To M8 or not

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by aplumpton, Aug 8, 2007.

  1. Why is this such a popular sport? This is a great camera, as good or better than any
    competition, other than medium format digital. The DP review doesn't convince me, or
    the several reviews that are of particularly high praise.

    Only solution is to try one and see. I for one care little when the M9 ever surfaces. it
    probably won't be 35mm sensor size (lens limitations) and extra pixels are not likely
    needed for 16 x 24 prints.

    If you have an M8, and have used it for 6 months or more and want to bash it, you have
    every right. But if you don't have one, and believe all the extreme fors and againsts, you
    may be robbing yourself of something good. If you have 10 or 15 thousand dollars worth
    of M lenses (and experience), the difference between a 5000$ and a 3000$ body is only
    about 10% of the total value.
     
  2. I think there are a lot of people that don't need a digital camera.
    Like me. Just because it exists doesn't mean everyone needs one.
    For just "trying" if you like digital the M8 is seems a bit expensive...
    Just my 2c
     
  3. "This is a great camera, as good or better than any competition, other than medium format digital."

    Well since technically it's only competition is/was the 6MP Epson, nobody can refudiate your cleverly worded statement. You can't be referring to the Canon 5D or 1DS-II because guys like myself who have actually compared images using the proper specific workflow optimized for each one know that the M8 is at best as good as the 5D but only at <800 ISO, and requires interpolation software to print where the 1DS-II can do it natively.
     
  4. Not...so much so that I've put my D200 in the classifieds and bought a Mamiya 7II to go with my Leica M7. For what I do and what I'm interested in photographically, I'm in photo heaven. Unless I'm a working pro or someone who has a lot of cash to burn, I couldn't see spending $4795 on a camera body. I bought the M7 used and got a great deal on the Mamiya...all for much less than the cost of the M8 body.
     
  5. It's not a possibility for me any more than a Lamborghini Diablo is. Doubtless it's a nice car, but it's just out of the price range.

    Plus, even though I'm not saying that digital cameras are a commodity item, it's hard to spend 4-5 times the price for basically equivalent specifications. Yes I know it's a Leica and that means a lot, but the price multiplier is just too high for me.
     
  6. I don't see the comparison to a 1DS II, the Canon is twice the price, size, and weight. Then there are those huge Canaon L lenses.
     
  7. Arthur, If you appreciate the camera, well and good.
    Post some pictures to tempt people into buying one (or a few). Do add 100% - 200% crops to illustrate your point.
    Why not use this very thread for it?
    Jump right in! :)

    [​IMG]
    Fuzzy image from an Epson R-D1s/Canon 50/0.95
     
  8. "I don't see the comparison to a 1DS II, the Canon is twice the price, size, and weight."

    The comparison is in resolution and the 1DS-II has 1.6x the # of pixels on a larger chip. It's the same difference between the 1DS-II and a 26mp medium-format back (well, there's a 22mp one)and nobody's foolish enough to claim there equal. Oh and the 1DS-II is currently selling @ B&H for $6999.95 vs $4950 for the M8. 1.4x the price for 1.6x the pixels and a full frame, not to mention all the other features the 1DS-II has that the M8 doesn't, plus the one it doesn't: needing IR filters on every lens. And the price of the M8 is supposed to shoot up another $900 in October, while it's likely the 1DS-II will be discounted and replaced by an even more potent camera at the same or perhaps even a lower price. So yeah, me neither, I don't see any comparison.
     
  9. I don't understand this constant comparison to Canon everytime this pot stirring subject comes up. To compare two very dissimilar cameras based on image quality is a waste of time since image quality is the same. You either like the attributes of a rangefinder or an SLR and choose accordingly. Where you spend your money is no one's business but yours.
     
  10. Thank you Ron.
     
  11. >>> I don't understand this constant comparison to Canon everytime this pot stirring
    subject comes up.

    I don't either. Every time a flaw or problem with the M8 is brought to light, it's always,
    "Yeah but the canon/nikon xx cam has that issue as well." Or even more amusing, is the
    characterization of canon/nikon users somehow justifying the behavior of leica users. A
    lot of insecurity here...

    Herd mentality at work - justify your own state of affairs based upon what's happening
    with another group. Weird...
     
