Why I will wait a few more generations for Leica Digital

Below is what I posted on the Leica financial woes topic. It reflects why I will wait some time after a new digital model comes

out to move into that realm. The friend whose review I post a link to gave the M8 a real field test. He is a long time Leica user

and I respect his opinion. I have used them for 30 years and for some time have kept the same two bodies and lenses.

They have served me well. A couple of CLA each during that time and no troubles.

 

 

------

I have looked at this site on occasion over the past few years. Have a couple of M4's that see use still. One bought new and

one used, both working well. I have considered a newer one but never pulled the wallet out as the two I have work fine.

Digital sounds nice but in seeing problems friends have with it I have held off. Then another friend wrote a piece about his

personal experience with the M8.

 

http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.htm

 

He is a long time Leica user and found the camera way below the standard he is used to. Glad I held off.

 

If the folks in charge now cannot get it right on a $5000 body I am not buying in. Especially when what I have still works

well. I will photograph, develop and scan if I ever get tired of darkroom work.

 

------

 

What I have now works and works well. I seldom do photojournalism these days but do use the cameras a lot for personal

work. For what I do they are familiar tools and do not let me down. One thing they have never done is fall off a tripod in

vertical orientation as some M8 users have reported. Some of us do use the Leica-pod and keep it handy for a lot of things.

Light, compact and still working well after 35 years. I am not anti digital and when Leica gets the bugs worked out and the

quality where it should be (both body and digital files) I will make the purchase. Until then I wait and read with interest the

field reports of real world use. These are a lot more use to me than a few testers who don't really put them to field use in

varied conditions.

Hey Al -- good to see you here. I hope you enjoy the forum. It can get a bit rowdy sometimes but that's kinda how these

things work. You should try to get your hands on an M8. I have used Leica M's for well over 30 years and I borrowed an M8

for about two weeks and had a great time with it. It's got a few little kinks but I sure had fun using it. Anyway, rather than

letting others make up your mind about the camera you should try it. You might like it. Anyway, good luck.

I have over the last year or so been in a photographic limbo of sorts - realizing that my film based

infrastructure is perfectly adequate (except for the increased scarcity and cost of locally available products;

being in Alaska, shipping is a HUGE deal), and that the process yields archival results proactively,

automatically, and without any further worry whatsoever, no matter how many computers and hard drives and DVDs I

go through.

 

I've also had a yearning for the modernity of digital. So lately I've been shooting with an absolutely wonderful

little Canon point-and-shoot, the 950 IS (I believe it's called). The thing is extraordinary. How did I ever

get along without it? I simply cannot believe some of the pictures I've taken with that little thing.

 

But, alas, it's really not good enough. I want further manual control, I want a better lens, and I want RAW

capability.

 

Knowing that it takes a hell of a lot less time to do some things in photoshop than in an actual dark room, and

knowing that many things can be done better + quicker + at less cost to do over should there be a screw-up, has

led some emotional and lazy part of me to shun my film-based work, even though nothing happened regarding film.

I won't even tell you how many unprocessed rolls of film I have sitting in box.

 

This was all starting to cause a conflict between me and the universe because I also know how fun, relaxing, and

rewarding dark room work is. I was actually starting to wonder if I was depressed! My enlarger is still there,

sitting pretty. I still have my washer set up in a bathroom. In a few minutes, I could be making prints from

negatives. A nicely processed fiber-based print - toned, cleaned, dried, mounted, matted, framed, hung, and

enjoyed for years - is an object in and of itself. That, combined with the satisfaction of having produced it,

could not be matched by the equivalent process with a computer.

 

But I still wanted a real digital camera. But which? My two alternatives were a Canon dSLR or a Leica M8. I

knew that the Canons are great cameras and that I would learn to love whichever model I chose. I knew that I'd

have plenty of manual control and that the lenses would be excellent and would impose much less of a limitation

on my photography than I would be as a photographer. (My dad once told me: "Use tools that are better than you

are!") But I'd have to buy into a new lens line when I have some lenses for my Leica M. I felt I needed to

preserve not only the rangefinder way of shooting but also my investment in glass.

 

So I bought the M8. I'd never even seen one, much less picked up/held one in my hands, much less tested one out,

much less used one for any length of time. Good grief. Most expensive thing I ever bought, and I bought it

sight unseen. If you think cameras have flaws, just look at some human photographers like me.

