Will the M8 be used by press photographers?

Yesterday I saw a nice documentary on press photography in the 1960's and

1970's. Needless to say, almost all of the press people used Leica-M's or

Rolleiflexes. Nowadays every sports and newsphotgrapher uses a digital slr

with some good zoomlenses. Now that Leica has introduced a digital M, do you

people think the "M" will make a comeback? Will we see press photographers use

the M8 in the near future? It has continuous shooting, superb optics AND it is

digital. Besides that it is smaller than a d-slr, the lenses are smaller so it

looks less obstrusive. I know it has no autofocus but I would say it is a

perfect tool for press photography. Just like it has always been. What d'you

say?

<i>Yesterday I saw a nice documentary on press photography in the 1960's and 1970's. Needless to say, almost all of the press people used Leica-M's or Rolleiflexes.</i><p>

In the USA? Must have been the sixties down south you noticed because that was my day and everyone I knew used Leicas and Nikon F (and some Nikon S). Nikon made it so easy for many press photographers to own a couple or more.

I don't think that large numbers of press will switch to the M8. The important thing for the

press is to get the image no matter what, and then be able to get that image to the photo

editor as quickly as possible. Auto focus, zoom lenses, high speed shooting, matrix

metering and sophisticated flash integration are all huge advantages for this task. A photo

journalist with a Canon or Nikon DSLR with a wide and telephoto zoom has a much great

chance of getting any given shot than does an M8 user with multiple prime lenses. The

cost of a DSLR system for either the photographer or news agency is also much less.

Longer

term documentary photography and reportage are where you may see some

photographers switch (back) to the M8. Stories and photo-essays where a photographer

can

take a more contemplative approach are more conducive to using the M8. This is not to

say you can't use the M8 for action or a DSLR for slower paced work, it is just about

choosing the right tool for the job. And of course the M8 is not going to be suitable for

most professional work until its problems with banding and IR contamination are fixed.

Even if they are fixed, I think the number of working journalists using the M8 as their

primary camera will be statistically negligible.

I haven't seen ever seen a photojournalist working for the disposable press (magazines and

newspapers, 'kitty litter' to me) in the last few years using anything but a Canon or Nikon AF

camera.

I <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/essays/vanRiper/040226.htm">have</a>. On the cover of <a href="http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,1101060116,00.html">Time Magazine</a> no less. Shot the <a href="http://www.davidburnett.com/fmsetgallery.html?gallery=Olympics%20-%202004">olympics</a>, too, among many other subjects.

The press core is kept further away than ever before for security and other reasons. Telephotos rule the day for those reasons and they really are no longer suitable for events covered by mass media digital or not.

I started as a PJ in the 60's and used Leica M and Nikon F's. To this day I still shoot both and would'nt part with them. Matter of fact i purchased a pair of a la carte M's this year. I shoot a great deal of documentary work when not running the commercial studio. In the commercial world I shoot 98% digital with Canon 1DsII's. I still have a number of PJ friends and I can say there's no way they will switch. High speed is the game today and that's not Leica. A full complement of zooms is critical to the job. The M8 has marginal flash, poor high ISO compared to Nikon and canon and no real zooms. The camera is simply too slow and limited. In the world of documentary work, atleast in my opinion, 10MP is too limiting for a full range of applications. I even feel the 17mp of the canon is shy of horse power for the kind of documentary work I do. This is why I stick to B&W film. It can printed to almost any size and only see grain enlarged but digital gets looking plastic as it is enlarged beyond the default size. My critical opinion is 150% enlargement is the limit for really good litho reproduction. Some commercial guys might buy but art directors are demanding 10mp minimum and most frequently they won't accept anything under 12mp.

 

My estimation is it will be mainly an amateur camera. Sad that Leica is so out of touch with the pro market.

 

Another point is pro service. Canon and Nikon both have priority pro service. The few Canon repairs through CPH have only once taken more than three days total with shipping. The one time it took one week Canon loaned me another 1Ds body at no charge. CPS and NPS are free to the pro and also include free loans od equipment for special jobs. Leica listen to that.

I think there will be limited use, but I don't foresee press shooters abandoning their DSLR

cameras in droves. At best I can see some of them supplementing their kits with an M8.

 

This spring I went to the VII Photo seminar in Pasadena (CA) and Gary Knight showed us a

story he had shot in an African nation park on elephant poaching. Normally he works with

a large Canon DSLR, but he shot that assignment with his M6, because he needed to keep

a low profile and didn't want to be recognized as a photojournalist.

 

On the other hand I've spoken with some shooters, who will give nothing more than a

disparaging look at a Leica, like it's a curiosity or relic from a bygone era. Usually these are

the younger shooters, who've never used a rangefinder and in some cases skipped film all

together.

 

So, yes I think there will be takers, but don't expect a stampede.

Go to aljazeera.com or any other non-governmental website and you'll see that the real (as opposed to "embedded"/AP/Reuters/propaganda) PJs are using digicams, not even dslrs.

<i>the real (as opposed to "embedded"/AP/Reuters/propaganda) PJs are using digicams, not even dslrs</i>

<p>

<a href="http://www.magnumphotos.com/Archive/C.aspx?VP=XSpecific_MAG.StaticPage_VPage&SP=photographers_list&l1=0&XXAPXX=SubPanel10">Really?</a>

That link goes to a site with a very small number of active PJ photographers.

