george_lambsdorff

I have no experience with this specific Konica, but keep in mind that when using the M8 the missing coding can become a problem.

A little bit off-topic, but nevertheless important:

"built as well as modern leicas if not better but not as well made as vintage leica"

And a myth is created and the next guy planing to buy a new lens asks for build quality...

They've changed nothing in materials or construction! Visit Solms and watch these guys building these lenses. When you get a different feeling, it's because of the amount of moving elements (like 1,4/50 vs. 1,4/50Asph) - not because of the tolerances, the materials used (in fact, the mechanical quality necessary for lenses like the 28-90 or 50Asph wasn't available 30 years ago - but problems with focus show that even today these tolerances are hard the handle). New lenses that have a similar amount of moving elements and size make that clear - try out a new R90AA and compare it with any 90 of the last 70 years - you won't find a higher quality!

The CEO of ACM once mentioned that Leica has to be removed from the stock market (I don't find the right English words for it - sorry) - the way it was before 1996 (until they needed money for the R8).

"demand for digital cameras outstripped that of its pricey traditional cameras. However, the company changed its management team and began focusing on digital models"

Funny, one press guy wrote that and everybody copy&paste it.

In fact, Leica began with digital cameras in 1996, came up with the DMR when the technology was available (would you have bought a DMR from 1998 with 5MPixels for 10000?? - no, the only way Leica-quality was possible at this time was a scan-camera - like the S1) and the old management also started the developement of the M8 and the new Panaleicas - the new management changed nothing here...

In practical situations the M8 will give you at least the same resolution as the 5D with a good L-lens (better lenses and not AA-filter). It has better dynamic range, superb build quality and compactness. Noise is up to Canon-standards when you use 200/400/800ASA (-1/3EV). A bigger sensor wasn't possible and a higher pixel density would result in higher noise. So using the KAF-10500 state-of-the-art sensor (as used in bigger versions für the best digital-backs available) was the right solution.

The lenses are simply second to none - open aperture with full resolution over the whole frame! WA-lenses with extremely sharp corners! What Canon-lens can produce sharp images over 24x36mm? Only a few and not always at open aperture.

It has it's weaknesses: it isn't as fast as the professional C/N, you can't use tele lenses but it also has unique strengths. Two IR-filters are free (unlike with other cameras like the RD-1 or older Nikons) - I think I can live with filters instead of chromatic abberations, soft images, mediocre build quality...

Of course a bigger sensor is better, jus like bigger film formats provide higher image quality. But you need lenses that can handle these sensors...

Of course digital technology will improve but for the next 2-4 years the M8 is the best digital solutions for many photographers!

P.S. Here is a small comparison I've made. Of course it's "only" a 2000? Canon/Sigma-solution and there are better cameras/lenses available from Canon but this was a crop camera (not image quality on the outer zones of 24x36mm...) and stopped down two stops!

"There have been problems with RECENT Leica mechanics too, but nowhere near as much. "

Have you recently seen Leica-mechanics? It's the same finish, the same materials, the same quality as always you have to pay for.

The reason why e.g. a 50Asph feels differently is the more complex construction with floating elements.

I would go for the Summicron, great quality für little money.

You get what you pay for - Leica-quality always costs this much, accept that - it doesn't matter where it's made. You want high quality work over decades with self-thinking employees, innovation... ? You have to pay them properly...

Portugal makes some parts for the M and R (but mostly accessoires), I think with the M8 it's only the viewfinder (assembly). Some ICs/Display are from Asia, the Sensor from Kodak (New York?) the assembly is made in Solms (they've installed new rooms for it - they invest more than 15.000.000? next year into Solms) but most parts (also the electronics) are made by highly specialized german suppliers like Clößner, Weller - so most of the work is done in Germany.

They once told me that the end of Leica would destroy nearly 10000 jobs in the area of Wetzlar!

These suppliers work for the space industry, they need to achieve extremly high quality and therefore need highly educated employees.

Everything that isn't captured by the lens is lost forever.

Digital sensors have high pixel densities, they need lens quality and 100% crops on a big screen make every failure in the system clearly visible.

Leica has chosen the best and most experienced suppliers (Kodak, Jenoptik, Phase One) around, equipped the M8 with expensive "MF-back"-like technology - combined with the usual mechanical and optical Leica-quality - I'm not concerned about the quality at all.

Everybody who wants to know what todays Leica-lenses can do in the digital world, should take a look at images made with the Leica S1 (25mpixel scan-camera) - that's what we could expect in the future.

But without this mechanical/optical quality, higher resolutions, pixel densities... are pretty senseless!

Of course, within a few years more sophisticated sensors will be avaible, DSLRs with >10Mpixels will become even cheaper.

But two things won't become cheaper:

Build quality of the body and lens quality - you cannot surpass the image quality even with 22MPixels-full-frame when the lens cannot match. this resolution

"It's a Copal. The Sensor's from Kodak, the image processing is from Imacon, the body's from Portugal, etc.

They did box the thing up in Germany, though, which apparently is all you need to do to print 'MADE IN GERMANY' on your camera."

