SONY R1 versus LEICA M8

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

The Sony has a perfect preview function, which the LEICA M8 does not have. Maybe

a M9 might have it. The R1 has a monitor screen which can be switched just like

a waist level finder for perfectt use. The R1 can be switched to noiseless

shutter function. The R1 has a perfect ZEISS zoom glass in a range just like to

get for the LEICa's. The R1 has a real 24mm focal length. O.K. the lens speed

range is limited from 24mm 2.8 to 120mm 4.8, but it is all built-in and

perfectly available at any time. The R1 has the same 10.3 MP capacity, just like

the M8, not to speak about cost. O.K., you can not keep up with Johnson's in

prestige with the R1, but it is no doubt, an excellent piece of practical

digital camera.

 

Why should I jump on a train, while I am sitting already in it?

 

I would like to see an comparison between these to excellent cameras!

 

Regards

[Brian]

I don't have direct knowledge of either camera but as I understand it they're not particularly rivals in any sense. One of the main attractions of the M8 is as a digital platform for Leica M lenses, which some people believe are special.

[d_gillespie]

One may assume a camera company may have a bit more experience building cameras. A global electronics company may be pursuing a growth market. Its also fair to assume there is a bit more quality in the glass available for the M8

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

"One may assume a camera company may have a bit more experience building cameras. A global electronics company may be pursuing a growth market. Its also fair to assume there is a bit more quality in the glass available for the M8"

 

Cameras are electronic devices these days. And Sony is pretty good with electronics. And they are have acquired expertise from Minolta. And to top it off they have Zeiss lenses on many of their cameras. And companies stay healthy by growing. So I think I miss your point, David.

[leicaglow]

Both companies have had sensor problems lately. I've found that you just can't compare cameras with statistics alone. You really need to shoot with them to see how the image quality looks. One 10 MP camera may look quite different than another. There's also a lot of response about cameras that use the Schneider, Zeiss, and Leica names on their lenses, and that they don't live up to that brand's image quality. Also, I'm not sure which of the two trains you're on, but if you like it, stay on it for awhile.

[del_gray]

The R-1 is an attractive camera for many reasons, but it is very different than a Leica/rangefinder in many ways - some of those differences are the very factors that lead some of us to shoot rangefinders in the first place. For most people who use Leicas, f2.8 is a very slow lens, and there is no chance of getting a faster one put on the Sony. The Sony is also much, much larger than almost all rangefinders, which is also an important criteria for many. You are right to say that the M8 is no better in many ways, but for those of use who like rangefinders and also want to shoot digital, we just don't have many options and have to make compromises in our choices at this point. Sure we could switch over to dslrs or digicams, but then we aren't shooting rangefinders, so its actually a difficult choice after all. At this point I shoot with prime lenses on a nice small dslr, and use rangefinders for film, but I look forward to the day when a nice, affordable digital rangefinder comes out.

[d_gillespie]

My point is experience. I don't buy pizza from Wal-Mart and expect it to be as tasty as my favorite place down the street. They may even buy their ingredients from the same place. Your comment about cameras being electronic devices is spot on.

[mars c]

The lens of my R1 is almost perfect. based on image quality, I believe it is truly a collaboration between sony and zeiss at the time of designing the R1. Not just a zeiss name badge on it.

 

I dont have the M8, and the M8, no mattrer how expensive, is still not perfect, You can use the money for other purposes instead of buying one M8, for practicality.

[mike_pallas]

I've been using the R1 for weddings and really love the articulated screen which allows you to get acute angles very easily. The camera can be used very close to the ground while looking down at the screen. So in that respect you will get shots with the R1 you can't on any other camera.

 

I also have a Panasonic FZ10 which has the Leica lens and I'm sure the quality of the lens has a lot do with the nice images I get from the camera. The Panasonic also seems to cope really well with high contrast scenes, such as a white wedding dress, whereas the Sony R1 can be prone to clipping. Don't know why.

[harvey_edelstein1]

The latest posts show that the Leica is not very good above iso 600. The M series was meant to be a low light camera, that was especially good for wide angles and had compact body and lenses when comparred to slr cameras and lenses.

 

 

I have an M series with a Zeiss 25mm f2.8, 35mm f2 Leica, 50mm f2 Konica

Hexar, and a Leica 90mm f2.8. I carefully selected these lenses for best performance for the money, compact size and weight. Since Leica is a rangefinder I can shoot at least 2 f-stop slower shutter speeds so these lenses perform like f1.4 on an slr and I find that fast enough for me.

 

I never use Leica for flash I use cameras with at least 1/250 sec. xsync and highly evolved flash systems like the Nikon SB-800 that can control several flashes with matrix metering and preflashes.

 

If the Sony will show itself to be reliable and have good low light photos at iso 1600 I would consider it an excellent bargain. We will see. I would not buy any new camera system, wait at least six months.

 

Those who bought the M8 thought that since Leica had spent years developing the M8 it would be perfect with no design flaws. They spent $4800 and now we know the M8 is a big flop. Lots of problems, and can't compare to the Canon 5D which sells for $2500.