  12. "I don't understand this constant comparison to Canon everytime this pot stirring subject comes up." Well, we used to listen to the same kind of arguments and complain about them the same way when the M6 and M7 were compared to Nikon and Canon SLRs. I think the same words could be used and no one would notice the difference. The M7 costs too much relative to Nikon SLR, the latter has millions of more features, etc., etc., etc., and the negative and print quality of Leica photographs just had something different and better than any other camera could deliver, etc. again. The only thing that's changed is the sensor for the film, and Leica didn't even make the sensor, Kodak did. Kodak made the film too, by the way. You buy and use a Leica M8 because it has all the features you liked about the M3-M7, and because it produces an acceptable digital image. That's it. It's just a digital M camera. You have to want the M camera and its features before you want the digital output, otherwise go for an SLR or P&S, which both make fine images. The surprise factor for me has nothing to do with Leica; it's the instant feedback after every shot to check lighting, exposure, and composition. This allows you to make on the spot corrections before moving on the the next shot. This is a hard feature to "give back" even though I'd still like to shoot film with my M6. Repeat, this has nothing to do with Leica other than the fact that the deal they made with Kodak for the sensor was a success. Come on, do we have to ask if Nikon and Canon digital SLR users put filters on their lenses too? Let me try to shorten this for all time: "It's an acceptable digital M." We have been demanding this for some time. If that's the kind of camera you want today, then the cost is irrelevant.
     
  13. Quote on: ________________________ David W. Griffinphoto.net patron, Aug 08, 2007; 04:20 p.m. It's not a possibility for me any more than a Lamborghini Diablo is. Doubtless it's a nice car, but it's just out of the price range. ________________________ Quote off. Have I got a Lamborghini Diablo for you! www.teaguemotorsports.com My M8 has to go in for repairs, too. I crashed the Lambo a few weeks ago. Last week I took off the M8's plastic bottom cover. :)
    00MAOR-37852184.jpg
     
  14. repost of smaller picture:
    00MAOY-37852284.jpg
     
  15. I think it is wonderful to have manufacturers push the technology envelope. Often, the improvements trickle down into products I can afford. Remember when a 4-banger pocket calculator cost several hundred dollars?

    Gary Sandhu, I don't know whether to envy you or commiserate with you. The closest I have ever come to such an experience is that when I was in the service, some of the mega-expensive toys we worked with would occasionally go bump in the night. Not due to me, thank the gods.
     
  16. Gary, How many M8s can you buy for that Lamb? :)

    Now, that is feisty.
     
  17. "I don't understand this constant comparison to Canon everytime this pot stirring subject comes up. To compare two very dissimilar cameras based on image quality is a waste of time since image quality is the same."

    The IQ of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far. Everyone with an unbiased mind sees it, including numerous pros who own an M8 as well. It comes up because a few Leica fanboys keep bringing it up trying to convince others that the laws of physics don't apply to Leica.

    "You either like the attributes of a rangefinder or an SLR and choose accordingly. Where you spend your money is no one's business but yours."

    True of an amature or a freelancer with a day job. Less true of a working pro but who has his own business and could if he wanted to decide to short shrift his family's lifestyle to finance his brand addiction. For a pro who has to bring in the money shots with no excuses and justify his expenses to a bean counter, nobody cares whether you "like the attributes of a rangefinder or an SLR", there only interested in the shots and the bottomline.
     
  18. SCL

    SCL

    Personally, I like both digital and film cameras; digital for the convenience when I'm in a hurry, film for the more reflective moments. I'd love a digital rangefinder camera to use my Leica M lenses on (all of them, and not with a crop factor) which was as compact as my M4 and didn't cost an unreasonable amount for an amateur who is retired. The M8 doesn't cut it for me. I'm personally delighted to read of others' successes with it. For the time being, when I need digital I'll stick with my Nikon, and when I need film cameras I'll use my Leicas (M&R) and others I've picked up over the years.
     
  19. Tom Murray wrote: "The IQ of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far. Everyone with an unbiased mind sees it
    That's a bit of a stretch, Tom. On fredmiranda.com there was a very long thread started by a long-time Canon user who compared his 1DsII with the DMR and switched entirely to Leica because of the image quality the DMR delivers.
     
  20. Are you talking about Guy Manusco, the one who wrote page after page after page about it? Now he's dumped the DMR and moved on to the M8 with the same gung-ho attitude. I think if there's a stretch, it's putting him with the unbiased group. Mind you, the DMR is a very capable machine, in fact I'd call it outstanding considering it only has 10-mp and a cropped sensor. MP aren't everything. Firmware has a lot to do with it. Also Canon goes the heavy-AA route and Leica doesn't, neither do the medium format backs, so post processing workflow also makes a huge differents. If you just look at the RAW's, the Canon's look softer. Processed right, they don't. Where the 1DS-II pulls way out ahead is if you start to crop, or if you print larger than native resolution will allow @ optimum printer DPI. Then the larger files from the Canon have more data, like in turn it can't compete with the files from our 39-mp Hassy. Leica's are like a 100-lb woman with a black belt in Kung Fu, she can whomp the average 200-lb guy--but if he also has a black belt in Kung Fu, then size matters again.
     