Yeah, you're right. No "real" ones. And all using P&S digital, too, I hear.

The point is that there is no point in the link. It's a tiny number of active PJs. I'm not sure that the standard is P&S digicams as stated, but the link doesn't have anything to do with that. What a couple of active photographers in an increasingly marginalized agency mean is unclear at best.

The point is, what's your standard for "real" photojournalism? The Magnum members are among the best. That's why there are only a few of them. "Increasingly marginalized" is an easy epithet coming from someone who's never tried to get into the agency, but it's difficult to imagine a PJ today who wouldn't jump at an invitation. Most of the VII agency photogs famously use Canon DSLRs (they sat for a Canon ad with them).

 

The statement I quoted from John is simply garbage, and his categorization of photojournalists is presumptuous and empty. Real photojournalists don't shoot cameras, they shoot stories. They do it with the tools they need to get the job done. Some of the best still use Leicas. Others use Canons. Others use Speed Graphics. Others use digital P&S cameras. Get over it.

I do like the idea of having the same gorgeous, sturdy piece of glass that i can put on a digital body and a batteryless film body. and i really like the idea of putting a fifty year old lens on a 2006 digital body.

 

imagine you are in a far flung place, away from civilization for a couple of weeks. (new orleans) you are shooting digital like crazy and you run out of batteries. with a small kit:leica RF or nikon SLR might be the way to go.

 

in general though press photographers (youtube) are gonna use what's laying around.

 

no way are sports guys gonna use the M8, unless they're in the huddle!

Who bought a Epson during the days of the Canon 10D? - The M8 is for wealthy freaks and whoever struggles to make ends meet might prefer a D Rebel to get started and will collect 2 other DSLRs, ISed zooms and so on first. Such folks might have other hobbies like families too and few of them will be left to buy M8s as professional toys / special occasion cameras. - Keep in mind that even Al Kaplan doesn't preach shooting a single Leica for a living, while some beginner PJs are focused on one DSLR + fishy backup to get started.

 

Local newspaper journalism isn't very demanding. I met a pro shooting a 1.3MP Powershot 70 during the days of that bugger.

Two misunderstandings IMHO:

 

a) the cult of PJ. A profession like any other. I wouldn't obsess over the preferred brand of taxi drivers or truck drivers when I'm in the market for a car. Do the "pros" drive BMW?

 

b) reducing PJ to paparazzi chasing after celebrities. While I'm no PJ I can really imagine that this profession has a lot more to offer than a crowd of fellows waving dslrs over heir heads in the hope of getting a shot of Tom Cruise.. In htis case the PJ is part of the show, I'd even say that he is the show and the celeb would be just another ordinary mortal without the crowd of paparazzi..

 

And ym 0.02$

 

When it comes to recording something as opposed to the inscenation of an event as in b) I can well imagine that a camera that does not fire like a shotgun and look like a ahoulder missile launcher will have it's share of use even among professional photographers. But then, as in a), I don't really care at all.

Only men with too much time & money on their hands will buy these. Sort of like Leica film cameras.

Will the M8 be used by press photographers? Why not... last week I have been in a meeting with three pros and one somekind of freelance. Let me told about their equipment: Nikon D50, a very little card size digicam and a Coolpix. The other one liked the D50, he wants to buy one. Two of them publish quite often on national leader print run magazines; the other is a publisher (he is not worried about cameras -I think he just want printable images-).

 

Surely all of them would like to have such a famous camera... but not at their own expense. Not all pros are sport shooters.

And that's one of the real keys, Jose. Staff photographers use what their publication or agency buys for them. That often means Canon or Nikon DSLRs, because they're tough (so the company doesn't have to replace them as often), they take interchangeable lenses (so the company can buy just a few of the specialist glass and check them out as needed), and those companies have excellent support for and marketing to the big (and even medium and small) media outlets.

"Usually these are the younger shooters, who've never used a rangefinder and in some cases skipped film all together."

Mmmmm... pity them. Could a guy, who has only ever known frozen foods and micro-wave ovens, open a restaurant?

Could a guy who's only shot manufactured, pre-packaged film without ever having mixed his own emulsions and coated his own plates ever be a decent photographer?

Probably not many. Most press photogs prefer zoom type and long focal length lenses.

If I were a pro PJ I would definitely buy an M8. I'd use Nikons for tele work, but an M8 is

ideal for wide angle work, and won't put too much stress on your spine and muscles.

Zooms are convenient, but unnecessary. Nikon and Canon make good lenses but they are

not as good as Leica M lenses optically, mechanically or as convenient in size. Most of my

PJ-film projects (for my own site) are Leica Film-body M work with a few Nikon telephoto

shots. After all, there is no modern Leica 180mm/2.8 or 300mm/4 M-mount lens, and

who would want to use a Visoflex on an M8?

<br><br>

<A href="http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~keirst/photojournalism.html">

http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~keirst/photojournalism.html</a>

They're also not as expensive. The Ferrari is better made than a Yugo, but also costs more.

 

Try a Nikon FM with a 55mm/2.8. Pretty sweet actually.