 

I would wait to see how the upcomming Pentax K10 and Fuji S5 perform before I would decide what to buy. The PMA show should be very interesting this year. Maybe Nikon will show a FF compeditor for the Canon 5D too. Meanwhile sit tight and shoot what you got whether its digital or film and enjoy the Holidays. Best of CHEER to us all.

[howardfuhrman]

To me this comparison is is hard to imagine. You can purchase a Sony R1 for roughly $750 plus a memory card that includes a lens. A Leica M8 is roughly $5,000 plus the cost of lenses which can easily add more than another $5,000. Price wise both cameras are not in the same league. It is like comparing a Rolls Royce to a Toyota Avalon - both are fine cars and get you where you want to go, but the RR (and Leica) is much more prestigious than an Avalon (and a Sony R1).

 

I own a R1, I bought it for the lens and it gives me very good results if you can deal with its pluses and minuses. The R1 is a slow, deliberate camera. If your subject matter is young children or sports, then the R1 is not the camera for you. My subject matter is primarily static, portraits and landscapes and the R1 performs great. I love the articulating LCD (although I would like it better if it was brighter).

 

I suggest if you can afford the M8, buy the Sony R1 as well, you will not even notice the extra $750 as it is probably far less than the cost of one Leica lens. Seriously if you can work within the limitations of the R1, you will find it a very satisfying camera capable of producing may excellent images.

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

Thanks to all inputs!

 

But, HOWARD, please tell me, where're the "R1 limitations", comparing with the M8? So far, I have not seen any comparison images! I bet you, that was the SONY R1 technology already has, will be new, at the next Photokina, may be in a M9 (!).

 

Regards

[howardfuhrman]

Wolf,

I do not know that much about the M8 to infrom you of its limitations. I saw some beautiful M8 images that Michael Reichman produced in the site:

 

http://luminous-landscape.com/ . In addition, I read about the M8's fixes for some problems that Leica had with the M8 with the initial production runs:

 

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0611/06112402leicam8fixes.asp .

 

My guess is that you are familar with these postings on these websites. I have always been a less main stream with the cameras that I have had: I used a Rollei TLR for many years and I liked not looking through a viewfinder and the articulating LCD appealed to me with the R1 (although its small size and the dimness of the LCD are limitations that I live with). Before I converted to digital, I was using Contax G2 rangefinder with my all time favorite lens - the Carl Zeiss 21mm. The Carl Zeiss T lens with my G2 attracted me to the R1 which has a fine 24-120 Carl Zeiss T lens (the 24mm part really appealed to me). In addition, I liked the electronic viewfinder, no mirror slap like a DSLR. I do not believe the 24-120 zoom lens is as good as the Carl Zeiss primes with the G2. My G2 with all 4 lens I had were much lighter than a comparable SLR. The M8 intrigues me because Leica has seemed to solve the so-called problem with wide angle lens with rangefinder digital cameras (Contax couldn't do it and ceased production for this and other reasons)-- although the M8 to me (cost aside) is less appealing because the M8 sensor is not full frame and after applying an approximate 1.5 or so multiplier factor to the Leica WA lenses, making wide angle lens less wide (for example a 20mm lens now has a 30mm lens equivalent).

 

Sony has ceased production of the R1 and what I read in the forums, there will be no R2. Besides a quicker AF system, a real time (quicker) LCD, and a brighter LCD in the R1, I would have liked to see if they produced one with interchangeable lens, making it more like a rangefinder or like a DSLR without the pentaprism and mirror.

 

I appreciate your patience with my ramblings. Good luck with your decision.

[harvey_edelstein1]

Wolf check out the Pentax K10D I saw it at a local demo in Austin TX. and it has a great build, weather proofing, interchangable lenses built in stabilization. The best thing is its viewfinder is bright enough to use. Pentax has good AF and AE and Auto Flash subsystems its an nice camera for arround $900.

[jtk]

The new Pentax sounds wonderful. Its true optical slr viewfinder, not to mention the other necessary features, will blow the other APS SLRs away for many. Many of us (MOST of us in California and New York in the 70s/80s/90s) relied on SLRS rather than equally-easily-affordable M324 ,...the Leica was for most of us our beautiful toy more than tool. Hopefully M89X will earn better status as the design matures.

[fast_primes]

With it's APS sized sensor and high quality zoom, the R1 would be a killer camera <i><b>if</b></i> it also had built-in anti-shake, which is becoming de rigueur nowadays. I look forward to the Sony R2!

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

Hi, thanks to ALL interesting inputs.

 

But, what I really would like to see here, is a good picture, made with an LEICA M8 and an SONY R1, with the same focal length and f/stop, from the same image.

 

Are the M8 users are anxious, to compare their image quality with an SONY R1 camera? Come on, lets give it a try!

 

Regards

[des adams]

Wolf do you have the Sony R1? I'd be interested to know how you find it? Al

[vinay_patel]

"Why should I jump on a train, while I am sitting already in it?"