 

After nearly a week of using the camera, having taken nearly 400 pictures (not one good one, by the way) (well,

maybe one or two of Mimi that I like; see my posted picture of her in my photo.net portfolio), having gotten a taste

and feel of nearly all the camera's faults, and after uncovering some really neat features, I feel like

I am starting to bridge this gap I've caused for myself and to get out of this limbo thing. I think I'm

reinvigorating myself. I hope I don't drop my camera.

 

Al, have you considered shooting with one, borrowing one for an afternoon or something? I wonder if one could

rent one these days? I think you'd be impressed. I had read the Iraq field test even before you posted it, but

it didn't stop me from buying an M8, and so far I don't regret owning one.

I had an M8. Sold it. Did Nikon for a while, D200 - D300 - and now D700. Last week I bought another M8. Just buy it used and sell it for not so much a loss. And as it's said: never sell a Leica, you just end up buying again.

The M8 works fine. While you're "reflecting" the rest of us with M8's are taking photographs. Just got back from a 4,000 mile trip around the western US. Took more good images with the M8 in a two week period than any previous trip with my film cameras.

 

When on road trips I used to take: Plaubel Makina 670, Hasselbad 500cm + 2 lenses, Nikon N-90 + 2 zooms, M6 + 2 lenses, Horseman 612, Horseman 45FA + 4 lenses, and a Sunpak 120J flash.

 

This trip - M8 with Wa-TE, 28mm, 35mm, and 70mm; Horseman 612, and the Sunpak flash. Never missed the film cameras and took 2 images that could only have been done with either the M8 or M6 - the difference being, I can make an extremely high quality 20x30 print from the M8 image - and you can't do that with 35mm film.

 

Since you don't own the camera or apparently have never used one - I find posts like yours baffling since you really have no idea what you're talking about.

 

This statement is laughable..."and the quality where it should be (both body and digital files) ..."

 

You have NO idea about the file quality, yet you feel qualified to make this kind of statement. What this sounds like is an exercise in convincing yourself that you've made a rational value judgement. Fine...but don't pretend you're actually are making it as an informed person.

I'll wait a few more generations, too, but for a different reason. As it goes with Leica and M lenses, in 50 or so years from initial release it starts to actually become affordable. :)

Hey, Tony. The first time I took my M8 out for a trial, a gust of wind blew my hat off at the instant I was putting the camera back in the bag (hence not strapped on). Impulsively I started chasing my hat and as I bent down to grab it before it blew away again (great screen comedy), I dropped my brand new $4800 Leica on the concrete. No damage. At all. I still worry about the outrageous investment, but I not longer stress over dropping it. This means I'm less likely to drop it.

 

In a nutshell, the M8 comes closest to replicating M film photos in digital capture. If you don't believe it, go to dppreview and look at the photos from the brand new Nikon D700, full frame. The are just not right . . . still odd looking modern digital images. Second, I tried my M6 again to see what it would be like for b&w. Only one place to process it locally, the printed photos were horrible, and my scans were not much better. I never have developed myself, so the lack of a good processor nearby has brought and end to my M6 except for backup purposes. I'm still attached to it. Third, I really like processing digital M8 images in photoshop and just as importantly printing them myself at home with a HP B9180 up to 12x18 in size. I remind myself of Ansel Adam's trying over 60 or more times to print one of his most famous negatives to his own satisfaction and never quite getting it right. I have the luxury of experimenting and improving my own prints. I enjoy this a lot. It really is the other 50% of photography. I now know why Cartier-Bresson refused to have any of his negatives cropped when printed: not for any aesthetic reasons but because he was not the one doing he cropping. He always had other people print for him, so he had to do all his own cropping when he took the photo. So, how many great photos did he give up because they were never cropped correctly? He had way more than his share of great photos, so it probably doesn't matter much. But I enjoy doing this myself. And finally, what normally comes first, I like the freedom to take at least a few more photos than I did with the M6 and be able to nail down the exposure while I'm doing it and experimenting with different apertures and viewpoints. Okay, always end up with way too many images to throw away (yet don't), but also a few more keepers than with the M6. And all I ever expected was one good one for every roll of 36 and perhaps one great one per year. In other words, it's almost a whole new way of using the camera. And apart from the filters, I've never had any of the problems reported by others. Just lucky, I suppose. I'd like the M8-2 shutter improvements, but the M8 is fine as it is. We asked for something like the M8, and Leica gave it to us (okay, sold it to us). Seems like most users are quite happy about it. Just don't shoot war photos in the desert of Iraq in a sandstorm at 110 degrees. On the other hand, the 90% plus humidity and heat in Vietnam didn't bother the M8 at all. Of course, I religiously kept it in a sealed plastic bag while going in and out of air conditioned buildings. I don't see any point in waiting for a better digital camera "if" one has the extra money to spare. All my kids are not out of college, so there's no reason to wait, only reasons to hurry.<div></div>

Still makes a perfect capucino. Can a Canon or Nikon even make good drip coffee? You should see it printed on bright white photo rag paper at 11x14 inches.