  21. Anyways, for someone in the market right now, the DMR is out of the discussion unless you can happen to find one used. I suggest we table the p!$$!ng contest until the R10 comes out and see how it compares to the 1DS-III or IV.
     
  22. Yes Tom, Guy Mancuso. His clients also saw the difference and were willing to pay for it and didn't give a hoot about the name on the camera. Guy has switched to the M8 because the vast majority of his work is in the focal length range where the M8 excels.
    Fine art printer David Adamson http://www.adamsoneditions.com/ has found that M8 files print as well as 4x5 scanned film and better than any other small-format digital camera at sizes as large as 30"x40". I suggest you re-examine your biases and try using either the M8 or DMR before making any more foolish statements.
     
  23. Let me try one more time. Once I switched from a Nikon SLR "everthing" film camera to the Leica M6, I had no desire to use a SLR camera again of any kind no matter what the technological or price advantages and differences. [The exception would be a need for a long telephoto lens for wildlife, which has not happened yet, and I have no interest right now in macro photography.] For me and for some time now, it is no longer a choice between these to types of cameras. So, when the digital M8 became available, there was never any comparison to Canon or Nikon digital SLR's. Only between the M6/M7 and the M8 regardless of price. If--and only if--the M8 met the minimal requirements for a digital M. Is this clear now? The comparison to any kind of SLR camera is irrelevant, so why do some keep insist on making it?

    One more clarification. This does not mean I or anyone else here hates these digital SLR's. I recommended to my son that he buy a Nikon D40X and the zoom lens it comes with, for all the obvious reasons, as his first camera, to a great extent because of the total cost and value for the money. So, no one has to persuade me of this point either. I've already done the persuasion myself. When the next or next after improvement of the D200 or D80 comes out, I'm still planning to buy one and start using my Nikon 180mm f2.0 telephoto lens again. Part time. M8 full time.
     
  24. Larry - you sound totally logical to me. I have kept a 20D and XTI only for my kids sports and macro. After this school year, I woh't need a sports camera, so the 20D will be sold. The Xti will be kept only until I decide who has the better offering in the next gen, Nikon or Canon, D300 or 40D. I have a few of each brand lenses, and I even have af confirm mounts for the EOS bodies for Nikon mount prime lenses. I use what ever seems to work better. My end goal is better image quality with the lightest gear I can muster, simple and logical...for most daily stuff I "get by" carrying the smaller still and sharper M8 and gear.
     
  25. Based on responses to forum questions about "what else do you use?", I would guess that many, if not most, Leica M users would say pretty much the same thing. I still have my 1969 Pentax Spotmatic SLR with a recently (and irrationally) purchased 50mm F1.4 screw mount lens. Works as if brand new. No plans to ever sell it no matter how little I use it.
     
  26. "I suggest you re-examine your biases and try using either the M8 or DMR before making any more foolish statements."

    I have used the M8, I've said so many times. I haven't used a DMR, but like I said, it's mute because they are discontinued. I admit I have biases just like everyone else who opines on the internet, whether they admit it or not. And I don't see why you need to call my statements foolish, IMO it is in very poor taste. Your entitled to your opinion and perhaps others here share it but at least they've managed to keep it above the belt.
     
  27. Well I just checked your link to Adamson and wasted 10 minutes surfing his website looking for any reference to Leica, Canon or any other brand of camera and found none. Which is like I'd of suspected of a pro in this biz unless he's being paid for an endorsement or is more of a gearhead than a photographer. So I Googled "Adamson" and "Leica" and found THIS THREAD where he's talking about it on a forum. Now I have grate respect for the man (never heard of him before but he's doing Wegman's work and I have heard of him!)but after scrolling thru 13 pages of posts I couldn't find where he mentioned the 1DS-II specifically. He did say in one of the first few pages, responding to a direct question, that he never printed from a DMR and his comments applied only to the M8. He got a lot of conflicting opinions in that discussion (funny, nobody called anyone else foolish). It was a very interesting read, thanks. Maybe I will reevaluate the M8 at some point, and e-mail Adamson if he'll let our printer in on his M8 workflow. As for the DMR, once again, it's a discontinued product. Even if I could find one used I couldn't convince my boss to buy it, he won't touch used digital gear.
     
  28. Tom, here's what you wrote: "The IQ of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far. Everyone with an unbiased mind sees it"
    In this craftily-worded statement you've insulted the intelligence of a master printmaker and a working commercial photographer whose livelyhood depends on producing high-quality photographs. Handling an M8 in a store is no substitute for actually working with its output day in and day out, as Guy Mancuso and David Adamson have.
    Since these two do not agree that "The IQ of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far" and since both Mancuso and Adamson are far more interested in high quality photographs than in brand-consciousness it seems that your statement above is either foolish or irresponsible or both.
     
