Is the M8 actually any good?

J

JasonG

Guest
Hi all,

I'm considering buying the M8 but haven't yet been able to find a local dealer who would actually let me give one a try. What with all of the horror stories I see posted all over the web I find that I'm completely confused as to whether this camera is actually any good, or indeed useable at all!

I see example shots of high-ISO colour which look rather good but others where medium-ISO seems to lead to massive problems with noise.

I see some people saying that they've had a couple (or more) bodies before they found one that even works semi-reliably but others clearly asserting that there is no problem with the reliability at all.

Worst of all, I see endless forum posts where everyone seems to take personal offence at negative comments posted by others and spirals rapidly away from any discussion of the practical issues with the camera.

So, my questions would be:

1. Is there a wide variability in the quality of the bodies, leading to some working well and others being problematic?
2. Is there a good chance that if I spend £3000 cash on a shiney new camera that it may produce images with poor noise?
3. If the noise issues are related to the photographer's use of the camera, what do I need to bear in mind to make reasonably sure of avoiding noise problems in images I capture?

Regards

Jason
 
Indeed, but none of the other threads I could find actually lay out how to work with it. I have seen some comments that the noise can be made to work like nice film grain but without explaining how. These are the sort of bits of info I'm looking for.

I realise that many threads have covered related ground but it's like wading through treacle to find any reasoned comments. I suppose a FAQ or HowTo for the M8 would be a super way of answering most questions that interested parties might have.

Of particular interest for me I guess is, given the noise performance of the M8, how do I work with the tool as it is?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Without trying to be nasty - if you equate lack of noise with good photography, you are probably better off with the newest Nikons.
Those of us who like the M8 find that, given that the M8 is in reality pretty good in that respect for our use, this is a relatively minor issue. The thing one needs with the M8 is the same as with any other minmalistic camera: one needs to have or aquire photographic skills in focussing, exposure, and post processing. It is not a press-here-for-a-decent-result camera.
If you wish, I'll happily PM you. No need for another fight.
 
Short of giving you lessons on the M8, how to work with noise, etc., just rent or buy one and use it for a few days. Go to a dealer in London if you can. These questions can only be answered by yourself whether the camera is right for you.

How experienced with digital are you?
 
I've got over 10K shots with my M8. Every camera, like buying a car has to meet each buyer's priorities otherwise every car sold will be the same. Mine are compact for carry everywhere with great images and I do carry it everywhere. So that leaves out the big DSLRs.

To compare with my M3 or MP that I had been using regularly, the M8 is greatly better (for my priorities) in workflow, images, no cost processing, fast shutter speed for wide open lens use. Noise is basically not existent under 640 and good compared to film at higher ISOs.

Jan
 
The M8 is capable of producing very good images in the right hands. It is not a point and shoot, so you have to have some technical photography skill to get the best out of it. The M8 is noisier (image noise) than some other digital cameras, but that doesn't mean that it is unusable. Basically, in low light you have to expose carefully and slight overexposure is better than any under exposure - this is true for all digitals, but some are more forgiving than others. The early M8s were a bit flaky (my first two were lemons), but general QC seems to have improved - there are still reported problems, but the frequency seems to have reduced considerably. If you are used to film Ms (I see you have an M2, but label yourself as a RF newbie) you may find the M8 shutter release noisy and less smooth than what you are used to. If you need to access exposure compensation or ISO frequently it can be a minor PIA because they are menu options, but if not then setting the camera up is simple. It has its foibles (like any camera), the on/off switch causes some people problems - accidentally setting to self timer, the frame lines are not the most accurate and other stuff that is well documented. I would certainly suggest getting hands on before parting with your money - some people find it a difficult camera to like (I sold mine after a year of trouble free use - just couldn't get to like it).

There are reviews worth reading - reidreviews, luninous-landscape for a broader view of the camera.

There are other digital cameras that can produce equally good images at less cost than the M8, but generally their form factor is bulkier and they have mirrors, but IS can make up for mirror induced camera shake.

So, in summary, the M8 is not a bad camera, but it isn't a stunning camera . Do get hands on before purchase and finally, good luck with your decision.
 
My little M8

My little M8

JasonG said:
Of particular interest for me I guess is, given the noise performance of the M8, how do I work with the tool as it is?
Click to expand...

I dunno what the problem is; my demo m8, purchased last September from Kurland Photography, has been absolutely fine.

A camera is a camera. Whatever you purchase, use it. "A poor worker blames his tools" was something I learnt when I was a lot younger.

I purchased the M8 because, (one of the reasons) it is an incredibly simple camera; basically a sensor and a lens; it is up to ME as a photographer to use it.

JohnS.
 
Hi Jason,

If you are situated in Kent then do contact one or more of the Leica dealers in London and see if you can arrange a few hours with the camera. As a start you can download the complete instruction manual from the Leica website along with a FAQ detailing some advice in this area and the progress Leica has made on resolving the outstanding issues. I have had two M8 bodies now for over a year and have not experienced the problems others are complaining about. You have already used rangefinder cameras so you know how to use an M8. Like your Bessa or M2 you cant use an M8 as you can an AF fast shooting, zoom lens DSLR with matrix metering.

All the major problems that early adopters experienced have been sorted by Leica. An remember up front the sensor is not FF and you will need to use uv/ir cut filters - that is part of the package (you get 2 free).

Also the camera should be used in RAW - that is most important and the metering is heavily centre weighted, almost spot. It is a simple camera to use with the minimum of menus. I like that part very much.

The images are great straight from the camera, personally I think they are noticeably better than those from the Nikon D3 (not talking about noise here).

Lots of fine CV, Leica and Zeiss lenses to choose from.

