Does the Leica M(240) Address Your Needs (vs M9)?

Interesting question, my experience of suggests is ISO 320 very good, ISO 640 good, ISO1250 ok and ISO1600 is about as far as I want to go.

My Nikon D800 is very good , it is almost 2 stops better. ISO 1600 is about the same as the M9 at 640, when resized to 18mp equivalent.  3200 is ok and 6400 when you have to. 12,800 not great but at a pinch it is useable rather like the M9 at 2500, the D800 at 25,600  is rubbish.

The Nikkor 50mm f1.4 is not very good wide open, ( that's being polite ) so I tend to use a 24/70 f2.8 zoom , which is pretty good. On simple grounds of low light, ths low noise advantage is lost to using a very good fast lens, ( I have a 50mm f1.1 nokton as well.... If light levels are thwart bad)

The Nikon is very good in many areas and pared with the Leica a strong combination. The M type 240 will no doubt be better than the M9  in many areas, but  the M8 was and is good, the M9 was a major step forward , but unless the video mode, live view, EVF and focus peeking are of critical importance , for traditional rangefinder photography the step forward is somewhat less In my opinion but a welcome improvement and the same price!

Whats not to like but I doubt if I will been a hurry to change, I got the M9 because it fulfilled my needs then and still does.