M8.2 or Canon 5D markII?

[d_g]

if i didn't have my canon lenses... i will wait for the next nikon full frame 24MP...

[nrb]

Hands down I'd go for the full frame camera.

[osfania]

Canon lenses can be iffy, too, even the L series. It's not that they are necessarily bad designs, but each batch

will have at least one lemon (from my experience working in a camera store that carries everything). If you want

an optimum system, try the newest Nikon D series (see what they trot out at Photokina) - probably a 24 MP full

frame, since Sony will have it and Sony makes Nikon's sensors. THEN, buy the Zeiss ZF mount primes.

[robert lee]

"THEN, buy the Zeiss ZF mount primes."

 

Or the new ZE mount if you're a Canon user. I'm eagerly awaiting the 50mm f1.4 Planar.

[trex1]

Neither. Keep what you have and buy a Hassy, or a Rollei TLR or 6000 series. You need some medium format in your life. I

picked up an almost new in the box Rollei 6003 outfit, for about $900. Now that is a camera. Makes this other stuff seem

like junk, even the Leica.

[el_fang]

<i>Can you quantify "better"? Can you explain what "overall" means? Unless you've used an M8 - how can you make

that statement? Is this a fact or just your opinion?</i>

<p>How about "any iso higher than 640" better? People do take pictures in conditions other than bright daylight,

you know.</p>

[john_a.]

I have both. M8 and 5D. Your best value is the 5D II for sure. I love my M8 and will hold on to it just so I can use my M lenses. If I could go back to film (too use to digital now) I'd stick with the M6 and get the 5D II.

[el_fang]

<p><i>I work for a newspaper that's having serious finiancial problems and will be going freelance soon... I

didn't want to get caught up in the MP race, but in a competitive market I didn't want my choice of equipment to

hurt my chances at getting assignments.</i></p>

<p>In that case, the M8 is the worst possible choice you can make next to a fixed-focal-length point-and-shoot.

If it's true that you have any real experience shooting for newspapers, you should already know that newspapers

expect you to be prepared for any type of assignment - and that could range from a community feature in which you

get full access and can get close with a 21mm lens, to a political event in which you are roped off in the "press

box" and need a 70-200/2.8 or even a 300 or 400 to get the shot.</p>

 

<p><i>No one cares what camera you use. It's the photographs that matter.</i></p>

<p>You got that part right. But if your photo editor was expecting a tight headshot of Obama and all you bring

back is a shot with him as an unrecognizable speck in the middle of the frame because you had the wrong gear,

then you will learn your first important lesson in today's world of freelance photojournalism:</p>

<p><b>There are a lot of other freelancers waiting to eat your lunch.</b></p>

 

<p>Photo editors, especially these days, don't have time for primadonnas. If you mess up on an assignment because

you weren't prepared, they'll just find somebody else next time.</p>

[jamie_robertson2]

Everyone knows (whether they admit it or not) that the 5D2 will have the superior image quality and having seen

shots from the M8 and the old 5D, I personally believe the original 5D is superior to the M8 in IQ terms. The 5D2 can

do almost anything you want but is big, heavy and noticeable.

 

The M8 has good image quality, is no doubt a joy to use and is discreet and quiet. It also has the typical

advantages/disadvantages of a rangefinder.

 

What puzzles me is that you already know all this and if you don't you shouldn't be buying either camera (no offence

intended).

[craig_shearman1]

I think the most important thing is to decide whether you want to be Leica or Canon and then stick to one or the other. Neither is cheap and it's horrendousely expensive to buy two different systems.

[ben_pincus]

very strange pair of cameras to choose between

 

if you need to shoot with a small discreet rangefinder then you do, and you buy an M8

 

if you don't then you get the canon

 

both are fine for editorial work, 18 inches across and beyond

[aplumpton]

"The M8 has good image quality, is no doubt a joy to use and is discreet and quiet. It also has the typical

advantages/disadvantages of a rangefinder."

 

Jamie, have you used it? I would say no (not good quality, but excellent), yes (joy to use), yes (relatively discrete), and no

(it is not quiet - better perhaps than Pentax 67s or most Nikon DSLRs, but not anywhere near as quiet as the M1 to M7 or

MP or even the M8.2 with improved shutter).

[peteradownunder]

I would wait for the Canon 5D3 - it will be much better than the 5D2. In fact you should wait for teh 5D4 - which will be beter than the 5D3.hmmm maybe you should wait for the 5D5...

[g-man1]

I have the Nikon D700 and a leica M8. As others have said, you should ask yourself if you like using an SLR or a rangefinder and buy accordingly. Don't worry about the sensors, high ISO noise, etc.

[terencechong]

i had the canon 5d with 24-70 f2.8 L lens for a while... beautiful setup. however, compared to the images of the leica m8 with the 35 summicron asph and 90 elmarit lenses, they were a tad softer. i chose the leica setup instead, and have now added the 50 summicron and a 21mm Zeiss ZM lens as well. great performers all around!

[peter_villaume]

Thank you all for your inputs – I’m still confused but on a much higher level :-)

 

As some of you are unto in your posts, I know the difference between a RF system and a SLR system, being a owner of both (prior to the M6 I had a Leica R4 and a Nikon FA). I like my M6 very much and the way of a RF suits me well. My main concern regarding the M8/M8.2 is the chip on low light shooting and the crop of 1.33.

