larry_kincaid1

Not sure what you mean by "high-end", but you should check out http://www.zenfolio.com/ to see if it meets your needs. Fits mine perfectly.

How do you pronounce fukase? (Couldn't resist.)

Not sure why the chef photo at 510 came thru so dark. Not that dark on my screen or printed. Here's the other one.<div></div>

I'm a new M8 user as well. . . still experimenting with it. I also need a manual for Capture One, since I have yet to figure out how to save a file in any directory in which it can be found. It's been too cold in Maryland lately to do much outdoors, so I took a few shots inside a tapas bar last weekend. I am having trouble judging the color files because I cannot tell if there's a magenta IV problem or not. I ordered the two free IV filters from Leica, but not knowing when they will arrive, I ordered another one from B&H (six week special order) to make sure I get something in time for a trip planned the first week of May. Meanwhile, here's a couple from the Tapa bar transformed in PS into b&w. Needless to say, I'm happy with the result so far. The color photographs--like the ones shown above--don't seem to have that obvious digital over saturated color look to them. Meaning, I guess, that they look more like classic color film photographs. So, here's a couple shot in natural (dark) light with a 35mm Lux. I hope that this kind of thread will become the norm and the "why not spend your money on Canon/Nikin" will disappear forever.<div></div>

Couldn't resist.

Very nice. Some of us are struggling over which "wider" lens to get for the M8, a 21 or 24/25mm Zeiss lens. Is there any particular reason you went with the 21? What are you using for framing? The ZM 25mm lens can be handled with the full frame of the M8.

One more . . .<div></div>

So, far I'm totally convinced that all the significant others are much better looking and more photogenic than any of their photographers.<div></div>

I'm glad I passed this information on the the forum. Why wouldn't Leica USA know this? For certain situations a 4MB card would be nice to have. I tried to access the Leica site with the list of SD cards, but could not find it. How can we get access to "Leica's own list shows several regular 4Gb"?

I'm passing on the answer I just received from the Leica USA tech support

person. The reviewer in the Rangefinder Magazine article mentioned that the

M8 could take a 4GB SD card. I read elsewhere that it couldn't. Here's what

the Jim Butler of Leica told me:

 

Currently the M8 will accept 2GB Cards only... We expect that to change with

future updates... You may want to take your camera to your local dealer and

try a few cards... Thanks... Jim Leica Camera Inc.

When I now print anything on my HP8750 printer, the printer feedback "window"

showing how much ink is left does not appear. Is there some way to bring it

back without reloading the driver software? Or is it a hardware problem?

Anyone else but me have this problem? I've rebooted the computer and it still

not there.

I'd buy an Apple computer before I'd ever buy into Vista. They've just given us all an excuse to finally make the switch.

Andy, she looks great without smiling. Just heard one portrait photographer say that smiles ruin portraits (or perhaps turn them into snapshots). Steve, I like the b&w M8 photos you posted, especially the night scenes and "Tea" (L1001137). Question for both of you is: Do see much difference between shooting in color and then converting to b&w in PS, or setting the M8 for monochrome photos to begin with? To answer, I suppose you'd have to take a series of photos both ways and then compare them.

Are you critics simply Canon and Nikon users or what? The M8 is about M's. That's it. Most of the arguements being made apply as well to the M7, M6, M3, and rangefinder cameras in general. Go check the price of a new M7 and compare it to a new digital SLR. It's not about price. My TZ1 digital p&s for $300 will hold up quite well--FOR THE PRICE--against expensive Canon and Nikon DSLR's. So if someone wants to cry about cost again, let's throw out all the expensive DSL's. I speak as someone with 3 perfect prime Nikon lenses who has been hesitating to buy into any Nikon DSLR because the cost does not justify replacing my new TZ1 $300 camera that zooms out to 350mm and fits into my pocket. I thought that the new Nikon D40 for $600 would get my to buy in, but alas it has no autofocusing for my old 21st century Nikon lenses.

 

All the discussion of the M8 is for those who already have endorsed the peculiar qualities of the rangefinder M's. We don't care how good the quality of the best DSLR's are for whatever price, because we want to use Leica M's to do the kind of photography that we're interested in. The main question for us is: Did Leica produce a digital M7 that is good enough for us to give up color film? (I still cannot see giving up Delta 100 and the M6, but time will tell.)

