Leica M6 or Leica M8?

C

calculi

Newbie
Local time
10:13 AM
Joined
Apr 10, 2010
Messages
7
After many months of saving, I managed to create capital to buy Leica M6. But after having lot of troubles traveling with my Leica CL to Chile (security checks at various airports!), I'm thinking that perhaps it makes sense to add some more money and buy Leica M8 instead, which has become cheaper in used market after introduction of M9 (it's the same fate for all digital cameras). But Leica M8 has crop factor of 1.33X, that means I may have to change to new lens collection rather than traditional 35, 50, 90mm ones.

What do you suggest in this case? Should I buy Leica M6 now and maybe in next couple of years I should think of buying rather Leica M9?
 
Now that M8 prices are falling -- and initial prejudices regarding the camera are being reassessed -- it is becoming a more attractive option. BUt there seem to be two main considerations -- at least in the way you pose the question. (1) Will an M8 resolve the difficulties you report in travelling through airports with your CL (I can't see why it would, personally)?; (2) If you favour the 35mm POV then, yes, you would probably need to invest in a 28mm to pair with the M8...

Perhaps a bigger question should be: do you wish to shoot film or digital?
 
They are entirely different beasts, in my opinion. Each has pros and cons. Two to think about are the extra bulk of carrying film and the M8's need for mains power. Both can be a right pain in the arse.
 
M6 + 35/50/90
M8 + 28/35/50

Roughly the same. If you do not own the above lenses then a suggestion would be to purchase them as 6 bit coded to accommodate the M9. An M6 can last 50 years but the availability of getting film processed may not last that long.
 
if ease of travel is a large concern, and you typically carry many rolls of film, digi capture makes sense imho.

the M8 batt charger is neither large nor small and has int'l power adapters. the batts themselves are small.

as steve suggests, the crop factor is not much of an issue since FF and 1.3x crop lens use overlaps. for the M8 you might want a 24-28mm (to approximate FF 35mm).
 
calculi said:
After many months of saving, I managed to create capital to buy Leica M6. But after having lot of troubles traveling with my Leica CL to Chile (security checks at various airports!), I'm thinking that perhaps it makes sense to add some more money and buy Leica M8 instead, which has become cheaper in used market after introduction of M9 (it's the same fate for all digital cameras). But Leica M8 has crop factor of 1.33X, that means I may have to change to new lens collection rather than traditional 35, 50, 90mm ones.

What do you suggest in this case? Should I buy Leica M6 now and maybe in next couple of years I should think of buying rather Leica M9?
Click to expand...

Hi, if you´re still in chile send me a pm!

By the way my experience is this, i sold my m6, m7 and many other stuff, and bought a zeiss ikon and kept my minolta cle for film.
Also bought an m8, the only length lens i changed was a 28 mm for the m8 to get 37 fov equivalent.

Bye!
 
Thanx for all those replies!

My problem at the airport was with films. I had to argue and persuade at each security check that films should not be scanned. Being a person of indian origin, this always raised the eyebrows of the officers. In this case, digital camera is of much help.

I'm sure that in next couple of years I'll buy M9, so I was thinking whether it makes sense to buy Leica M8 now and invest in 28mm lenses and IR filters. I own 50mm and 90mm lenses, so I wanted to buy Leica M6 and one 35mm lens. If I go for M8, then I have to invest more money than for M6 plus for 2 lenses, namely 28mm and 35mm. I was thinking of getting older 35mm lenses instead for M6, since I can't afford new ones yet (typical situation of a student). On the other side, I spend at least EUR 11 for a film and processing. That adds up anyway. And that creates this dilemma.

So the related question is how do the results compare of M8 sensor image (with proper noise reduction) and Film image with decent scanner like Epson v500 or v700?
 
We had a thread on scanning films at the airport here a while ago, general consensus was that airport scanners are no threat to film, unless ISO 1600 and 3200.

From everybody responding, only one photographer had actually had a film fogged, but not even spoiled. Over fifty had not ever had any issue.

I myself have travelled to the UK and Bulgaria in the last six months, all my film was scanned (twice, since I brought my own film) and I have suffered no ill effects.
 
Last edited:
Keep in mind digital doesn't age nearly as well as a film camera.