THe shutter is from Seiko, that's right, the sensor from Kodak (where do they produce them?) - some ICs, LCDs etc. from other countries.

But most parts are from highly specialized suppliers from Germany (soe of them even produce for the space industry).

Imacon is no longer part of the game.

@Brad

You're right, but Andy mentioned it:

One way to reduce moire is to enhance the pixel density (DMR/M8: 0,0068mm) - even small failures (i.e. in focussing) create some kind of "AA"-effect and moire disappears.

I'm not sure what I should think of the pixel density of the M8. On one side, the very important noise (the DMR has the lowest noise at 100-200ASA from ALL professional cameras) issue becomes more problematic with smaller pixels. On the other side, the M-Asph-Lenses are the best in the world, they could easily (I have seen big prints of Leicas 25MPixel S1) achieve a higher resolution for those who want them (precise focus, extreme shutter-sppeds/tripod) - that's maybe one big thing for the M9 (full-frame because of further developements in microlenses...) = it can use the full quality of the (very expensive) lenses!?

I've wrote a long answer but it seems to be lost!?

So I will give a short answer:

The only problem I've ever had with new-bought Leica-equipment was my R8 (by the way it was a japanese part that broke down). Everything else (and my R8 with new eletronics) works perfectly and is build unlike any other!

Everybody who has seen the production in Solms, the 100% quality control (noticed the little number between "infinity" on your M-lens? It tells you the precise focal length for YOUR lens - they measure every single lens and engrave them!!!). But it's still hand-assemblation and with the M7/MP over 1300 parts are put together in 16 hours (that's the assemblation time of a small car!) - failures will always occur. It's the same with Canon, Nikon or even a Space Shuttle! But quality is not only about quality control and here is the major difference between Leica and mass-production. They use the most expensive materials, production methods etc. when it increases the quality!

Instead of reducing production costs (and very often quality) with every new generation, they really improve the product. There's a lens in the new 50 Asph that costs as much as all lenses together in the old one! Older Ms have a top plate made of zinc-diecast, the new ones are massive brass (CNC-milled http://www.cloessner-gmbh.de/ ).

Let's esteem this quality or it will be gone forever!

Apologize my bad English

Their quality, their production/engineering philosophy is unique - that's their only chance to survive! Being "unlike any other" plays a big role in global business.

Many companys broke down because they made compromises, they wanted both: quality AND quantity, they we're attacked by the Japanese companys and tried to catch up with their prices, tried to copy their philosophy and in the same moment they lost their unique (german and also swiss) advantages.

Companys like Rolex, Patek Philippe, Miele or Hülsta show it:

They believed in their advantages, tried to learn from others but also accepted some disadvantages. They had a pretty hard time while everybody went a different way. But whats now? All the quality opponents have gone and (some) customers starting to realize what crap they bought the last years.

That's the only chance for Leica, they already tried it cheap (china-compact-cameras, Minolta-cooperation...) and failed, now they have to focus on their strengths more than ever before!

They're already enough management/controlling-quality-compromises on the market, when somebody wants that stuff he can buy Canon, Nikon... but somebody needs to be different, making more than the absolutly necessary, setting new standards - that's the way milestones, legends and masterpieces we're created.

Do we landed on the moon because we made compromises?

P.S big german global players like Daimler or BMW don't have most of the typical german quality philosophy and therefore are not a good example for "Made in Germany"-quality (at least 20% of these cars are not even "Made in Germany").

The new wide-angle lens will be a 15mm and some even say a wide-angle-tri-elmar would be possible.

Leica told it some time ago: all lenses will cover the full 24x36mm, because the whole system is made for this size, when full-frame-sensors even work with wide-angle-lenses, they will bring a full-frame-camera.

They need new wide-angle-lenses because with the crop-factor of the Digital-M, the fabulous 21mm Asph will become a 28mm and a 15mm-lens will take its place in the "crop-world".

The construction is still brass, steel and aluminium, not plastic!

Leica uses a very expensive construction for the aperture clicks, it uses some kind of ball bearing (I don't know the english word for this construction), but in the smaller lenses there is no space for a mechanical stop, therefore you can always go a half click further.

To prevent missunderstanding:

Not all Ms before M6TTL had zinc top-plates, they used an older technology to shape brass. I think the most M4P-M6 have zinc top-plates.

A conclusion:

- Older Ms (at least until the M6TTL came out) have a zinc top plate.

- The chrome lenses are heavier because aluminium cannot get a chrome surface in Leica-quality, therefore they use heavier brass in chrome lenses.

- All new Ms (all M7, MP but I'm not sure about the TTL - just the last ones?) have brass top plates. Nearly all outer parts of an M (also in the inside, like R8/9) are cnc-milled of a block. One of the most expensive ways but also the one with the best quality (tolerance < 1/100mm). The small company Clößner is doing this job (look at the other parts they make!) :

http://www.cloessner-gmbh.de/

You can differ the cameras by looking onto the edges, the cnc-millded top-plates are rather "sharp"-looking, espeacially in the corner in front of the time-wheel.