Leica...Live by the net, die by the net.

[dstate1]

When a spate of internet pundits, "testers" and general noise makers suddenly

opened the flood gates with all they learned from their pre-production M8

cameras I was pretty suprised at effort Leica had put forth to generate buzz on

the product. While it is normal for established industry writers and known

photographers to have early access, Leica sent cameras to just about anyone who

had a camera chat website! (One tester admitted he had never USED a

rangefinder camera!)

 

The fact that we are now seeing some pretty obvious image problems...stuff that

should be fixed at the early prototype stage...says a lot about the danger of

Leica's strategy.

 

They used testers who were either not astute enough to judge the issues, or who

were willing to overlook problems in exchange for the "honor" of being on

Leica's favorites list.

 

Now the same internet that created all the positive buzz is spinning out of

control with NEGATIVE buzz.

 

Leica's new managers need to be reminded that they are not rolling out the

Leica Xbox 360 or M Playstation3. Hopefully next time they will be more

interested in delivering a perfect product, not just perfect buzz.

[rj]

A first issue product will most probably never be perfect. It will certainly not be perfect for everybody. Its just reality.

 

It seems to me that the internet has not been overly positive about Leica products ever. It always seems their is some issue with the products (usually price). IMHO

[Brad_]

<I>A first issue product will most probably never be perfect. </I><P>

 

There's a HUGE gap between releasing something that's not perfect and releasing a disaster.

And then trying to keep it under wraps...<P>

 

Knowledge is good and it's great the net helps promote that.

[rj]

I agree that knowledge is good and that the net helps promote that, however I don't think that is what is going on with these camera company freak out sessions and they are not limited to the leica cameras. It seems that in this case hysteria is the only term to use to describe this promotion of "knowledge."

 

I disagree strongly that the camera is a disaster. There seem to be plenty of users shooting with their cameras right now, if it was a total disaster than they wouldn't and couldn't do that.

[ray .]

beat a dead horse

[Brad_]

The camera <i>roll-out</i> is a disaster - I should have been more clear. Poking around on

the net will confirm that.

[Andrew in Austin]

At least Leica has said they are aware of problems and will probably release a firmware update soon. If this were Nikon - you could count on radio silence.

[Troll]

It took Oskar Barnack over 10 years to develop the original Leica; the M came about 8 years after WW2 ended; the M7 15 years after the M6, and every one of them had initial problems. Why should the M8 be any different?

[jtk]

Seems kamikazi to rush into market with a technically iffy, physically heavy, $5000 rangefinder...especially in light of the image-making utility of, for example, Canon G7 (@ less than 5% $, assuming the Leica actually requires two or three lenses).

 

Everybody DID see this coming, right? I mean, who really expected Canon et al to sit still while Solms fiddled?

 

The G7 may or may not make a 20X30 that's as smooth as M8 (forgetting relative color for this exercise), but since when did Leica-lovers aspire to "smooth?" And since when did they know the difference, if they didn't do their own processing and printing? And of course, what real photojournalist will haul a $6000-10,000 M8 kit if $600 kit is smarter in all important respects?

 

Canon's lack of raw is a pixel-peeper worry, of course. But neither G7 nor M8 is a proper replacement for DSLR in studio or field anyway, so maybe raw is irrelevant.

 

G7 may be nearer to Leica's 1950s concept and execution perfection than is M8, even if M8 eventually does what the buzz promised.

[rj]

John,

 

While the G7 may be a great camera (actually I think it looks promising even with the lack of RAW), its no substitute for an M mount rangefinder. Lack of a real wide angle, only f2.8 coupled with the smaller sensor so you can't isolate a subject very well, no manual focus, no m mount, no rangefinder ect. make it no substitute for the m8.

 

When you say "but neither G7 nor M8 is a proper replacement for DSLR in studio or field anyway" you do speak truth, however I never thought a DSLR was a proper replacement for a rangefinder either. I find them good companions.

 

I'm saving up for the M8, but will wait for the fixes to be in.

[dstate1]

If only to bump this back onto the tracks a bit...My comment was not about the viability of the M8. No doubt it will be a great camera once the bugs are worked out, as was the R8.

 

I really feel the major difference in this rollout vs. the R8 is the obvious willingness to pander to the self proclaimed experts on the internet.

 

They pimped their prototypes pretty hard prior to launch to people they felt would generate excitement about the product. That very weapon has now been turned back upon them...As always it's not the crime, but the cover-up. Welcome to the new virtual world Leica.

