damien.murphy
Damien
Hi,
I'm strongly considering an M8, should I be able to find the funds.
I've done a fair bit of research of late, and am ok with most of the quirks, but have one or two questions for M8 users.
1) A 21mm lens would seem to be the closest field of view equivalent on the M8 to a 28mm on film, but the widest frameline on the M8 is 24mm yielding a 32mm equivalent field of view. How have 28mm shooters found this, and do you use a 21mm or 24/ 25mm to fill this need with the M8. Is there sufficient room around the 24mm framelines to accurately approximate things should you choose to use a 21mm lens ?
2) Am I right in saying there are still only 8-bit DNG files available from the M8 ? I only just discovered this idiosyncracy in the course of my research, and to be honest am quite surprised. I'm a black and white shooter (but want to shoot colour with the M8), and wonder how do M8 B&W shooters find the limited bit depth - surely more bits = more tonality ?
I'm strongly considering an M8, should I be able to find the funds.
I've done a fair bit of research of late, and am ok with most of the quirks, but have one or two questions for M8 users.
1) A 21mm lens would seem to be the closest field of view equivalent on the M8 to a 28mm on film, but the widest frameline on the M8 is 24mm yielding a 32mm equivalent field of view. How have 28mm shooters found this, and do you use a 21mm or 24/ 25mm to fill this need with the M8. Is there sufficient room around the 24mm framelines to accurately approximate things should you choose to use a 21mm lens ?
2) Am I right in saying there are still only 8-bit DNG files available from the M8 ? I only just discovered this idiosyncracy in the course of my research, and to be honest am quite surprised. I'm a black and white shooter (but want to shoot colour with the M8), and wonder how do M8 B&W shooters find the limited bit depth - surely more bits = more tonality ?
On the latter: the M8 uses a "Cheezy" compression scheme to scale 16-bit raw values coming off the A/D convertor to 8-bits. It stores the Square-Root of the value. So, 0-65535 gets stored as 0-255. The M9 has a mode to store 16-bit values.
MCTuomey
Veteran
#1 - I have used the 15 and 18 FLs on my M8. I need a separate VF for them. Haven't used a 21 on an M8, sorry. My guess is that it would be ok without a separate VF (you'd use a 28mm btw) using the full height and width of the finder as long as you're not fussy.
#2 - 8-bit only. I'm okay with the compromise vs 16-bit (an M9 would be pretty wonderful but not feasible these days). My prints look good, color and B&W, but I don't go large.
cidereye
Film Freak
Yes they are 8 bit files instead of 14 bit files Damien but Leica say/said there is no discernible difference between compressed/uncompressed. Funny how they changed their minds for the M9 though isn't it as Brian said. 
I've not really got a problem with this though, for a 10 mp camera the files usually have so much detail in them I've not got any time for any pixel peeping and I'm more than happy.
Can't really comment on the 21mm situation as 28mm is as wide as I go on the M8.
I've not really got a problem with this though, for a 10 mp camera the files usually have so much detail in them I've not got any time for any pixel peeping and I'm more than happy.
Can't really comment on the 21mm situation as 28mm is as wide as I go on the M8.
Last edited:
damien.murphy
Damien
Thanks guys for the info, and keep it coming.
Re: the 8 bit files, has anyone found it an issue when converting colour files to black and white ? I don't really print big, but it's been on my mind of late, as well as experimenting a good deal with colour, where the extra bit depth would be nice when editing.
Does anyone know if Leica has any intentions of altering the situation, through firmware. I imagine the continuous shooting frame rate would take a big hit, but to be honest I would prefer higher bit depth in place of the 1.8 frame per second frame rate. Or at least the option
Re: the 8 bit files, has anyone found it an issue when converting colour files to black and white ? I don't really print big, but it's been on my mind of late, as well as experimenting a good deal with colour, where the extra bit depth would be nice when editing.
Does anyone know if Leica has any intentions of altering the situation, through firmware. I imagine the continuous shooting frame rate would take a big hit, but to be honest I would prefer higher bit depth in place of the 1.8 frame per second frame rate. Or at least the option
damien.murphy
Damien
I find it odd the M8 viewfinder only extends to a 32mm equivalent field of view, when all regular M's since the M4-P go to 28mm, even if you need to squint to see the entirety of the framelines
I suppose there shouldn't be a huge difference between what a 21mm lens sees on an M8, and what you see with the 24mm frameline. External viewfinders aren't for me, so definitely interested to hear people's experiences with a 21mm on the M8
cidereye
Film Freak
MCTuomey
Veteran
Damien, i've shot a fair amount with a 25mm on the M8. Although a 25mm calculates to an effective FOV of ~ 33mm, it feels wider in use and when working with the files, much like a 28mm on film to me. You might want to try a 24/25mm on the M8 and see if it gives you want you want.
Regarding the B&W conversions and 8 bit depth, I think you'll find that working with good software, like Silver Efex Pro, will give you excellent results with the M8 files. Check out some of Tim Barker's M8 conversions - he uses SEFXP. Imho, his B&W work with the M8 is superb.
Regarding the B&W conversions and 8 bit depth, I think you'll find that working with good software, like Silver Efex Pro, will give you excellent results with the M8 files. Check out some of Tim Barker's M8 conversions - he uses SEFXP. Imho, his B&W work with the M8 is superb.
Last edited:
damien.murphy
Damien
Thanks for the feedback, Mike.
I'm not sure if the 25mm is for me though. It's a bit of a no man's land focal length for me on film, with regard to framelines, whereas a 21mm would pull double duty on film and on a possible M8 quite nicely.