  29. Shoot!! Photo.net doesn't automatically take HTML. D'OH! Here's THE LINK again.
     
  30. Doug, FWIW, Guy M. has some business connection with Leica. He will not divulge the details of it. It is similar to Erwin P.'s case. Even if they have something genuinely good to say because of their experience/knowledge, it will not be 'unbiased'.

    I have handled the camera briefly, I like it very much for its UV response which is better than my Epson R-D1s. If they drop their price by a few thousands I will buy and use it happily.

    I would strongly encourage anyone who has the cash to buy it, to buy it
    ( buy a backup body as well, for a good measure!). These folks keep the company that makes a digital RF cam afloat.
     
  31. Vivek, as far as I know Guy had no business connection with Leica when he compared his 1DsII with the DMR.
     
  32. >>> In this craftily-worded statement you've insulted the intelligence of a master
    printmaker and a working commercial photographer whose livelyhood depends on
    producing high-quality photographs.

    Uh, where was his intelligence insulted? Just curious, has anyone heard of David Adamson
    before the leica comment? Any skeptics on the 4x5 film remark, or is all taken as solid
    truth. If he said the M8 is on par with 8x10 film would people still say, Ayup? What were
    his conclusions on nikon/canon/etc with respect to 4x5 film quality?

    Regarding the "commercial photographer," well, we've seen his pix here and it's difficult to
    reconcile that with the pix he's posted on the forum here and the resulting comments. He
    does have a terrific rotating "Batman" symbol with some cool Peter Gunn sounds when you
    go to his web page - very impressive...
     
  33. >>> well, we've seen his pix here and it's difficult to reconcile that with the pix he's posted
    on the forum here and the resulting comments.

    Should be: ... well, it's difficult to reconcile that with the pix he's posted on the forum here
    and the resulting comments.
     
  34. Brad, if you can't understand it there's no point trying to explain it to you.
     
  35. "commercial photographer," well, we've seen his pix here and it's difficult to reconcile that with the pix he's posted on the forum here and the resulting comments.

    They were poor.sorry, just being honest. Of course, even Leica users are not allowed an opinion anymore as far as the fondlers are concerned.

    Every cam Leica produces is wonderfull...understand......no other opinion is tolerated. Please conform.

    We were happy with the new Magenta M8...yes,we were,until they upset us.

    Tony,tony......
     
  36. More like Leica users are not allowed an opinion, period.
     
  37. More like Leica users are not allowed an opinion, period

    Doug, until Marc Williams pointed out the Magenta issues with the M8,not another err user noticed. He was an actual user...like myself.

    Yourself, i have respect,great photos. But i don't do the blind faith thing....it does not do any favours to Leica,either.
     
  38. *yawn* ...

    did someone say something? still bitching about the M8 ... after all these months ... get a life ... move on ... sell all your Leica equipment if you don't like the direction Leica is taking ...
     
  39. Um, just some facts, and then an opinion or two:

    --Phil Askey's DP review was right on the money in my books; the M8 has some AWB and JPEG flaws that prevent it from being a real point and shoot type of camera.

    --Most pros I know wouldn't care. Some, though, who do shoot JPEG, most certainly would. So DP was right to mention that, and Leica should fix the artifacts in the JPEG engine. I have no doubt they will.

    --Guy Mancuso had no business relationship with Leica when he switched from his Canon 1ds2s to the Leica DMR.

    --He had no business relationship with Leica when he acquired his M8s (plural).

    --He became a vocal advocate of the M8 based on the quality, at first, of the DMR

    --He became a vocal advocate of the M8 next, as Doug as mentioned, based on the quality of the M8 files :) He sold his DMR (but kept his R lenses) to finance more M glass.

    --He now does some beta testing and customer advocacy for Leica, but to the best of my knowledge, and I know Guy pretty well, there has been absolutely no business relationship with Leica other than that of customer with XK$$ worth of Leica gear. Does he have the ear of Leica US and Germany on issues of the M8? Yes. I think any customer with $30 or $40K worth of Leica gear could too. I daresay someone with that much Canon equipment would still have to go through CPS; this is one of the benefits of investing in a relatively small company :)

    --I *also* switched my 1d2 and 1ds2 for a DMR based on Canon's inability, at the time, to produce decent glass under 50mm :) After bolting Leica normals and wides on the 1ds2, and struggling to focus (with all kinds of screens) the DMR was a welcome relief. The 5d does just fine as a small but capable ff AF.

    --I bought an M8 as a "mini-DMR" and was actually quite shocked at how good it was for large prints, even when it was released. So was David Adamson, who prints for all kinds of photographers, including folks like Annie Leibowitz.

