the M9P are the same camera except for the LCD and the M9P having traditional logos. Put the extra cash towards a good lens. Zeiss lenses are great! Can't go wrong with the ZM 35/2 Biogon.

[Keyne]

LOVE the c-biogon. It's my favorite lens. That being said I don't have that many lenses.

[Andrea Taurisano]

Originally Posted by eric23

Good Day All,

I am thinking about getting a Leica M9 or M9-P?

I am not sure if I should pay the extra 1K to get the M9-P or not and what would be the best lens to start with? I was thinking of just getting the a 50mm F2.5 for now and saving up for a better one next year.

Eric

Whether you should pay the extra 1K for a M9-P depends on how good care you'll take of your camera while carrying it, transporting it, storing it. Or alternatively on how well you can live with a scratched LCD.

Rembembering how irritating I found it to use the scratched LCD of my earlier M8, I didn't think twice before I chose a M9-P instead of a M9 when I upgraded last year. I couldn't care less of whether it has a red dot or not, but that scratchproof LCD made all the difference for me (and after almost one year of not too careful use, it's still just like new).

[eric23]

Originally Posted by Andrea Taurisano

Whether you should pay the extra 1K for a M9-P depends on how good care you'll take of your camera while carrying it, transporting it, storing it. Or alternatively on how well you can live with a scratched LCD.

Rembembering how irritating I found it to use the scratched LCD of my earlier M8, I didn't think twice before I chose a M9-P instead of a M9 when I upgraded last year. I couldn't care less of whether it has a red dot or not, but that scratchproof LCD made all the difference for me (and after almost one year of not too careful use, it's still just like new).

I just feel that this is my one ant only nice camera I am going to buy any day soon, so I don't mind spending the extra 1K to get the best one.

[jsrockit]

Originally Posted by eric23

I just feel that this is my one ant only nice camera I am going to buy any day soon, so I don't mind spending the extra 1K to get the best one.

In that case, buy what you really want so you don't have to think about what could have been.

[ChrisLivsey]

Originally Posted by eric23

I just feel that this is my one ant only nice camera I am going to buy any day soon, so I don't mind spending the extra 1K to get the best one.

Problem with digital, and you know that from Nikon, that "the best one" is only best for a few years, 3/5, then "the best one" is another dollop of cash. Having said that if you don't get the M9P version you will regret it

[250swb]

Originally Posted by eric23

I just feel that this is my one ant only nice camera I am going to buy any day soon, so I don't mind spending the extra 1K to get the best one.

Yes but it is only a cosmetic difference. For now you could buy another lens and get on photographing stuff. Even if you don't go for an aftermarket LCD protector and if you really bugger up your LCD you could still spend the extra £1100 on an M9-P upgrade to your M9 much later, and it will come back like a new camera!

Steve

[brokencivilian]

I am going through this dilemma right now, m9, or m9p. seems like a easy decision ie. save a grand... but for some reason the m9p is calling.