Thanks for pointing out Tim's work, which is quite impressive. Food for thought, with regard to what's possible with 8-bit files..
I'm not sure if the 25mm is for me though. It's a bit of a no man's land focal length for me on film, with regard to framelines, whereas a 21mm would pull double duty on film and on a possible M8 quite nicely.
Thanks for pointing out Tim's work, which is quite impressive. Food for thought, with regard to what's possible with 8-bit files..
ampguy
Veteran
Hi Damien, I've used the CV 21 a lot on the M8, and it is a bit larger than the M8 VF maybe 10%-15% or so, or maybe a bit less if you were to scan the extreme edges before each shot. I never felt I needed an external finder, but would check the lcd occasionally for framing.
I think the CV 21 is a great value. These images here were mostly all taken with the CV 21/4 on the M8 w/o an ext. VF:
landscapes
I think the CV 21 is a great value. These images here were mostly all taken with the CV 21/4 on the M8 w/o an ext. VF:
landscapes
elmer3.5
Well-known
Hi Damien, i´ve used a 21mm lens on my m8, to make a precise composition can be troublesome, but for infinity shots, it´s OK.
The only issue is about the depth of field, check this shot.
VC 21mm f4
The only issue is about the depth of field, check this shot.
VC 21mm f4
Some shooters dislike external viewfinders, going to great lengths to avoid them. I admit to this with the Bronica RF645, just using the whole viewfinder for framing 45mm, but clearly one loses parallax compensation this way. For some reason I don't object to external viewfinders on my 35mm RFs, though. Parallax compensation is lost with these too but at least I can see what might be the whole frame.
I have a hard time seeing the whole 24mm frame at once in the M8, but using the 25mm lens seems to be fine anyway. I do use the lovely Zeiss 25/28mm viewfinder with 18 & 21mm lenses; the view is so nice and big I don't mind moving my eye from one "peephole" to another! FWIW, the 21 I most use is the slow Zeiss Biogon f/4.5 and I like this angle of view so it's used a lot.
I have a hard time seeing the whole 24mm frame at once in the M8, but using the 25mm lens seems to be fine anyway. I do use the lovely Zeiss 25/28mm viewfinder with 18 & 21mm lenses; the view is so nice and big I don't mind moving my eye from one "peephole" to another! FWIW, the 21 I most use is the slow Zeiss Biogon f/4.5 and I like this angle of view so it's used a lot.
Last edited:
Lss
Well-known
I use the CV 21/4 with an external finder on the M8. It can be used without one, but I'm not comfortable without the viewfinder. The CV 15 I use without a viewfinder even on the Epson R-D1, which has a slightly bigger crop than M8.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Echoing what MCTuomey said, you really ought to consider a nice software option for B&W conversions. SilverEfex Pro has many fans. Easy to use. Great results.
I think one of the mistakes people make is thinking they can go into Photoshop and do a simple gray scale conversion. That's a great way to create a mediocre image.
Obviously, SilverEfex Pro isn't the only way to go. And it's not particularly cheap. But when I compare the cost of that software to my lenses and cameras, it's a relatively minor expense.
I think one of the mistakes people make is thinking they can go into Photoshop and do a simple gray scale conversion. That's a great way to create a mediocre image.
Obviously, SilverEfex Pro isn't the only way to go. And it's not particularly cheap. But when I compare the cost of that software to my lenses and cameras, it's a relatively minor expense.
damien.murphy
Damien
Thanks for all the feedback. It seems using a 21mm on an M8 without an external viewfinder is a personal judgement call. I'm not a massive fan of approximating framelines, but nor am I a big fan of having to change up my whole lens line-up just to suit the M8.
Tim, I'm quite impressed with the results I've seen from Silver Efex, and also your own images. I'll need to bear it in mind. I think I just have a mental block about spending that much money on software.
EDIT: Just noticed Silver Efex is not as expensive as I thought (€180 for European version)
Tim, I'm quite impressed with the results I've seen from Silver Efex, and also your own images. I'll need to bear it in mind. I think I just have a mental block about spending that much money on software.
EDIT: Just noticed Silver Efex is not as expensive as I thought (€180 for European version)
Last edited:
SR1
Established
Damien,
I use an M8 with a Zeiss ZM 21 f4.5 almost exclusively. Until this year I approximated the view but now use an external VF. Much easier and not the hassle I expected
Www.flickr.com/photos/simon_robinson
I use an M8 with a Zeiss ZM 21 f4.5 almost exclusively. Until this year I approximated the view but now use an external VF. Much easier and not the hassle I expected
Www.flickr.com/photos/simon_robinson
damien.murphy
Damien
Those are some beautiful images, Simon - are they cropped to a panorama, or do you stitch several images together.
Re: viewfinder, don't really mind external viewfinders, especially with the large depth of field of the 21mm. My main fear is losing anything that is not bolted onto the camera!
SR1
Established
Damien,
Thanks for the kind words. The Highland images are stitched. 4 images per shot, although all other images are single frame, cropped if I prefer the different aspect ratio.
I use the Leica 21/24/28 VF which screws down to the hot shoe so you can't lose it.
I should add that my lens isn't coded and I've never felt the need to use a UV/IR filter.
Depends what you shoot I suppose
Regards
Thanks for the kind words. The Highland images are stitched. 4 images per shot, although all other images are single frame, cropped if I prefer the different aspect ratio.
I use the Leica 21/24/28 VF which screws down to the hot shoe so you can't lose it.
I should add that my lens isn't coded and I've never felt the need to use a UV/IR filter.
Depends what you shoot I suppose
Regards