    --IMO, and after owning all the subject cameras as a pro, the image quality of the DMR and M8 is absolutely comparible to the 1ds2 / 5d in large prints at lower ISOs

    --IMO, and to go out there, the M8 / DMR have about 2 stops more shadow detail than either the 1ds2 or 5d at ISO 640 and under), and with the right workflow, despite Canon's extra pixels, you can get about a page size better enlargement with the M8 / DMR because you're not sharpening something that's blurry to begin with. You just need to know how to process RAW files and enlarge properly.

    --YMMV :)
     
  40. Tom what's a Leica fanboy? Is it anything like a Canon fanboy? Why don't I see all the Leica users over on the Canon threads busting huevos on the Canon users for the autofocus problems the new Mark III has to offer? Why is it that Canon users constantly feel the need to compare their cameras to Leica? I'll state it again for you where someone else spends their money is their business pro or not, not yours. And by the way Arthur are you happy you got this ball of snot going again? I've had enough I think I'll go take some pics.
     
  41. Basically, everything Doug and Jamie are saying is true. A few of you might remember me from the old days when I was nearly shunned from this forum because I sold all my Leica M film gear to fund a complete immersion into Canon digital :) Doug and Jamie will remember me from then for sure. And for full disclosure, Guy is a friend of mine too... For fuller disclosure, I still own a whole lot of Canon and regularly shoot with the 5D.

    Anyway, that intro out of the way, I have owned every high end Canon camera ever made, so speak with some authority, and I can assure you the 1Ds2 does not "blow away" the DMR or the M8, even upon cropping. In fact, the 1Ds2 is only slightly more detailed than its smaller brother, the Canon 5D. The fact is, all of these are top-notch cameras, as is the Nikon D2X, and are capable of making great prints.

    The M8 however seems unique in its ability to take digital upscaling and I have printed stunning 32x40" prints from its files. Yet I cannot make the same claim for the 5D files, and even compared to 1Ds2 files, the M8 at that size are superior. (I don;t shoot Nikon so cannot comment specifically on D2x files at that size.) No it doesn't make logical sense that an 11MP file can out perform a 16MP at that size, and I don't know exactly why it works that way... I have educated guesses, but the bottom line is, the proof is in the final prints.

    All that said, the M8 is not without its operational warts -- but nobody can argue the outstanding quality of the M8 file.

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  42. I'm another user who owns both a 1dsMk2 and an M8. If i were interested in the final print being large (> 16x20), i'd be shooting it with the Canon. If i need a focal len > 100mm, i'd shoot it with the Canon. For everything else, I have used the M8 ever since buying it, and haven't picked the Canon up since. Personally, I feel the image quality of the M8 is better than the Canon (on prints up to 16x20). The fact that it's a blast to use is an added benefit. I could care less who makes a camera.. it's a tool.. and despite the issues around the M8, it's an excellent one.
     
  43. I've had a couple of fairly strong disagreements with Guy over at the Leica user forum, and I'm probably not on his Christmas card list, but really, this trashing of him is typical of the ghetto that Photo.net, or rather this part of it has become.

    As has been said above, to the best of my knowledge Guy's only connection to Leica is that he is on the M8 beta testing program at Leica. In such a capacity he gets to suggest improvements and changes to the firmware. Leica are of course free to disregard anything he suggests. I am totally unaware of any connection that involves money changing hands, or equipment being given to him. If anyone claiming otherwise has any evidence of this feel free to post the evidence - or shut up.

    This kind of unjustified innuendo is why I'm spending less and less time here these days.

    Oh, and I also have a 5D and an M8. Haven't used the 5D since I bought the Leica. Your viewpoint may differ.
     
  44. Tom said:

    "The IQ of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far. Everyone with an unbiased mind sees it, including numerous pros who own an M8 as well. It comes up because a few Leica fanboys keep bringing it up trying to convince others that the laws of physics don't apply to Leica."

    Tom, I don't have much of an issue with most things you have said, but this doesn't ring true at all (and is pretty insulting, for no apparent reason, other than possibly some arguments you have had with someone else, somewhere else, at some other point in time).

    First of all, I know many pros who were hugely disappointed with the 1Ds2 when it came out, and felt that the 1Ds was much better, for image quality. The M8 keeps up with the 1Ds pretty well, so where does that leave us?

    The issue is too complex to reduce to such simple-minded statements. About all you could say is that "The resolution of the 1DS-II is very obviously ahead of anything Leica has offered thus far." I don't think that anyone would disagree with you there. Resolution isn't the answer to everything though, and the images coming out of the M8 and DMR are so much more satisfying than those from the 1Ds2, before editing. Sure, you can edit a 1Ds2 image and make it look good, but the point to many, perhaps not you, is why should we have to?