 

Buying an M8 now is more like jumping in front of a train. It's almost a certainty that Leica will not sell enough of these hobbled curiosities beyond the hardcore in-denial Leica fanatics, and will have to redesign a new model ASAP, at which point the current M8 and stash of infrared-cut filters will be worth a pittance. Everyone expects that of all digital cameras of course, but not in under a year.

[m-k]

I'm a longtime fan of rangefinders, and I've got an R1. It's a great camera in all the ways that others have already pointed out -- very quiet, a fine lens, etc. I can see why some make the comparison to Leica, since the design appears to to speak to some of the same ideals.

 

The idea that it's somehow a competitor to the M8, though, just points out the limitations of its design: the lens is great, but it's very slow; the realtime preview is terrific, but it's not an adequate equivalent to a Leica's optical viewfinder in low light; I love the way auto/manual focus is implemented on this camera, but focus speed and confirmation are very compromised compared to a Leica; lack of interchangeable lenses, etc.

 

Instead, I'd prefer to see R1 as a remarkable innovation -- the first digital camera whose best design features are derived from not the SLR, or the P&S, but the rangefinder. This is no small thing! It reflects some truly innovative thinking that maximizes digital technology's potential in ways not possible within the design parameters of the P&S or SLR. There are clearly things that could be improved to make it truly a next-generation rangefinder-equivalent: interchangeable lenses, some good fast primes (imagine an R2 with 35/1.4 and 90/2 equivalent primes to supplement the excellent all purpose zoom!), better viewfinder to make manual focus more certain, etc. It's not a Leica replacement, but it's inspired by a similar impulse.

 

Some manufacturers are starting to see the benefits of hybrid thinking, and it's starting to generate some interesting cameras. Since the R1 has been discontinued, it's hard to say if more innovation in this direction is in the offing from Sony. As a design experiment, though, it's introduced some interesting possibilities, and hopefully Sony or another company will go further in that direction. Some of the 4/3 cameras, in general, seem to be taking up these possibilities.

 

(first time back here in several years -- glad to see things are still thriving!)

[des adams]

Michael thanks for your thoughts. I thought about getting an R1 for street photography, it was so quiet but trying it out in a shop when it first came out lead me to think that the AF was much to slow for that. Just now the price of a new R1 has dropped considerably and I retested it in a shop with a card inserted. I tried manually focusing it and using it for zone focusing and the shutter lag seemed to be almost non-existent in that mode, nevertheless most of the pics I took were out of focus. It's true to say that I was unused to both the camera and its menu and was generally blundering around so maybe when one was used to the camera using it in manual focus mode might make it viable, i.e. fast enough,for street shooting. I imagine it's quite good for portraits anyway. Al

[emraphoto]

you can shoot for an hour in the rain with an m8... with the r1, hmmmm. you can

strap an F1! prime on the m8... with the r1, hmmm. you can pound nails with a leica

and then take pictures... with a sony r1, hmmm. some leica shooters have different

requirements from their tools besides looking cool or scorin' babes contrary to what

you hear.

i have a 15 year old m that has NEVER failed me through dirt, rain, -30 weather,

thousands of miles, airports, 4 feet of snow, 4 feet or mud, falling through the

second story floor of a 250 year old house... hmmm, a 15 year old sony?

because some pay 4-5 times as much for their gear doesn't mean they're dumb...

they just have different requirements of their gear. simple

[emraphoto]

PS

 

"borrowed" from dpreview...

 

"Fixed lens means no way to create a more portable 'prime lens' shooter"

[wolf_rainer_schmalfuss]

Hello Al Durer!

 

Yes, I have the SONY R1, and I am very pleased and happy with this camera! I don't see the R1 NOT as an competitor to the M8 at all. NO question! ALL, I want to see is, two pictures, one made with the M8, and one made with the R1, of the same subject. That's all. Speaking about the Zeiss glass, the rear lens element, of the 12 element zoom lens, sits only 2.1mm (!) in front of the digital sensor. This is unique, and performs an outstanding image quality! The reason's why the R1 system will may not be improve is to my opinion, that SONY is concentrating fully into their new ALPHA system. But, that does not mean, that the R1 is outdated! Absolutely not. The excellent handling of the R1 with its flexible monitor (waist level finder),the preview system, noiseless shutter, excellent optical capacity, and his good price/value, speaks fully for the R1. But, if you need prestige, than you need definately an LEICA M8 to keep up with Johnson's. I fully understand, if you have a row of expensive LEICA glasses, that you want to have the M8. But otherwise, I am feeling, it is not necessary to spend that much money for an yesterday technology.

 

Regards

[emraphoto]

once again... the leica m8 is not the sum of one part. nor do the buyers of such a

camera base their decision solely on 10 megapixel vs whatever. the leica m8 is a

highly specialized tool that cannot be judged by putting two images side by side on a

monitor. build quality, reliability, rangefinder focusing abilities, F1 lenses, compact

design, simplicity of use and on. the mass of leica shooters i know take public transit,

use coupons when shopping and save their pennies diligantly to purchase. YOU DID

compare the two camera's and thus my response.

i have shot (professionally) on leica m's for years and lack of preview has not been an

issue. different strokes for fifferent folks...