Unboxing of M8.2

[doug_hagerman]

Wish I had a video of me picking up my M2 from the police evidence locker. After living with a sophisticated Japanese SLR for six months (theft insurance payoff) it was shocking to see how simple the old Leica was...

[t_nu_tamm]

It has nothing to do with this german brand name, but anyway, all those unboxing videos look the same:

[danielkennedy]

Andy, not to flog a dead horse but the sensor in the Olympus E-400 is nothing like the sensor in the M8 except

for the fact that they're both CCD technology based and developed by Kodak. <br><br>

 

The sensor in the M8 is the Kodak KAF-10500 with a 6.8µm pixel pitch. <br><br>

 

The sensor in the E-400 is a Kodak KAI-10100 with a 4.7µm pixel pitch.<br><br>

 

Also, the KAF-10500 is an APS-H sized sensor, whereas the KAI-10100 is a four thirds system sized sensor (roughly

half the surface area). Contrary to your earlier statement, crop factor is a direct derivative of sensor size.

Here is a chart to help you:<br><br>

 

<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ec/SensorSizes.png/431px-SensorSizes.png"

border="0" alt="SensorSizes">

<br><br>

Sorry but I can't stand the perpetuation of misinformation.

[peteradownunder]

Daniel - your forgot to include the 617 chip just announced by RED ...<p>

 

<a href="http://www.red.com/epic_scarlet/">yes a 617 sized chip </a> mine is on order.

[akochanowski]

Daniel, you may be completely correct, though copying the sensor size chart from a Wikipedia article doesn't strike me as the

greatest proof in the universe. Whatever. My original point, regardless whether the Kodak chip is identical or not, is that the

quality of photos from any 10MP digital with an APS-size chip is more alike than not. I just came back from a meeting with a

curator for a show I am doing, looking at prints roughly 16x22, shot by an Oly DSLR, a Nikon D200, a Nikon D300, and film,

and the only thing I know for sure is we all preferred the film, the rest was of optically indistinguishable quality.

[ray .]

You make your choices. I like small cameras. Have always liked them. They were invented because they were easier

to maneuver to get a shot than twin lens reflexes or view cameras. It was not difficult for me many years ago

to come to the realization that I would probably never use large or medium format if the point was fun, because the

cameras were

just too much of a pain in the ass to haul around and didn't suit what I wanted to do anyway. One of the best street

cameras going today has a tiny sensor. It's called a GRD. It's optimum performance is ISO 100- anything past that

runs the risk of

looking 'rustic.' So sure, it has limitations. But it's a whiz of a machine for catching fleeting expressions and gesture. In

the motion of

an arm and the blink of an eye it does its work.<p>

 

As for film? Film's great, love it. It limits how much I can edit through though, and that's important to me at this

stage.<p> This pursuit of

technical perfection- it's a thing we have, never to be attained. We all know it's the light, the content, the technique of

the photographer

that makes 98% of the work. Would you really think about a difference once you don't have the prints side by side and

get caught up in

the content of what the photograph is saying? OK maybe, depends. I've still never seen prints like Atget's.. If you want

to see the

sublime in photography there's no better ticket.

[ray .]

In all truthfulness though I indeed do need to get back to printing. No doubt too much of the monitor..

[akochanowski]

Ray, agreed again. Small is good. And yes, the truth really is in the print. I've got 10 prints in a group show next week and

have been printing a bunch. Those blown or almost blown highlights from digi look like crap printed up even when you move

the exposure down to compensate. You know I do just about all color, but I find it easier by far to get a realistic-looking black

and white print from a digital file than a color one. I've used Alien Skin and have fiddled a whole lot with some files, but printed

up relatively big color digis and the film scans are immediately distinguishable.

[peteradownunder]

A link to your 10 shots AK - dont be shy...