    I agree about the 5D and M8 having pretty comparable imge quality, and that the 5D has better high ISO, but I also sold my 5D and all my Leica R lenses, and bought an M8. I have not had much chance to regret it yet, and I am nearing 10,000 shots. The M8 just delivers really nice files, right out of the box, and I find that they scale better than the 5D results, so the difference in technical terms between the two is really very small.
     
  45. This kind of argument or discussion, in an effort to keep this civilized, is fruitless in some circles but not valueless. Tom and others are certainly entitled to have their opinions. Those of us who use an M8, should not be deterred or insulted. Everyone has opinions. I own both dslrs and an M8 for their strengths, not for their weaknesses. If you do not need an M8's virtues, then by all means don't try to justify it or insult others who have and use them. IF you do not "get it" that is fine. Different horses for courses...
    As I get older, I want to carry less, not more, thereby, my current camera selection. If my needs change, then the equipment will also. Do not see why some find it pathological for others to change equipment as their needs change. If using the same gear you had five yrs ago works for you, fine, if not, OK too. All our needs are different and uses also, M8's serve the needs of some, not others, just the same way a Ferrari F430 serves the needs of some, and a F350 truck others. Neither owner would be happy using the other for their intended purposes. One would not begin to appreciate the other, so what. JMHO...fwiw..
     
  46. To stir the pot, a bit more... I have been using 1D/1Ds Mark IIs as bread and butter for last 3 years. I skipped 1D IIn as I did not need an upgrade. Now, I don't shoot film any more and since selling my (panoramic) RF combo of xPan/TX2 I was missing all that rangefinder shooting style gives. I got M8 and few lenses (used, ZM or VC- I am not "hooked" only on Leica glass. If I win lottery I will be!). So now, I use them all. I will not be buying 1D MKIII since my MKII still clicks great after 87000 times. On the other hand, I just ordered second M8. Go figure...
    00MBKv-37873484.jpg
     
  47. "...has found that M8 files print as well as 4x5 scanned film and better than any other small-format digital camera at sizes as large as 30"x40""

    Pure rubbish. I have used and like the M8. I have two 4x5 cameras plus 5 lenses. I use an Imacon scanner for film. The M8 doesn't come close to scanned 4x5.

    If someone is claiming otherwise - I'd be highly suspect of anything else he/she may say; and/or their film scanner; and/or workflow.

    Unless you're using a low grade flatbed scanner - scanned 4x5 is a whole different league than the images from the M8. The M8 makes very nice digital files - but, I can still get images with far more detail in large prints with my 6x7 and film. The 4x5 images kill the 6x7 for detail.
     
  48. At this point I am thousands of euros less than capable of buying any of the cameras specified in this argument, so if I may I ask, what digital camera would you say is the highest picture quality that can be bought today for let us say a top limit of 75% of the price of a Canon 5D? I presently use a Leica DLux-3 and I am very much disappointing because I cannot get good pictures from above 200 ISO. I use raw files and Noise Ninja, but that suffers detail.
     
  49. she may say; and/or their film scanner; and/or workflow. ... >>
    Someone is indeed claiming otherwise: this man, a professional printer.
    I don't know the gentleman. Nor do I have 4 x 5 cameras or an M8, for that matter, so I truly have no dog in this hunt.
    A discussion Adamson began in November, 2006, has continued on another forum for quite some time, often without him. I haven't followed it carefully, but I did see his most recent post:
    "Hi all, I have been busy lately and I am glad to see this thread goes on without my input! Just returned from the Arles photo festival where many M8's were in evidence, great place to visit in July. Last week in Edinburgh for a show of William Eggleston's works that I printed on the prototype Epson 11880, Bill had fun playing with the M8 and showing me the .9 canon lens on his rdp1. I still prefer the M8 overall although my new Iphone does an excellent job !! Best David"
    If Adamson is printing for Eggleston, Chuck Close, Wegman and others, I suppose there is a remote possibility he knows a little something about printing photos.
    But what do I know ? :)
     
  50. >>> Pure rubbish. I have used and like the M8. I have two 4x5 cameras plus 5 lenses. I
    use an Imacon scanner for film. The M8 doesn't come close to scanned 4x5.

    It's refreshing seeing that at least someone else holds a healthy amount of skepticism on
    the claims bandied about with respect to LF film and the M8. Seems everyone else nods
    their head in lockstep with respect to the claim. No doubt produces output as good as
    8x10 too; ayup.

    Herd mentality at its finest...
     
  51. Healthy skepticism is a good thing. I'm all for it.

    My own eyes are neither sharp enough nor well enough attuned (unless an expert is standing by my side) to draw critical distinctions between prints from different cameras in most cases. Moreover, those distinctions with few exceptions are probably insignificant for my purposes.