Most of the cost of the M8 is in fact invested in the M7 rangefinder system that it comes in. Canon/Nikon DSLR users would never be happy paying for the mechanical system that underlies the M8; they just hope that someday they'll get a brigh viewfinder too. They put up with that "disadvantage" of SLR because they "want to see what they're going to get." The pleasure of using the Leica rangefinder system and manually focusing is itself enough to keep us from using any SLR at any price. I tried going back to my Nikon film SLR and just could not tolerate the viewfinder and slight delay in the shutter. The reviews that we're seeing now are addressing the issues that concern Leica M users who want the convenience of a digital sensor but don't want to give up their M photography. The M8 appears to have delivered what they want. The only real issue for me is: when the quality of new sensors dramatically exceed the one in today's M8 (a certainty) will today's sensor still be good enough (at least comparable to today's film quality) or will the absolute value and durability of the M7-type rangefinder underlying the M8 and its cost justify and make feasible the replacement of just the sensor only in the M8. We would not want to give up the camera that comes with the M8, nor buy another one in the body of a M9.

 

The war of pixels is abiding a bit and questions are being raised about the need for much more improvement (if film is still the reference point), so perhaps the only issue is how long the M8s can be repaired and maintained. But the reviews and experience and output of the M8 so far suggests that there's not much basis for criticizing Leica for producing it. What we got is what we wanted. (Yeah, yeah, I'd still like about $2000 back from my M8 purchase price, but then I never could justify the price of a new M7 over what my used or formerly owned M6 TLL provided me for US $1,200. At the time, that $1200 was hard for me to justify. I guess that only the digital sensor with the M8 made the outrageous new cost justifiable. But it still has to beat the film output from my M6 [okay] minus the growing aggrevation of processing film.)

I like the idea of simply using the full frame;it's very close to the 24mm frames and in fact probably more appropriate for distant shots. Seems like it would be worth trying it with just the IR filter and no lens coding to see if that's works well enough. I haven't seen any problems with the 35mm lens, but it's supposed to become more of a problem with wider lenses.

For some reason, it's available on the magazine's web site at:

http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Feb07/showpage.taf?page=98

If you read his recent biography, you'll see quite a bit of attention is given to her. She helped him a lot on his trips to Asia, and on his life in general. When he was young a fortune teller apparently predicted that he would marry her. How much more influence do you need than that?

I was thinking along the same lines. The new Leica 28 for the M8 sounds great, but just too close to the 35mm to spend the money. That leaves a 21 or 24/25. 21 still seems a bit wide for me, so that leaves the 24 a la (1.33 x 24=33 or so with a 24mm perspective). The ZM 25 seems about right. I just assumed that it would bring up the 24 lines on the M8. I'd still like to use it on my M6 as well. If you modify it for the M8, what would it bring up on the M6? The $300 f4+ lenses sound okay to for the money. I do feel the loss of the full 35mm lens on the M8 and I was considering the ZM for the M6 before I bought the M8.

Beauty is a Luigi hand-made leather half case with a built in grip. A little over US $300 for the M8. Wonder what the price difference is between his case and the bare Lecia grip?

How 'bout, "It's 25 degrees and windy outside."

Looks like there's still a lot of fuss left to go. This photo was shot in high level jpg, which is quite good. I've tried both but haven't compared the difference yet in PS or printing. No color saturation was necessary, might have done curves and levels.

 

One of my main points was missed by some. I think that the M8 should be compared to the M7 and M6. If it "goes out" I'll have to use my M6, but that would be the case for the M7 too and my TZ1. My batteries went out once on the M6 and I successfully used the sunny 16 rule (from vague memory of it). But I still prefer using the battery. I just cannot see comparing Nikon and Canon DSLRs to this camera. They just seem to be designed for different purposes and users. To me the real comparison for those two SLR's is the emerging quality and ease of use of the Panasonic-Leica fixed lens SLR for $600 with zooms out to 420mm. If these get much better, who would want to carry around the classic SLR's and a set of lenses. When it comes to the Lumix range of cameras, you have to ask why you'd want a heavier version when the small TZ1 zooms to 350mm or so. Quite amazing if you want zoom and image stablization capacity. All these variety of digital cameras will only get beter and cheaper. But I still like what M rangefinders do for me, and still attribute much of it to the lenses. I'm now averaging the cost M8 and one lens with the Panasonic TZ1 at approx. $ 300.000. Average sounds better and two digital cameras sounds better than one. 350mm zoom is fun and nice when you cannot walk over there (top of cathedrals and the other side of the river, etc.). I'm not ready for macro photography yet. I still like my 1969 Pentax spotmatic (Like New) with its new (formerly owned) f1.4 50mm lens, but have not figured out how to take pictures with two cameras or perhaps 4 cameras at once now.