[mingus1]

The thing about leica is that they have "die hard" believers, brand fetishists and followers.

Blatently put the could sell Plastic Holga, put a 5K price tag on its brand it with the leica

dot and people will buy it, despite

whatever quality it represents, read the posts on LUF, I don't know whats in these peoples

heads, but as mentioned before this is not a gimmicky toy (well maybe it's just that) it's a

4000$ camera which as a camera is not good, despite being able to take nice pictures

under

some circumstances, the company that manufactures and sells them take their buyers to

be a bunch of blind red dot focussed fools, which apparantly they turned out to

be.Firmware update certainly will not be the solution, new sensors will only become

apparant in the M9, all the M8 die-hards will be waling arounf with free, dark red IR filters

on each and every lens they use, but still claiming it's the best thing that happened to

them since birth .....

[jtk]

RJ, right, rangefinder with bright frames is ecstacy, and there's the nostalgia of the M mount (not to mention LTM)...but do those bits justify a far-over-$5000+ price difference (M8 ould be less fun without lenses).

 

You're right about wide lenses, but maybe zooms a trade-off (I personally dislike it).

 

Two f-stops are irrelevant, given stabalization. The little chip isn't likely to produce impressive bokeh, though I've recently seen good software simulation (somewhere?).

 

M8 needed to be a carbon body (greater precision than metal and lighter) with a zooming bright frame. Leica wildly misplaced its engineering dollars.

 

RFDR works a lot better than SLR for my eyes, but so does autofocus, and there's no excuse for lack of stabalization.

 

All the next PanaLeica needs to vanish M8 is a bigger chip, Tri-Elmar, and a hot shoe for bright frame viewfinders. Of course, by that time Canon will introduce a G8.

[al_kaplan1]

Image stabilization does great things for a shakey photographer. If it's the subject that's moving you need a faster shutter speed.

[michael_b._elmer]

Dan, you are quite right, but do remember that one often can get the impression that some people want to turn this (and other similar) wbesite(-s) into a Leica hatesite, either because they hate the idea of Leica inventing something more modern than the M2 or simply because they hate Leica and all that it stands for, i.e. exclusive and expensive tools (and toys) of great perfection.

 

Some people also seem to think that if they are able to find even the smallest imperfection in this perfect photographic tool, then they will be regarded very fine photographers with great expertise.

 

Having owned Leicas for more than 45 years, I am confident that the M8 will fully meet all my expectations, and I do not mind waiting for the one I ordered almost a year ago.

[vinay_patel]

"some people want to turn this (and other similar) wbesite(-s) into a Leica hatesite, either because they hate the idea of Leica inventing something more modern than the M2 or simply because they hate Leica and all that it stands for, i.e. exclusive and expensive tools (and toys) of great perfection."

 

That is a completely true statement. However it neither explains nor excuses the situation with the M8. Those of us who are Leica users and Leica fans and want(ed) a digital body for our lenses are among the most disappointed and feel the most betrayed. The few individuals bent on putting a positive spin on this are not helping.

 

If Porsche shipped out 2000 cars that had inoperative headlights and lost power above 3000rpm, the people who drive only to and from their office on 35mph roads during the daytime might think it was a wonderful vehicle. It would not make it so.

 

Dan is correct that today word of product defects, regardless of the product, spreads rapidly due to the internet. That is a fact which no manufacturer can avoid and therefore no business plan can afford to ignore.

 

When I read some of the tearful pleas for leniency and forgiveness of Leica I have to shake my head in awe. Those of us here who have our own practice or own our own business, how many of us could depend on our patients/clients/customers to cut us slack if our work/product was as defective as the M8, we knew about it, and attempted to conceal it?

[rj]

Vinay,

 

Its not putting a positive spin on it, its not asking for leniency or for forgiveness, its not getting hysterical and just facing the reality of the situation. In six months if the cameras are not fixed then you really have something to get hysterical about.

 

I've had plenty of tools from Snap-on (you know they are supposed to be the best) that haven't functioned at all, functioned poorly or broke quickly. This is the first time that I have ever mentioned it on the internet, you know why, because Snap-on has always had great customer service after the purchase. In fact I have a 1/2 inch battery powered impact that I use everyday that I have had replaced 3 times because of problems. I don't beat the hell out of the Snap-on guy with it when he comes into the shop, yelling and screaming, we calmy work on getting the replacement or fixing it and getting back to work.

[dead_metaphor]

Anyone who can justify a "fix" for a $5000 camera that requires a red filter on any lens you use is in serious denial.

