Erwin: More on M8

http://imx.nl/photosite/comments/c030.html

"The bottom line is that the M8 is a most pleasurable camera to use that can open your eyes to the basic understanding of the photographic process and can produce extremely high quality images as a result," he says.

He's waxing rhapsodic, I'm not sure how much of that is really useful in evaluating the M8, but since it's way above my price range anyway, it certainly doesn't upset me.

 

I find the M8 an interesting camera, but by the time the M8 is "affordable" on the used market, it will already be losing some of the things that make it useable (card format availability, interface to the computer, availability of spare parts, etc.). And much though I'm attracted to it, it's five times as expensive as competitors which are likely to return just as good a result. I love my M2s and I can afford them over decades of acquisition, but I don't think the M8 can have the same long economic model. Maybe that's good for Leica, because truly the M2's of the 50s still compete head on with the M6 and M7.

 

If there is truly going to be a digital rangefinder renaissance, I think it will be a 4/3rds camera with a 2x sensor, small Leica lenses, and a price tag in the affordable range, say $1500 (probably manufacturered by Panasonic or Olympus or somebody other than Leica but using Leica lenses). Or maybe it will be an interchangeable lens smaller camera with something like the new Sigma sensor.

I have to disagree with that last part, sadly. The fact that <i>anyone</i>, let alone a waiting-list of people, would pay $5000 for a camera that requires an external filter on every lens to make up for excessive IR sensitivity, should be proof enough for anyone that Leica can count on their customers to buy anything the company turns out, not to mention defend it as viciously as a momma grizzly her cubs <grin>.

On this subject, Erwin writes a great deal but says almost nothing.

 

I am becoming very cynical about whether there is any value in such online "reviews". I am coming to the conclusion that they are worth no more than the price we pay for reading them.

I'm sure the M8 is a useful camera. If I could get one with a 28mm lens for $1000, I might even consider buying one myself.

the latest edition of LFI has more objective and comprehensive evaulation than all that have been put up by Puts in his web site.

Built in obsolessence, thats my quirk, film M cameras seem to last sooo much longer at the top, just a thought.....

Jerry, it should be obvious to anyone who regulary visits this forum that Leica CAN'T rely on their customers to buy anything they produce OR defend them. Please get real - we are.

John, it should be clear that few of the people who visit this forum are actually Leica customers. Most of it is just chatter by people who have never bought a new Leica product, and many of them have never bought ANY Leica product, new or used.

Why didn't they start putting the damn IR filter between the sensor and the shutter? Like,

add another layer above the moire filter.

 

This 'buy a filter' nonsense just seems quite over the top to me.

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Personally, based on my experience using Technical Pan film, I like a little extra IR sensitivity.

"Why didn't they start putting the damn IR filter between the sensor and the shutter? Like, add another layer above the moire filter."

 

If, by the word "they" you mean Leica - Leica didn't design or manufacture the sensor. Kodak designed and made the sensor. But, I'm sure that collectively the engineers at both Kodak and Leica aren't nearly as optically design savvy as you are. I guess they just didn't understand the problem like you do. Why don't you go to work for either Kodak or Leica and straighten them out?

The reason they didn't put the strong IR blocking filter in was it didn't fit with certain lenses. It was a mechanical space issue. Now if you want to eliminate certain lenses you could do it. This would be a marketing nightmare, unfortunately the IR filter just wasn't strong enough, I am sure by time the M9 hits the market you will not need an external filter (I am offering lunch bets on this to those who live in the Boston area).

 

This does not occur with SLR's becuase they have a mirror to worry about, so other makers like Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minsony, etc have an easier solution.

You have to shake your head on the conjecture as to why leica chose to not put in an IR block

filter.

 

Especially since the solution to that decision's major consequences was not engineered and

put forward a year, or many months ago before camera release, but after the cam had

reached customer hands and the most trivial of snapshots exhibited the problem. Leica then

*reacted* with the filter cure and discount program to pacify users.

Discount program???? You mean that Leica has admitted that the M8 has a serious design

deficiency and has significantly reduced the price as an acknowledgement? And promises on

its heart to do better next time? $5000 for this inherently faulty camera is nothing short of

extortion and/or exploitation of the gullable. The camera works, sort of. So does a Lomo.

 

Reduce the price? Yes, that would go down well with the customers who paid the inflated

price and saw their "investment" plummet in value. The only way to force the issue is to vote

with your wallets and sink the Leica M8 Edsel - unsound at any speed.