Some context here:<p> A Hasselblad HC lens can set you back about the same as an M8 a 40mm CFE one and half M8s!

A set of M lenses acquired over time 21 asph/28 cron/35 lux/50 lux/75 lux - these are irreplaceable lenses in

35mm land. So for the price of one or one and a third MF lenses - an M8 body with all its so called faults ( why

do they not bother me these faults?) allows me to use my M lenses - the best travel and happy snap kit you could

ask for.<p> Oh and yes you can make very large prints from M8 files - beautiful files as good ( I wont say

better) as the DSLR stuff you get..<p> I have about 60 rolls of developed film - waiting for me to

develop...sheeeesh!

“In a nutshell, the M8 comes closest to replicating M film photos in digital capture."

 

And my eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord………

 

“I dropped my brand new $4800 Leica on the concrete. No damage. At all. I still worry about the outrageous

investment, but I not longer stress over dropping it”

 

My mate Petey, bless his little white Aussie cotton socks, dropped his M8 from the roof of the Melbourne Opera

House. It

fell all the way to the ground and bounced right back up landing on top of his cork hat. There, beat that. Okay, there

were a

few minor scratches but nothing major....but it sort of put him off it. He tried to flog it to my mate Ray, however, he

was having none of it………he would never thrash around at night with anything less than a perfect cam.

 

Fun aside I would love to see some of your superior M8 photos,then I would share some of my superior DSLR

photos. We could then decide what cam has the Leica look...... we could start out with some Leica film shots.

I've just noticed your superior coffee cup photo,Larry. So,my superior DSLR photo.

 

Notice the crispness and detail, Larry. Very Leica film like.

 

Straight from the cam, Larry.<div></div>

I know most don't really put their cameras to heavy field use in inclement weather. What good is a $5000 camera if it won't hold up to use by some such as David Douglas Duncan, Alfred Eisenstaedt and Cartier-Bresson? They used Leicas for daily work. From those whose opinions I respect, who actually use the cameras in day to day work I find it is not up to the job. Why would I buy it? If I were a Dentist or occasional user (as the image of so many Leicaphiles is etched in lore) it would not matter. I want reliable gear that performs to traditional Leica standards. Not something that has Wetzlar screaming 'product abuse' when the whole tripod socket pulls out on turning the LeicaPod to the vertical or photographing in light drizzle siezed up.

 

I like the M4's and will wait until actual field use by reliable, experienced professionals shows the Digital version is up to the task Leica keeps telling us is its forte. All I want is LEICA to be a LEICA, not an expensive, precious and delicate toy.

<A HREF="http://leica-users.org/v37/msg07626.html" target="_blank">Tina Manley in Honduras</A>

<i>Tina Manley in Honduras</i>

<P>An anecdotal report of someone submerging an electronic camera (weathersealed or not) unscathed is not so much

indicative of the camera's reliability as it is a testament to that person's <u>pure dumb luck</u>. Don't get

confused.</p>

Pure dumb luck works both ways, Fangie. The reports of bad luck are rare but they get a lot of attention from trolls.

I have shot with D200 and other DSLRs but enjoy using my M3/ 50mm LUX on all my travels. Recently I sold my D200 and

contemplating on getting the M8.2. My main use is street photography, less to carry on travels and not too obtrusive. Often

when I take walk to a local market I miss a lot of good photos if I don't have my M3 as the D200 is a pain to carry. Any

views on the M8.2? I hear a lot about the IR issue etc..Is there anything additional I need to get with the M8. I have a

summilux 50/1.4 which is now on the M3. I will use a summicron 50/1.4 collapsible recent purchase from Ebay on the M3.

I went underwater along with my M8's. They

were submerged for several minutes until I could get my footing.

 

Is that the Indiana Manley Jones who swam across the Zambezi River naked a few years ago with only an M8 to

cover her altogether? Despite being submerged for several hours her M8 still managed to take photos and fend of

crocs simultaneously. If rumour is to be believed it was also chewed and swallowed by a particularly large croc and

passed through it’s digestive tract……whereupon Indiana Manley Jones immediately retrieved it and started to take

photos.

 

Cool or what.

 

Best story I’ve read in my Girls Guide Adventure Manual for a long while….

Allen ! :)