Five photographers who still use the M8

<p>10. Cameras are disposable. It's the images you want to protect. ;-)</p>

I spend a lot of time keeping old cameras from being in the disposable category. Including some digital cameras. Funny= a

10 year old Digital camera is considered old; a 10 year old film camera is considered new. Not sure what defines an old

film camera. Most of the ones that I work on are 50+ years old.

<p>Thank you Allen. Some believe the M8's IR sensitivity to be a liability, I think of it as an advantage; the idea that I can shoot handheld IR with a (mostly opaque) R72 filter with no camera modifications is amazing to me, considering my past experience with HIE.</p>

<p>Leica has supported the M8 as best as possible.<br>

Lack of replacement parts made by a now "deceased" part of Kodak.<br>

I own a Nikon which has battery door problems.<br>

Any issue to do with battery, is NOT part of warrantee.<br>

I noted that camera has "Wi-Fi".<br>

Looked on Internet.<br>

One year left of warrantee, BUT as camera is now obsolete,<br>

info is no longer available.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If the proof of the pudding is in the eating, the M8 is relevant today - unlike almost every single digital camera from 2006, except for medium format backs.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><em>That</em> is the fanboy statement, as even a cursory thought would have realized. My daughter still uses the Rebel XTi from 2007 (Leica M8/M8.2 was the only Leica M digital available until the M9 of late 2009), and I know at least 3 people who still use as their main camera the original Canon 5D. So this is a silly sentence and is making some special claim for the Leica M8 that it does not deserve.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>That</em> is the fanboy statement</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not really. Those older digital backs pretty much eat alive every single DSLR from that era. They also put the Leicas in their place, though not quite as severely. In fact, they're better than some modern DSLRs, but certainly not all.<br>

<br />But I don't tell other people what camera they should use. I can suggest one. And I will engage in discussion, if appropriate. But people can use what they want. Rebel XTi? Sure. If it tickles your secret special fancy spot, why not? Okay, it's no match for Fuji Superia 400, but it's no match for a lot of things. It's the photographer's vision that counts in the end, isn't it?</p>

Fall Colors with the M8.<p>

 

<img src="https://c7.staticflickr.com/6/5698/30765131646_3fc8e081ec_b.jpg" width="682" height="1024" alt="Fall Colors">

<p>

 

Minolta 50/1.4 MC Mount, converted to RF coupled M-Mount. Maintains RF coupling to 0.65m. Used Wide-Open.<p>

<p>Lovely shot. BTW how much would it cost to couple an SLR lens?</p>

Karim- Thankyou. <p>

 

This lens was kind of a "dare" to myself. Went through the Pop Photo 1976 test of 32 "normal lenses" and bought some of the best. The Minolta was best over the center 2/3rds of the image, perfect for an M8. Cost is "Mostly time", this is a real "every lens is different, some work, some don't, everyone is custom".<p>

 

<img src="https://c3.staticflickr.com/8/7378/11655695986_44210aeac8_o.jpg" width="768" height="1024" alt="minolta2"><p>

 

This one uses a Foto-Diox adapter (~$35), a cut-up leg from an old tripod, and some retaining rings. Hours of trial and error filing. The RF Cam is epoxied in place. Total cost including the lens, $85 and a lot of time. Cold winter-day, stuck inside kind of project.<p>

 

A real technician would probably charge $200 or so for labor, and then there would be the cost of machining real parts...<p>

<p>Brian, that's quite impressive. I wonder if a total cost of $500 would be reasonable. I mean, the lens itself is not more than $100. Mind you... the CV lenses are more compact and are already available and not much more, if anything, than $500.</p>

<p>There are some lenses I'd love to adapt, though, at least on paper. Such as, say, the Olympus 100/2.8, or the Vivitar 90mm macro. Some would love the Canon FD 50/1.2 (lovely bokeh).</p>

The 100 and 90 would require a custom helical, or using the focus mount from an existing RF lens with the new optics. The

50mm lens requires a simple extension from the rear element to the RF cam of the camera, movement is 1:1. I have a

couple of lenses on the "list-to-hack".<p>

 

This is where the liveview feature of the M240 is most useful, but I'm stubborn and just like using the RF.<p>

 

<img src="https://c8.staticflickr.com/9/8345/8285061583_e1fa32888b_o.jpg" width="1024" height="768" alt="Canon 50/1.4, now RF Coupled"><p>

 

The Canon FL mount 50/1.4 is the easiest to convert, has a manual aperture switch built-in. This lens has very low spherical aberration due to the long optical path. It was second in performance next to the 50/1.2 Noctilux. Your looking at a total of $60 and ~8hours of work here.<p>

 

IF I ever sell my M8, it will come with a most unusual assortment of lenses that were custom adapted to it.<p>

<p>My one and only M digital is M8. I got it upgraded and it is far more better than M8.<br>

It is better than any MDidigi ( Except M Monochrome ) Only thing is it is not full frame but as long as you are used to it's crop factor you can master it easily. The Colours are unique and CCD Kodak sensor is the reason behind all. This camera is limited in so many ways due to discontinuing. It's major after sales, spare parts and repairs are limited. They are not available anymore. <br>

So the camera will be ended up as a paper weight one day.<br>

So get the maximum out of it while it is living.</p>