    But I tuned in late here to a post that seemed to take a potshot at a nameless character, so I thought it would be useful to fill in a bit of background.
     
  52. Carsten Whimster wrote:

    "I agree about the 5D and M8 having pretty comparable imge quality, and that the 5D has
    better high ISO, but I also sold my 5D and all my Leica R lenses, and bought an M8. I have
    not had much chance to regret it yet, and I am nearing 10,000 shots. The M8 just delivers
    really nice files, right out of the box, and I find that they scale better than the 5D results,
    so the difference in technical terms between the two is really very small."

    This is very much what I find too. So since the M8 is smaller, lighter and less obvious, I
    now find I use it more over my 5D's. And this stuff about M8 prints being better than 4x5?

    I don't buy that. If you take the best 30x40 from your M8 over to John Fielder's new
    Gallery in Denver and hang it next to one of his 30x40 prints, I am pretty sure you will see
    just how much the 4x5 out resolves the M8 in print. I really don't care how good a printer
    this guy is, B.S. is B.S.

    And this mentioning of Guy? Isn't he a big enough internet hero-ego on Fred Miranda and
    the Leica User forum? The man is a nice "guy" and does some great things in terms of
    bridging the gap between those of us who do not have a direct professional relationship
    with Leica ( which I do, but do not need to play it up on the internet ).

    The whole internet hero thing is one of the strangest phenomenon of our modern times, I
    would be quite embarrassed if I were Guy, but then, I do not post 5,000-15,000 times on
    any one site.

    My photos are what I want to be remembered for, not my internet hero status...
     
  53. Yikes, I was typing while Michael was posting - the result looking like I was implicitly
    responding to his post. Not true. Michael's views are well reasoned and I totally respect
    them - he's a friend who I enjoy talking to and hooking up. My post above was totally about
    what Steve S said and the posts before that. Just wanted to make that clear...
     
  54. Brad, not a problem. In any case, I took no offense.

    And I'm still all in favor of "healthy skepticism," my own post notwithstanding. :)
     
  55. >>> "...has found that M8 files print as well as 4x5 scanned film and better than any other small-format digital camera at sizes as large as 30"x40""

    Pure rubbish. <<<

    I agree, that is a ridiculous statement. Scanned 4x5, at least quality drum scanned 4x5 still edges out MF digital back capture from a detail standpoint IMHO.

    (However, the latest generations of 33+ MP MF DB's are very good and maybe close enough to scanned 4x5 for some; they certainly more convenient at getting a high resolution digital file into your computer ;) )
     
  56. PS: Notwithstanding my above comment, I will stand by my claim that the M8 file is capable of producing *stunning* 32" prints.

    Cheers,

    Jack
     
  57. "To compare two very dissimilar cameras based on image quality is a waste of time since
    image quality is the same."

    But it's not, and you are doing a disservice by misleading people into thinking that they
    have identical image quality.
     
  58. Another 2cents worth:

    I second above comments on Guy's relationships with Leica. Jamie Roberts summary is
    right on, and to my knowledge (having followed Guy's pathway for the past two years, in a
    modest way) dead on correct.

    I went and got a DMR and was amazed by the image quality. I ahve a 30" x 42" print on my
    son's walls that looks like something from medium format. No way comparable to 35 mm.

    I've only used the Canon 20D, and have little affection for the color rendition in that
    camera. It works well enough, but something is just too flat for my taste. However, in high
    ISO environments, it shoots well, focuses rapidly, and gets the AWB right, something Leica
    just can't seem to get right.

    But the M8....came after the DMR - as the larger camera just didn't suit my style. The M8 is
    now used all the time, and nails shots that by rights it shouldn't get. It has a sensitivity
    that can best be compared to medium format film. It makes no sense, the numbers don't
    suggest that, but between the clarity of the Leica glass, and something in the porcessing
    algorithms, its not just like anything else.

    Can it make big prints? Yes. As good as 4x5? Gee, I'd doubt it, that really seems a bit of a
    stretch, but it does things that are surprising.
     
  59. I would love to own an M8, but it would the height of self indulgence in terms of other "must do" events coming up, mainly in the field of home maintenance. I am a pure amateur so an M8 would neither be a tx write-off or a source of income. I have been enjoying the "debate" on this and other threads. I like it when people get emotional about a camera. Question: do any stores other than megagiants like B&H keep an M8 in stock? It seems like it is a special order item in my neighborhood (King County, WA, which probably has more billionaires than anywhere else here in the land of Microsoft). I would love to handle one, or even induce them to let me take a shot in the store with my own memory card inserted. I can often do that in my local camera shops that have come to know me and love my credit cards.
     
