How reliable is a Leica M9

I am now about to replace my Nikon D700 with a Leica M9. I have read many posts on different sites on the net that Leica M9 is a very sensitive and not very reliable camera and that service times are very long. I know that weather sealing is missing but how sensitivity and reliable is a Leica M9? I often do jobs in different slum areas, refugee camps, among nature people etc. and have to trust the camera. Does anyone have personal experience.

Thanks in advace
Tommy

There is plenty of experience.

The M9 is not perfect and there have been a few posts here, with people having a problem. I had a M8 that was DOA and another M8 that had to go in and have the focusing calibrated. It took only a week and was back.

I am on my 3rd M9 and have not had the first problem with any of them. They are pretty rugged and if they work when you get it, you got a good chance that they will work for years. Leica's build quality for both their M bodies and their lenses are unsurpassed. But then, so is their price!

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida

For moire caused by the lack of the AA filter. I know that's not what you are asking though. I have owned my M9 since Sept 09 (and an M8 before that) and it hasn't missed a beat.

It depends on what you mean by “reliable”. If reliable in actual use:

If you are asking for AF speed and new to rangefinders, look elsewhere unless you want to learn all over again. Speed with manual cameras also come with learning about your very own camera’s lens. Learning how to pre-focus without the camera up to your eye, etc.

If you are looking to be close up to your subjects without actually being physically close, reconsider rangefinders. Its advised not to go past 135mm, after that manual focusing is less than 50% accuracy.

Reliability in rugged-ness of the M9 will last forever. Though its digital, who knows. Electronics will eventually fail at some point. Right?
Best wishes. Let us know if you have more questions.

i love my m9, but it isn't perfect. bought it about 14 months ago, and have shot more than 20k photos in half a dozen countries--including 3 months in the tropics off the beaten track a bit. i use it, don't baby it, in whatever weather, and for the most part it has done well. i have had some minor fit and finish issues, and currently the camera is off for service because the rear dial ceased to work. (on the plus side, i could still use the camera fine, just couldn't zoom in to pictures on the lcd.)

the less good news is that i have experienced more glitches with this camera than i have with all my other digital cameras combined (considerably more frames, that). the camera does sometimes seize up and needs to be rebooted by removing the battery (which is a pain to do). this has happened maybe three times ever with my canons, and over a dozen times with the leica--not paralyzing, but frustrating, and potentially very bad--i've been lucky it hasn't happened at the worst possible moment, yet. i have also had three separate types of failed files recorded--some weird horizontal lines, a situation where half the sensor recorded a different color than the other half, and several times, portions of a subsequent picture written into the file of the preceding photo. all of these are potentially devastating, but, in total under a dozen bad files; not a bad rate compared to film, but much worse than anything i've seen with canon or nikon.

in spite of the less than perfect function (bear in mind i've killed a number of my other cameras through hard use, too), i continue to prefer the m9 (and in a sense would consider it more reliable than many other cameras) because in normal operation, it does exactly what i tell it to: it never misses focus (because that would be up to me), it never misses exposure (me, again, since i only use it on manual and can instantly adjust the aperture and speed by feel--something lost on canon or nikon), and it's more likely to be there and help me get the shot fast than anything else. but if you are planning to use it for serious photo work, you need backups (and way more extra batteries than you think). for me, so far, my film m6ttl (shutter speed dial matches the m9, unlike older film m's or the mp) and canons serve backup duty, but if i were primarily a photographer shooting full time, i would need at least one spare m9 body. if, otoh, you have a day job, but want to take lots of photos along the way, i would say you could do a whole lot worse than an m9 (and for longer trips, an m6ttl tucked away for peace of mind, out-and-out monsoons, and the odd film indulgence).

I don't know anything about the reliability of the M9, I only know that in good hands it helps produce stunning photos. But what is wrong with your D700?

The most you coud get for a second hand d700 would be around 1250 GBP or 1300 euros and this will not get you very far in Leica land. Perhaps enough for a second hand 50mm summicron. Can't you just keep both systems? I presume Leica wins in terms of portability, but for a single M9 body you could get the 200/2 VR Nikkor, the 105 VR macro, the 135/2 DC. As you can see I am just pointing out the lenses that cannot be had in the M mount. I am not even mentioning the 14-24, the 24/1.4 or the 35/1.4G. Just my thoughts.