I believe it's 2 (or is it 3?) free IR-block filters and a 30% discount on a lens. Heh, kind of a

clever way of driving lens sales...

**Why didn't they start putting the damn IR filter between the sensor and the shutter? Like, add another layer above the moire filter. This 'buy a filter' nonsense just seems quite over the top to me.**

 

My understanding is that they designed it this way on purpose, knowing full well that there might be an IR problem but just a minor one that could be handled with software. Apparently every digital camera has to implement a solution to this problem, usually with an IR filter on the sensor. To achieve a level of quality that matches the Leica lenses, Kodak/Leica opted to put a thinner IR filter or layer on the sensor itself. This nor the software solution eliminated the problem, hence the occasional magenta color problem. But I just saw a review of a new Canon digital camera that said it also had a magenta coloring probem, I assume from the same IR source. This is the "great digital electronic company" with a decade of experience making the same mistake in 2007. Frankly, I don't mind the idea of using an IR/UVA filter on all three of my Leica lenses. I have UVA filters on them already. So, this is no change at all. If I wanted to shoot in certain situations without the IR/UVA filter, I would just take them off. You cannot take them off of the sensor. Thus, Erwin's latest essay narrowed down the choice criteria to just one: (given you already have Lecia M lenses) Is it worth $5,000 to shoot Leica-type photgraphy with a camera that allows immediate feedback and then storage of as many shots as you want. So, the digital criteria in general, which also means no more messing with film, film processing, storage, scanning, and printing of the scanned digital image.

 

Are these digital advantages worth switching from M2-M7 photography? People who already use M2-M7 cameras want to keep doing that type of RF photography. We may have a digital camera as well, but we still prefer M2-M7 cameras and film. Now that the M8 digital solution is available, M2-M7 users have the option of continuing but in digital format. How can anybody complain about being given a viable technological choice? All that remains is the $ 4,750. We cannot wait around for the nice supply of used/formerly own mint like cameras like we did with the M2-M6. I actually thought that my used M6 TTL was extremely expensive at $1200 after having been given a $500 Nikon auto everything film camera.

When a company disingenuously tries to cover up some technical defects in its product in an attempt to sell ice to Eskimos, and when caught (infra)red-handed, offers a wheelbarrow free of charge so the ice can be easily carried, and still have its die-hard faithful customers clinging to defend it, you have to laugh.

Personally, I'm still on the fence about buying an M8, mostly because of reservations I have about digital imaging in general, such as its rendering of human skin and of highlights, as well as the near-impossibility of putting a digital file onto gelatin silver paper in a home darkroom. But some of the published reports I've read, including those that describe the magenta problem in critical detail, nonetheless claim that the M8 produces the best digital files of any camera available short of medium format.

 

For someone who already owns Leica lenses and who wants or needs to go digital right now, the M8 strikes me as an imperfect but reasonable solution to a technologically difficult problem.

Larry you are dead on target. Pentax encased the sensor on its camera so that dust would not stick, if the filter was bonded to the sensor package I think it would work as you said, and make sense out of a snafu.

 

I was hoping that the M8 would be in such demand that anybody who bought one would no longer have use for their M6 M7 or MP and FS adds would be so plentiful that a buyers market in E+ used cameras and would cut prices of film Leicas a lot. Too bad so many have cancelled their M8 order.

You don't need an IR filter all the time - only in those limited combinations of subject and lighting where it makes a difference. Secondly, you don't need a filter on all your lenses, just one lens at a time.

Hi Mr. Bob Atkins , your views are well known here this much is sure

and I for one accept this. However a camera such as the M8 plus a a 28mm lens for $ 1000.00 now I think you lost it. Perhaps you can give us an example the 5D I used for a while does not even come close to film in fact none are performing with wide lenses. Sorry if I offend some here but this I wanted of my chest. Your call Mr. Atkins!

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0701/07010403fujifilmfinepixis1.asp

 

 

maybe Leica should carry two favours of M8, or make it an a la carte option, or introduce a

black paint version, or a full frame version.

 

the truth is you can't find a unit on the shelf, despite its price tag and despite all the negative

reporting which looks like more a bug list.

Brad .. bingo! much like buying a car with defective air-bags and the manufacturer offering crash-helmets at a 30% discount. hospital vouchers for surgeries?