  60. Hmmm. Interesting and some very wrong comments here also. Thanks for those that
    actually know the facts. let's clear the air first. I have a very close relationship with leica
    but only after the purchases of the M8. I was also asked to be a beta tester and sign a NDA
    which in reality i am not even supposed to say i am a beta tester but leica decided if i was
    more comfortable being out there in public and saying i was it was okay with them. i do
    NOT recieve any money from Leica for anything. I did just join leica on there Leica / Porche
    Acadimie tour in Germany in which i did tour the factory and also had meetings with leica
    which i had in the past at PMA. First off there really nice folks and really enjoy there
    company. Now i did own the DMR and was in love with that system and what it could do , i
    wanted to try the M8 system becuase we all hear the Leica m lenses are better than the R
    lenses , well there right and after all the growing pains of the M8 inluding 2 SDS situations
    i persoanlly had i stuck it out with the M8's and they have been a joy to use and the files
    are very similar to the DMR but with better micro detail so i completely switched to the M8
    and use it today with 2 M8's and 10 lenses as my primary commercial shooting rig. Yes it
    has it's limitations on the long side and tilt and shift lenses and if i need a DSLR than i can
    always rent one if I have the need which i have not so far.

    Now i use the system because it works and works better than almost anything out there if
    it said Kobalt for a camera name i would be using that. i just simply will use the best there
    is and the name is meaningless but i also like owning leica for what it is and the people
    behind it. Now i have been very focal about this system and worked really hard to get
    everyone that owned a M8 to get working around it's initial issues and problems , if that
    make me some internet whatever was described i could care less, i make no money from
    the internet but i do like helping folks and getting them shooting so if i took on a
    customer advocate role than that is my choice , love it or hate it makes no difference to
    me. Like my work or not is also in the same category unless your paying me i could care
    less what you think of what i shoot, my clients think better of me and pay me well to shoot
    and at the end of the day that is the bottom line.

    Now with regards to leica i am also helping them with firmware and upgrades and
    suggestions to help them build better machines and tools for us and they do like my
    suggestions and comments and such . i will continue to do that because i like having this
    relationship and in the end it helps the end user, US. So if you want to piss on me for no
    better reason than to do that than you have the problem , not me. But this place is a
    absolute train wreck and some of you are guilty of causing that and it is a shame because i
    remember when it was a nice place but it is only as good as it's members and if you guys
    want to ride it into the wall than that is your choice but the issue is your not learning
    anything and that is the real downfall of this place. All i see is bad info and misguided
    comments. I personally would rather be positive and work the issues to make the tools we
    use to be better and the photo industry to listen and make product of value to us the user.
    Thanks and have a good day , no further comments are needed from me. Guy
     
  61. let's clear the air first. I have a very close relationship with leica but only after the purchases of the M8. I was also asked to be a beta tester and sign a NDA which in reality i am not even supposed to say i am a beta tester but leica decided if i was more comfortable being out there in public and saying i was it was okay with them. i do NOT recieve any money from Leica for anything. I did just join leica on there Leica / Porche Acadimie tour in Germany in which i did tour the factory and also had meetings with leica which i had in the past at PMA.
    Guy, To clarify my reply to Doug Herr above- it was due to your own postings (either here or on the l-forum, i couldn't locate that particular post/thread) where you said, cryptically, that the 'relationship' between you and Leica, you will not expand on.
    Thanks for your clarification here.
     
  62. The critical issue seems to me that there is no competition to the M8 for what that particular style of camera offers, which is essentially the seeing window. If you want that viewfinder, which is hugely luxurious and functionally much more useable than what any DSLR I know of possesses, the only alternative to M8 is a discontinued RD-1. Since seeing is what photography is, doesn't it make at least some logical sense to want the camera with the biggest brightest clearest window?
     
  63. "Since seeing is what photography is, doesn't it make at least some logical sense to want the camera with the biggest brightest clearest window?"
    It makes sense to me. What baffles me is the apparently widespread acceptance of really crappy viewfinders. Do people not know anything better exists?
     
  64. I'm afraid I'm baffled regarding a lot of things people accept these days. With regard to photography, anyone doing it would ideally have some experience using a good RF viewfinder (which in Leica's case is the absolute best ever made), just as they should have experience with putting their head under a cloth and viewing an upside down image on the ground glass of a view camera, at least once.
     
  65. "anyone doing it would ideally have some experience using a good RF viewfinder (which in Leica's case is the absolute best ever made), just as they should have experience with putting their head under a cloth and viewing an upside down image on the ground glass of a view camera, at least once."
    I'd add the Leicaflex SL viewfinder to this list as an example of how good an SLR viewfinder can be.
     
  66. "Since seeing is what photography is"

    hip-shots make good photography too.
     

Share This Page