Theo

Thanks for your comments Theo!

There is absolutely nothing wrong to use the D700. I have for many years worked with both Nikon's full frame and APS-C cameras side by side and it is in most cases an excellent combination, using the D700 for wide normal and D300/D7000 for telephoto. My idea now is to continue using the D7000 for the focal lengths above 50 mm and rapid motive but replace my D700 with a Leica M9 for focal lengths below 50 mm and slower motives. I know I will lose some performance (AF, High ISO, advanced light metering, etc.) but I win in terms of a more discreet camera and image quality/image character if I manage to learn to deal with a range finder camera and some high quality primes (28 and 50 mm Summicron). I shoot sometimes in places where there is not so good to show up big camera equipment (see picture report on http://www.tommyhansen.se ).

Besides this, I see a big challenge to shoot with a less automatic camera equipment, which means greater demands on me as a photographer.

/ Tommy

No problems since I bought it a year ago. Works very well.
Check out my M9 summary if you like to.

http://www.dirkahlgrim.com/wordpress/?p=86

D!RK

Hello Tommy,

being back from Israel / West Bank while my M9 was on (third) maintenance trip to solms, I can confirm that the D700 is clearly not the ideal camera to shoot in "difficult" environments: its body + lens size and loud shutter attracts attention and very often ruins spontaneity.

Wherever I was - Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Ramallah, Hebron, Kalandia, camps, ... - I missed my "stealthed" M9's reduced size, non-existent weight and silent shutter.

D700's autofocus did not help that much, due to its tendency to lock on high contrast patterns as opposed to intended subjects in quick shots, and I missed the ability to see what was going on outside scene framed in the viewfinder (one of the greatest bonuses of rangefinder cameras). Framing people with the 24-70 was like pointing a rocket launcher and made subjects adversely perceive me as a "pro" making money out of their conditions. Even when I switched to the 35mm, things changed not that much since the D700's loud shutter noise was audible up to 10 meters away - lots of turned heads.

In such environments the M9 (with black-taped logos) would had made me look as one the other hundreds "tourists" with compact cameras, i.e. inoffensive by definition.

I can confirm that from the pure image quality standpoint, the M9 is the finest camera I had the opportunity to use south of the D3x and (some) digital medium format systems. Focus is as good as your eye, rangefinder alignment and lens calibration; metering is not as sophisticated as in the D700 but is easy to learn; M lenses are on average quite better than Nikon counterparts (as an example, the 50mm f1.4 G becomes comparable to the Summicron 50mm f2 mkV only at f5.6, corners catching up at f8). You do not get a good lcd, though. But, at the end of the day, shooting with the M9 is quite a deep experience which no other camera (and I really mean "no other") proved so far able to replicate.

On reliability, the M9 can be a a hit and miss. The M9 is entirely built and tuned by hand ("scary" clips available on youtube), it does not have top quality dials and buttons and its rangefinder is made up of mechanical pieces.

There are perfectly working M9's, and M9's which constantly go to Solms for fixing. Rangefinder alignment can be an issue, since "factory tolerances" are somewhat wide and if you expect every lens to be pinpoint sharp at 100% monitor view, prepare for potential disappointment.

On lenses,best for street / environmental photography I mostly use 28mm and 35mm, the latter probably being the best "single" focal length on the M9. A good 50mm (Summicron IV or V) is useful, but I tend to marginally use it compared to the 28 and 35. The 75mm, 90mm and 135mm are quite difficult to focus "on the fly" at the larger apertures, and I use them for "distant landscapes" and portraits.

You would test any used lens on your M9 before buying as to avoid "rangefinder coupling" issues. A lens calibration performed by Leica is in the €150 ($200) range and is best done on your camera, with an average turnaround time of 3 months.

I hope the above did not bore you that much.

Best regards,

M

--
Mauro

http://www.maurobenphoto.com
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mbenphoto

Dropped my M8. Getting used to the heavy Elmar 135/4 lens was partly the reason, and the lens took most of the impact (without apparent damage except to the attached filter). But the blow messed up the vertical alignment of the rangefinder. Being in the US, I sent it to New Jersey. They took a week and a half to produce an estimate, and quoted 5 to 6 weeks for repair, probably not counting return shipping time.

I'm getting along during the wait with M-mount lenses on an Olympus E-P1.