 

FWIW, i've owned more Leicas than I can count in the last 35 years, and I'll own a mechanical M till the day I die, but people paying $5k for a current M8 just prove the old adage "A fool and his money are soon parted."

[Andrew in Austin]

Another tempest in a tea cup. A year from now we'll be flooded by images produced by the M8.

[Brad_]

<I>... that some people want to turn this (and other similar) wbesite(-s) into a Leica

hatesite,

...</I><P>

 

That is so bogus. How about naming these leica haters?<P>

 

<I>Anyone who can justify a "fix" for a $5000 camera that requires a red filter on any lens

you use is in serious denial.</I><P>

 

Bingo. Imagine if canon put that out as a fix for a similarly defective 5D or 1Ds. Would

never happen - because they care about staying in business.

[pico_digoliardi]

<i>Anyone who can justify a "fix" for a $5000 camera that requires a red filter on any lens you use is in serious denial.</i><p>

Red filter? Not necessary. Look into Hot Mirror filters. The trick is to get a filter with cutoff above, say, 700nm so that reds render fairly accurately. A 'cut off' filter reflects IR, which is easier/more accurate than absorbing it.

<p>

That said, an IR filter doesn't bother me if it fixes the issue.<p>

[jtk]

Didn't the alleged Leica announcement talk about the source of the problem? ...the glass sheath over the sensor? If that's true, the fix will hopefully be in the glass formulation (or coating), which is supposed to be Leica's stongest hand. The notion that they could actually design sensors is, however bizarre. Surely they didn't actually do it, despite assertions.

[ishik_tuna]

i think the real issue is the elusive idea of "value"

 

i was fine with spending top dollar on Leica stuff, when the camera/lense system was the absolute best at producing a 35mm negative/slide/image. At least I could rationalize the expense by knowing i got a magnificent photographic tool, that would last forever, and would hold it's value for years, and possibly even appreciate.

 

It's with great love and difficulty, that I am gradually giving my Leica kit away to my children as they reach college age, and show an interest in photography.

 

My Digilux 2 is entirely another manner. It's value is plummeting, and i suspect in a couple of years it will have little if any resale valuye left. It is not "the best" at what it does, although it certainly was priced like it was.

 

The M8 is similarly priced "among the best". One has certain expectation of what that means, and what it means to be a Leica branded camera. I think that problem is Leica doesn't do sensor design itself (at least that I know of). In digital, at least today, the sensor rules the roost, with optics coming in second place in importance. So far, I have little confidence in Leica given the less that optimal sensor in the Digilux 2, and now the sensor issues with the M8. I sure would like to see this situation improve. I always thought it was just a little strange that Leica was not letting anyone release images taken with the camera prior to the release of the camera of sale. That set off red flags and bells as far as i was concerned.

[harvey_edelstein1]

0I read all the posts on the other forums. I read all the Mea Culpas and the excuses and justifications. The takeaway I got is that all these test reviewers were giving Leica some slack in exchange for Leica giving them feedback and a chance to test the production model before it shipped so that they could update their review before the M8 shipped to the customers. If you remember, just a few weeks ago the best guess was the M8 was going to be shipped no earlier than the beginning of December. Now its available earlier than expected and these reviewers feel duped since Leica never followed thru with sending them corrected cameras as promissed by someone at Leica.

 

So the feeling is that Leica pushed to get the cameras out before the reviewers ever said BOO about the problems. These guys have egg on their face and the Leica faithful are stuck with shakey lemoney cameras. Take the money and run?

[eliot_rosen1]

Leica bad, M8 bad, Leica bad, bash bash bash bash, Leica made mistake, Leica evil, bash bash. Thanks for another original useful thread on the M8 problems. Just in case someone hasn't read the other 800 on the same subject.

 

To repeat, Leica bad, M8 bad, bash bash bash bash. Leica make mistake, bash bash. They deserve to be bashed. Nobody else ever made a mistake. All other companies always got it right on the first try and in any event didn't charge so much money for their product. (well let's forget about the fact that the first digital cameras cost $ 30,000 and provided 1 MB images).

 

To repeat, in case anyone reading this thread hasn't seen the other hundreds of similar threads, Leica bad, M8 bad, bash, bash, bash, double bash. Dan States perfect, Brad perfect, other posters perfect. Leica bad, M8 bad, purchaser of M8 stupid, buyer stupid deserves bad camera, Leica bad, bash, bash, bash, bash.