I'm not engaging in tiresome film-vs.-digital flame wars, I'm merely making a valid point.

The M8 is a great camera but is already out of date, technically speaking. And in 2 or 3 years time will be even more out of date...but by that time the money will be spent.
If you can afford to move up to whatever version of the M9 is out on the market at that future time, then great...go ahead and get the M8 now. If not, well...then you'll be stuck with the M8 (did I mention how much fun repairs are for aging digital cameras..?). Think about what kind of files you get from, say, a Nikon D1H or D2H now that the D3s is out, to further the point.

I've travelled internationally with both film and digital cameras...both have issues and either way you'll be carting along support gear (film, or portable hard drives/chargers/cards).
 
I travel a lot and just don't worry about my film getting scanned. I shoot a lot of high speed stuff too. Of course I mean scanned in the carry-on scanner, not the checked luggage one.
 
You can answer your question by considering the differences between the two cameras:

Do you want to shoot digital or film?
Do you want to spend $1000 or $2000+?
Do you want fully manual or aperture priority exposure?
 
I've let my films be scanned through carry on xray check with no problems at all. the only ones I keep from the xray are iso 1600 and 3200, but since usually i'm carrying just a couple iso 1600 rolls there is not really much problem with security.

once when travelling from rome to athens I was able to check my bag, which I was taking as a carry on all the time, and just forgot to remove the films... first thing I did when arriving in athens was to end and develope a portra 400 VC roll I had in one of my cameras and see if it was damaged. it was just fine. but I don't plan on doing that again!

just don't worry about film being scanned and go for the M6 if you prefer film. the M8 has some advantages in versatility for being digital (change iso, 1/8000) but needing the IR filters is really annoying and the camera costs almost as double as the M6. maybe a R-D1 would be a good option if you like digital.
 
The ir filter situation is only annoying till you have them. then theres no worry at all.
Ill vote m8. I have both film and digi m and the digital m is just easier to travel with. and IQ is brilliant
 
since scanning film needn't be a hassle, i'd get the m6. when prices for the m9 fall, i'd get that with money i saved in the meantime.
 
For the moment, I had decided to buy Leica M6, and in fact, I just bought it already. It is in perfect mint condition in original box, almost without any scratches. Actually, I've still got lot of films with me and I thought for the moment it's good idea to use them all, and later think of going for digital.

Thanx for all those advice. I really appreciate it.
 
It's all a matter of economics which I believe favors the M9 for digital work and digital work in general. There are many more lens that are designed for full frame digital sensors [i.e., most every Leica M lens made] than for a 1.33 sensor. You can offset the higher cost of a M9 versus M8 by getting used lens. Because of the huge surge in popularity of DSLRs, there seems to be a good [and now more affordable] inventory of used M lens and boxes. However, I'm in a love affair with my M6 and thus will not consider a M9 -- even if I could afford one and find one. But I do cheat a bit and have acquired a X1. There is, I sorry to say, a lot of good things to say about digital photography [especially now that Kodachrome is history]. Mostly it is cheaper once you have the equipment. And if you no longer have a good darkroom [my case] then you are going to end up likely scanning in your negatives anyway. Plus some of the digital software can do wonders in correcting your mistakes. Plus my woman is happy that I am not disappearing in to a dark room for the evening, but instead can be easily found bent over my Mac.

PS finding either a M9 or a X1 isn't easy these days.
 
I think I'm now changing my mind again. Local photo shop stopped taking films and only possible film developing is done by drug store, where the quality is really bad and moreover they force you to buy the worst prints they produce. Having own dark room is also very costly and time-consuming investment. So I think Leica M8 will be much suitable option under these circumstances.

But I already bought Leica M6 with great excitement in perfect mint condition and now heavy heartedly I've decided to sell it back together with my Leica M2 which I had also acquired on the way. I put them in the classifieds together with Elmar 90 lens. If any of you who are interested can have a look there!

I bought brand new budget lens CV Nokton 35/1.4 to be used with Leica M6. Does any of you had any problems using this lens with Leica M8? I think it's not 6-bit coded and one needs odd 43mm UV/IR filters extra for Leica M8 user, right? Any other opinion or suggestion for this lens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom