Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/11/09

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] m9 review
From: richard.lists at gmail.com (Richard Man)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 19:08:46 -0800
References: <C71D1BB1.58386%mark@rabinergroup.com> <2B32D10C-CE25-485C-8D04-E9EABD6CDEB6@ameritech.net> <440b792d0911091830v66a7294bh3e15e4b83c8674b0@mail.gmail.com> <F7AEDC88-1EFE-4907-9A5B-DA18AD31E066@ameritech.net>

If there is a reasonably inexpensive 35-equivalence 1.4, or heck, even
a pedestrian F2 M lens, that'd be great for the M8. I suppose my
thinking is colored because I bought the 35/1.4 ASPH for a mere $1300
back in 2004.

In any case, no new M9 for me. May be when the used prices come down
to ... $4000 in a year or two..

I still think the M9 is great and would get it in a heartbeat if not
for the price.

A D3 is un-exciting :-) For the size and weight, it should produce
prints 4x better than the M9 :-)

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 6:57 PM, Dante Stella <dstella1 at ameritech.net> 
wrote:
> Mehrdad -
>
> To clarify, I don't believe that the M8 was a failure - but the bar is a
> little higher in 2009 than it was in 2006. ?Would I have bought an M9 for
> seven grand in 2006? ?Yes. ?But in 2009/2010 - after buying an M8 and
> practicing for a long time to get over its quirks - the M9 is not as
> exciting anymore. ?Like a lot of M8 owners, I simply bought a nice 28mm 
> lens
> and moved on with life and using the camera.
>

-- 
// richard m: richard @imagecraft.com
// w: http://www.imagecraft.com/pub/Portfolio09/ blog:
http://rfman.wordpress.com
// book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/745963


In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] m9 review)
Message from dstella1 at ameritech.net (Dante Stella) ([Leica] m9 review)
Message from msadat at gmail.com (mehrdad) ([Leica] m9 review)
Message from dstella1 at ameritech.net (Dante Stella) ([Leica] m9 review)