M8 preview....

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by marlo_., Sep 14, 2006.

  1. http://www.dpreview.com/articles/leicam8/

    Can the price really be as low as �2990 body only !!??
     
  2. That's GB Pounds.
     
  3. $4,795 in the U.S. - official quote from my dealer this morning.
     
  4. ..and can the viewfinder really be "huge" when compared to a full frame SLR?
     
  5. Marlo: The question of course is whether that 2990 includes British VAT - the whole question
    of VAT (which is a mystery to most of us Yanks, because our sales taxes are local and
    therefore almost never included in quoted prices) has clouded the M8 price estimates/leaks
    for months.

    My purchase or sales tax - e.g. - will be about 7%, so the FULL VAT-equivalent U.S. price (in
    my state, county, and city) will be about $5,130 and change
     
  6. it's a bottom feeder alrite
     
  7. Jim R: At least as huge as a full-frame SLR - which means HUGE compared to 98% of the
    DSLRs actually sold.

    As I've said over and over - the one DSLR that compares rationally to the M8 is the Canon 1D
    (not "s"), and the 1D viewfinder is pretty decent size even with its crop.

    But compared to the "reversed-binoculars" view in most weenie-DSLRs.....
     
  8. View finder huge? the 50mm crop lines in the finder are diminuative compared to a M-3.
     
  9. The small 50mm finder lines are because the native lens size is 35mm, due to the 1.33 crop. The "cheap" standard lens is the new 28/2.8.

    The 50mm frames are for a mild telephoto -- and this 0.68X finder is a WIDE viewfinder, comprable to the 0.58X on the film cameras. Compare them to the 75mm lines on a 0.58X film finder.

    To some degree, this finder is an admission that wides are much more popular on the M cameras.
     
  10. If the new stndard lens is 28mm and the slowest ISO is 160 gone is shallow depth of field.
     
  11. Andy....Ah yes, the dreaded VAT man, a possible fly in the ointment...still, I think that as a 'pro' orientated tool, with that build quality & those lenses it's a not unreasonable price - heck, even the pro Nikon/Canon's in that price range can become just as (megapixel junkie-wise) 'obsolete'...but the M8, if it does the image bit right, has that certain something already that says 'this is the beginning of something wonderful'. Can't believe I took a shine to the Panasonic L1 now....falls flat in almost every way.

    Wonder if DAH will ditch his newly acquired Nikon's....? Surely HE must have known what was coming...?
     
  12. The new 'standard' lens is 35mm (35mm x 1.33 = 47mm approx)
    You can get plenty shallow depth of field at f/1.4 or f/2 with a 35mm lens.
     
  13. Mr. Hare, depth of field 35mm @ f/1.4 @ 2m = .27m; 50mm @ f/1.4 @ 2m = .1.3.
    Different lense signatures must also be considered. Placed your order yet?
     
  14. Charles, the shutter goes to 1/8000, and since it is electronically controlled, it's not hit and miss like the mechanical 1/1000 on the non-M7 film bodies. So you will be able to get the DoF you crave, subject to the DoF extension effect of a 1.3x crop factor.
     
  15. Yummmmmmmy ! Can't wait.

    The most valuable piece of info was that the lens coding isn't applied when using RAW. That
    just saved me a bundle of cash since all I ever shoot is RAW files. PS CS2 ACR has a very good
    vignetting sub-program for those times it'll be needed.
     
  16. Can one shoot RAW with the shutter to continuous (2-3 FPS, as I estimated from the demo posted yesterday?).
     
  17. I get nice shallow DOF with fast to medium fast lenses on the 1.5 D200. It won't be a problem.
     
  18. Depth of field is a function of focal length and aperature, and not crop factor. a 35mm
    lens has approximately twice the depth of field as a 50mm lens at the same aperature. As
    to what one thinks is adequate is up to one's own personal tastes.
     
  19. 2990 GBP. A lot of money say compared to my D200....super nice camera. Hmm, will those nice Leica lenses do their thing with Digital....think about Digital using the centre of the lens, the sweet spot. Even a so so lens will look nice. The DMR did not convince, sorry. Personally, i thought my Fuji wiped it's arse. My D200....let's not even go their.

    Then, the thought, where will Digital be in say 18 months time.Jeez, i've got a obsolete camera,and i payed all that money! But, it's small, and very pretty,just nice. Non of that awful Nikon mirror slap thing. And those extra wide open small sweet lenses.

    Me, i'm still saving for a MP, love the all mechanical thing...the myth the legend. Hey, i might be stuck in the jungle somewhere, about to go in the cooking pot....but i will still be snapping with my all mechanical camera.

    Just a few thoughts.
     
  20. There's no point in arguing with the math, but in practical applications, I don't think there's that much of a problem with the change of DOF. If you need shallower DOF than you can get with a 35 1.4 there's always CV's excellent Nokton 35 F1.2. You can get pretty shallow DOF even with APS sized sensors.

    [​IMG]
    Nikon D80, Sigma 30mm F1.4 | Matt Alofs www.1pt4.com

    If someone would build a 10MP APS sensor RF (Cosina?) for $1000-$1500, I'd buy one. I'll buy a used M8 too in a couple of years when they have depreciated a bit.
     
  21. Matt Alofs...nice.

    A photo. Love them.
     
  22. It's about what you like:)http://static.flickr.com/58/
    162870242_ed7882c156_o.jpg
     
  23. DPR now has a Leica forum as well...
     
  24. Sorry, I had forgotten about the 1/8000.
     

Share This Page