 

I will take my time on this and my local Leicapusher has offered me a small testshooting on the M8 so I think I will try it out and bring back the pics. for further study at home.

 

I would still like your comments…

[jamie_robertson2]

"Jamie, have you used it? I would say no (not good quality, but excellent), yes (joy to use), yes (relatively discrete), and no (it is not quiet - better perhaps than Pentax 67s or most Nikon DSLRs, but not anywhere near as quiet as the M1 to M7 or MP or even the M8.2 with improved shutter)."

 

Have I used it? No. Have I seen it being used? Yes. Agreed, nowhere as quiet as the M6 & 7 but definitely quieter than a 5D which is the OP's other consideration. Regarding image quality, that is a matter of personal preference. I have seen countless full res shots from the M8 as well as prints and the image quality is good, very good... but certainly not what I would call excellent. When it comes to taking pictures after the sun goes down the inferior image quality of the M8 really shows.

[brad_farwell]

> Thank you all for your inputs – I’m still confused but on a much higher level :-)

 

rotfl! That's the most beautiful summary of internet forum use I've ever seen.

 

Depending on your geographic location, if you can't get a rental, you might at least be able to bring your memory card in a take some snaps in-store with your existing lenses, so you can take the files home and see what you think of them. If you like the 40D, I think you'll really appreciate the 5D; it's a nice body, feels good, robust build. (...but a much bigger piece of equipment than than the Leica. I admit I can't stand RF cameras, but I'm always jealous of the tiny body.)

[steve_swinehart]

"It's sharpness looks unnatural and seems to be a result of absurdly aggressive sharpening. "

 

Then you couldn't have been using the DNG file since there is NO sharpening applied to an M8 DNG raw file. If you're looking at the JPEG - the M8 JPEGs may be the worst JPEGs in a camera over $199. You can use them to sort the DNGs but - that's about the limit of their use.

[steve_swinehart]

"How about "any iso higher than 640" better? People do take pictures in conditions other than bright daylight, you know."

 

You seem to want to quantify everything against hand holding the camera under every lighting condition. If it doesn't meet that metric it's apparently unusable - at least for you.

 

Some people actually own and know how to use both flash equipment AND tripods. Your singular fixation on ISO is a bit baffling. I just wonder how in the world ANYONE could possible take a photograph before the advent of ISO 25,000,000,526...?

[w_wachusea]

Look at these current discussions:

 

Have leica always been expensive?

 

Does Leica need money fast (M8 horror story)

 

Then decide between Canon or Nikon for a D-SLR.

[gil_g]

You got me wondering if this is a real query or maybe you

are just trying to start a conversation here.

if you are not a pro save the money. the EOS5D is more than good enough for you.

you said it yourself - you only have it for a year. no need to buy the new EOS5D.

[el_fang]

<i>You seem to want to quantify everything against hand holding the camera under every lighting condition. If it

doesn't meet that metric it's apparently unusable - at least for you. Some people actually own and know how to

use both flash equipment AND tripods.</i>

<p>Isn't the ability to hand hold under a variety of lighting conditions the whole reason for being of the small

format camera? Isn't using flash against the whole "M philosophy" of available light? (Oh right, I forgot, that

was just Leica and Leica-fanboy propaganda.) If you're going to schlep a tripod around, what happens to your

"compact" kit? And, if you're going to use a tripod, why bother with a $5,000 small format digital body when you

can get a Mamiya 7 (including lens) for a third the cost? After all, unlike the M8, the Mamiya 7 can be used in

vertical

orientation without the risk of breaking the chassis, and its results will blow away the M8's.</p>

 

<p><i>Your singular fixation on ISO is a bit baffling.</i></p>

<p>Are you saying, then, that people who buy portable, small-format cameras - from professionals who are often

not allowed to use flash in certain venues or assignments, to amateurs who just want to make snapshots of their

families and friends both indoors and out, without needing to buy yet more camera accessories - are baffling to

you? I'm just asking for clarification because the things you're saying are getting more and more bizarre.</p>

[el_fang]

<i>I just wonder how in the world ANYONE could possible take a photograph before the advent of ISO 25,000,000,526...?</i>

<p>Of course, I would put it another way: I just wonder how in the world ANYONE could possibly [sic] take a <a href="http://www.motorcycle-usa.com/Photos/Nikon_Adv_USA.jpg" target="_blank">photograph like this</a> before the advent of ISO 6400. And now, while the M8 is still struggling at ISO 800, 6400 is already old news...</p>

[noah]

<<In that case, the M8 is the worst possible choice you can make next to a fixed-focal-length point-and-shoot. If it's true

that you have any real experience shooting for newspapers, you should already know that newspapers expect you to be

prepared for any type of assignment - and that could range from a community feature in which you get full access and

can get close with a 21mm lens, to a political event in which you are roped off in the "press box" and need a 70-200/2.8

or even a 300 or 400 to get the shot.>>

 

I'm an experienced photojournalist and I know what tools I need to do the job, thank you very much. I got hired at a

major daily right out of college. My editors know the kind of work I'm good at and they know I can get access to places

and events and rarely need to use long glass to get the job done well. Usually at political events we can get pool access

to get close, though clearly for event coverage a longer lens can be helpful. I really do more documentary work than

photojournalism I guess. I should have been more specific.

 

The whole time I was in Iraq in 2003 I never used anything longer than a 50mm. It's just my style of shooting, and it's

worked for me so far.<div></div>