Well, I received the M8 from Photo Village last week. And everything works

properly. Not sure what all the fuss was about. First impression: it seemed

like I was using my M6 until the shutter fired and recocked for me. It feels

exactly like the M6 in your hands. So, my first impression is that it is not

really a digital camera. It's a M7 with a digital back or sensor. So, in a

sense it should not be compared to a digital camera, especially a digital SLR,

any more than a M6 should be compared to a Nikon film SLR. What's the point.

I have a digital Panasonic Leica TZ1, so I have some idea what a digital

camera is like, as well as a Nikon N80 and Pentax spotmatic so I know what a

SLR film camera is like. The M8 is a rangefinder M7 with a digital sensor.

It's just what the Leica M folks have been asking for. So, the only real

question is: does the Kodak sensor do justice to the Leica lenses? From what

I've seen on the web and here, as well as my own printed M8 photographs, the

answer is yes. It's close enough to justify the cost, if one wants all the

extra features of a digital camera. Apart from the obvious "no waiting to

process and see the film results," the most interesting feature for me is the

immediate feedback from the LCD monitor. I've discovered that it serves quite

well as a Polaroid back for a medium format portrait camera (I assume), in

that you can check the lighting, adjust manually until you get it right,

determine the exact framing, and the forget about it and shoot away with

perfect exposure and framing. No bracketing; no waiting to see it you got it

right; no work in PS to fix the exposure. This will speed up and enhance the

quality of decent shots quite a bit. Meanwhile, it handles just like my M6.

Here's a shot from my first "roll" of digital film (what else to call it; I

didn't fill up the SD card). This shot was taken indoors at night with normal

lamp lighting. 35mm Summilux open to f1.4 with hardly any cropping or

adjustment in PS later. The picture on the LCD screen was substantially

brighter than what it looked like with your eyes. Not quite believable. How

can you get more light on the LCD than in your own eyes? But the digital file

and the printed photo also were brighter than it looked "in person." Not sure

what one would do with a flash when this kind of photo is possible. Meanwhile

the 35 Lux Asph showed some nice bokeh in the background, and very nice

illumination on the leaves of the flowers or whatever they are. Enjoy.<div></div>

I just bought a Sandisk SD to USB2 adapter at Best Buy for $15 that works quite well. Remove the SD from the Leica, jam it into the adapter, stick the adapter in the computer. Adobe wants to upload the photos immediately, but you can also simply treat the SD/USB hardware as removable disk drive and use whatever program you want to copy them intot he computer. Its the same size as a memory stick more or less. I like the idea that you can use any software to copy them, or none at all. I was also shocked at the $15 price tag.

The Leica M8 is the best photgraphic tool ever made, especially in black, which is so much better and "lighter" than chrome which, as we all know, wears horribly. It's not good for hitting nails--who would dare?--but if you ever drop it on concrete, you just know that the tough brass plate on the bottom will keep it going for you. The polished ASPH elements on the newer 1.4 summiluxes produce incredibly sharp photos--all with great bokeh and noticable glow. You just cannot beat the modern lens designs. All great investments--worth more tomorrow than you'll pay today--and great value for the money compared to CV and Zeiss lenses, as long as you keep them all in mint condition. The M8 knocks the socks off the M7 and the MP; the M3 doesn't even come close. The M8 is the perfect tool for the real professional, a pearl in the hands of the real fondler, a jewel in the vault of the real collector. The camera will outlast its Kodak sensor by decades. Of course, I've never seen one or tried one yet, so THIS has got to be the most tedious post of all time. [Just kidding, of course... I just got my M8 in the mail and actually did drop it on a concrete bunker the first time I used it outside. It still works. I promise some photos soon, including one of the concrete bunker--if you see it, it has to be true, right?]

We would all like to know how the Zeiss 25/2.8 fits the Leica M8. Do the 24mm framelines come up. How well the these framelines match the 24 lines in the M8? How does the Zeiss compare to your other M lenses? Can you share some more photos, perhaps some color?