Also visit Reid Reviews website - comprehensive real world tests on the M8 and loads of lenses by a photographer with a balanced view. About £17 annual subscription.


Hope this helps,

Jeff
 
So Much Time Spent on the Noise Question...

So Much Time Spent on the Noise Question...

When, with the proper plugins, noise is one of the easiest problems to clean up, as is Chromic Abberation.

Furthermore, so many want to avoid post processing.

Impossible. It's digital capture.

Shoot RAW and learn to Post Process.

Otherwise, shoot film.

In which case your images will ultimately be converted to digital, and you will be doing post processing anyway.

Maybe? huh.

Anyway, noise is not the problem you think it is. You're just expecting more than the camera is capable of at capture.
 
Like we used to say back in the day: "If grain (read: noise) is a problem, dump the 35mm and get a Hasselblad or a view camera." With the M8 it's not so much will there be noise, but what kind of noise will it be? With a little experience and experimentation, the noise is very good noise, indeed. It is, dare I say, very much like 35mm film.

For instance, this shot is a CV 35/1.4 Nokton Classic, wide open, hand-held 1/4 sec exposure @ ISO 2500.


(clicking on the image will lead you to where you can get a larger version)

The M8 takes the best glass made, is a rangefinder and is capable of making absolutely stunning photographs. It also works like a real camera. Yeah, I'm old.

Oh! And it's a ton of fun to use!
 
leicasniper said:
Tolerance for noise (or grain, for that matter) varies from person to person. Looking at your photo in the original size on flickr, it is much too noisy for me. But thats a personal thing. And if you are shooting to please yourself, as most of us are, and you don't mind the noise, then that's great and the M8 is perfect.
Click to expand...

Yep, there's no pleasing everyone, so you gotta please yourself.

Of course, if we had been pixel-peeping our 35mm enlargements at a size relative to the 100% views of digital files, I bet a lot of people would (and did, come to think of it) leave 35mm behind for MF and view cameras.

So, keeping that in mind, remember that noise renders differently in a good print than it does on a screen at 100%.
 
maggieo said:
Of course, if we had been pixel-peeping our 35mm enlargements at a size relative to the 100% views of digital files, I bet a lot of people would (and did, come to think of it) leave 35mm behind for MF and view cameras.

So, keeping that in mind, remember that noise renders differently in a good print than it does on a screen at 100%.
Click to expand...

That's a very good point that so many people miss in the 'age of internet forums'. Viewing on screen can lead to incorrect assumptions about 'quality' (although comparisons are of course valid). Noise, like grain, is something that is extremely subjective. Some photographers would never shoot faster than 100 ASA; others would only use a specific 800 film for its appealing grain character. On my first digital (Nikon D1), the fact that I could even change ASA was just amazing.

Obviously digital noise is generally seen as inferior to grain. Agree. In that respect, I understand the appeal of a D3 (what wonderful pics at 6400!) But the original post on this thread was really asking how people here worked with the files on their M8 to ensure best results.

I believe a lot of the effect of noise relates to post processing. Rather than trying to eliminate all noise, I like to work with it somewhat. Using the classic USM technique in PhotoShop of high amount, low radius, no threshold can often make digital noise look better on prints and slghtly more film-like. I know this goes against all traditional "rules" but with a 12 MP file I will use a 200% sharpen amount with a 0.4% radius and no threshold after RAW processing. Sharpening is best after colour/tonal correction IMO.

Anyway, I guess what I am saying is that sometimes you need to see the effects of noise or grain when it appears in print (magazine etc) or even a digital print to make real judgments.

I'm not saying the M8 is great - I have never actually used one - but it's just worth seeing prints and not just screen samples if possible. That said, I'd probably never buy an M8 at the current price despite seeing all the advantages over the norm SLR's. But some people (myself included) can even see value in having something different. It must be so nice going to a shoot and not having someone come up and say "hey I've got that camera!"
 
I visited a dealer Leica demo last week. Took a SD card, formatted it the camera, and took pics side by side with my D200. Unfortunately it was a greyish day and not great for photography. I did find some neon lights, red cars and yellow flowers. Both cameras had 35mm lenses.

The colors are different, perhaps dull compared to Nikon when both were raw unadjusted.
The Leica has a funny noise I presume is the shutter winding. My wife liked the Nikon color.

The M8 is most definately sharper. I can apply only 1/2 or 2/3 the sharpening compared to the Nikon file.

It is a Leica RF experience with all the foibles that go with it. You like it or not.

The reliability remains an issue. Same with the stupid red filters and coding. A $5500 camera should be perfect. For a premium price, it should have nearly perfect reliability.
 
I fully agree. If you are unable to see the difference you certainly should not pay the money. For those who are competent to judge relative merit, the matter might be slightly different though...🙄
 
Jason,

It is important to shoot RAW with the M8 to get the best out of this camera and lenses. Jpegs right out of the camera do not do the M8 justice. The color, sharpness, dynamic range, in a well processed RAW file are as good as it gets. I find I do not have to do any sharpening with the M8 files. They are definitely sharper then my 5D.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Leica Digital M (11-D) Bugs
Replies
6
Views
585
Photon42
Photon42
peterm1
A night time walk with a Leica Summarit 50mm f1.5
Replies
1
Views
233
Richard G
Richard G
C
Any Love For The D-Lux?
Replies
7
Views
670
girdwoodINC
girdwoodINC
Jake Mongey
Stuck In A Hole - How to find enjoyment in actually taking photos?
3 4 5
Replies
98
Views
5K
PetPhoto
P
mrtoml
Hand Held Hi Res (HHHR) mode and the Panasonic G9 II
Replies
7
Views
611
Godfrey
Godfrey
Back
Top Bottom