For the die hard M8 fans

[boojum]

Just from looking at these four photos, if someone told me one of them was shot with an M8, there is no doubt that I would have guessed it was the top left. The files it produces definitely has an M8 signature, I think this is due to the CCD effect? Maybe it is blown out of proportion, but some of my M8 files (not all of them) have the same look.

I did not have my M9 at the time so I did not compare those two as a part of the test. But yes, the M8 CCD sensor has special resolving. Likewise the M9. I should do it again, this time with the same lens on the Leicas to make it more reliable. I do agree with you that the M8 is a special camera. I have the new sensor, same in the M9, so have only shutter problems to fear. I'll try and wear them out. The M240 is no slouch, either. I have things about Leica which I do not like at all, especially the gushing overly enthusiastic and uncritical fanboys who deny all that is bad. These cameras have had their problems, have low ISO's and that weird M8/M8.2 IR problem requiring the UV - IR filter. But, tickle it right and you will get good photos. And it does great B&W.

 

[peterm1]

And a B&W, Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35mm f/1.4 II MC @ f/5.6

​

Very nice tones. Was this a JPEG straight from camera or a converted color shot (RAW or otherwise?) No matter what camera I use I tend to shoot the latter simply because I like shooting RAW but if JPEG's from my M8 can produce these tones I am willing to change my practice. I really have not seriously tried with mine.
Also did you use a color contrast filter? I am lucky in that when I shot film I ended up after a number of years with a suite of Leica color contrast filters for its lenses (yellow, orange, red, light green and dark green plus blue) including 39mm and 41mm for various lenses plus some clamp fit ones for Elmarsand even an IR one. I would love to use them again though they must be worth a good deal of money these days and I could sell them but am not keen to do so.

 

[boojum]

This is just a B&W JPG straight from the camera. No filter other than the B&W company's UV + IR with the camera told that the filter is there. I am not the brightest bear in the woods so I just keep it basic and simple. I have heard all the arguments for shooting RAW but am pleased with what the camera(s) figure out on their own. The M240 has five color filters built-in if you are keen on using filters for B&W and not carry them around. Cool, eh?

You do know you can shoot both RAW and JPG at the same time, right? And set your JPG to B&W and you have the best of both worlds.

Years ago I mentioned to a pro friend that I thought that light was important. He replied, "Yeah, like about 98%." He also confided in me that his M3, " . . . had never been sullied by color film." I really am not that bright. ;o) Keep it under your hat.

 

[peterm1]

This is just a B&W JPG straight from the camera. No filter other than the B&W company's UV + IR with the camera told that the filter is there. I am not the brightest bear in the woods so I just keep it basic and simple. I have heard all the arguments for shooting RAW but am pleased with what the camera(s) figure out on their own. The M240 has five color filters built-in if you are keen on using filters for B&W and not carry them around. Cool, eh?

You do know you can shoot both RAW and JPG at the same time, right? And set your JPG to B&W and you have the best of both worlds.

Years ago I mentioned to a pro friend that I thought that light was important. He replied, "Yeah, like about 98%." He also confided in me that his M3, " . . . had never been sullied by color film." I really am not that bright. ;o) Keep it under your hat.

Thanks for that. I did not know that the M240 has the ability to specify filters types in firmware. It does make that camera attractive to me. My D700 kind of does this but the different settings are not named as red, orange etc, just a contrast adjustment that you can set as you wish. Never the less it works pretty well. The best camera I ever used to date with this kind of facility though, was my old Panasonic L1 (which was a Panasonic / Leica collaboration back in the day before mirrorless M4/3 cameras were yet on the horizon - the L1 was a 4/3 SLR type of camera. Not only were its lenses superb but its black and white modes were very good too. In fact I still use the original Leica designed (Panasonic Lumix badged) 25mm f1.4 with a 4/3 to M4/3 AF adapter. It is so good that I cannot bear to let it go and keep my M4/3 camera basically just for this lens even though I now shoot Sony day to day.

I did not mention it but yes I do often shoot and save as JPEG and RAW simultaneously. In fact this is how I most often shoot if I wish to shoot straight from the camera in black and white. My idea being of course that if the black and white image comes out as I wish it then I need do little in post except perhaps for minor tweaks to sharpness, contrast etc. But if the black and white image straight from the camera does not work well for a given image I will delete and convert the RAW instead.

 

[kknox]

Love mine. The M8 I have now is my third one. I have sold 3 and bought my 4th one with only 5k on the shutter. The B&W straight out of the camera is amazing. The jpeg color is perfect. Long live the M8.

 

[Doug]

I like the M8 and figure it's worth keeping even with the modest 10Mp resolution. I've had two of them since early 2008, and one went in for the Upgrades in conjunction with pixel mapping. It got the M8.2 shutter and viewfinder but not the rear screen. The other one, with black finish and very few clicks, recently sold through PopFlash. Paring back the group, the M240 is going too, but I'll keep the unique and charming M-D 262. I do like the quieter shutter of the M8u and do not mind using the UV/IR Cut filters; indeed I have even used those on other digital M Leicas too.

 

[raid]

I am using the M9 with the M10 now, and the M8 was set aside. I will get it out from the closet and I will use with it a 50mm lens very soon.

 

[boojum]

Just because of the one fellow, peterm1, who is keen on monochrome, here is one with good tones. JPG, straight out of the camera, no editing. I'm not very good but this camera sure is. For a 10 megapixel sensor this pic blows up really well.

​

 

[boojum]

The M8.2 does low light level scenes like magic. Here is another sunset. Don't we see them so often. But look how the camera handled it. It's magic. Again, it is not me, it is the camera.

Probably the Canon 28mm LTM f/2.8 @ f/2.8

​

​

 

[Rob-F]

I liked the color and the look of my M8.2 shots, and didn't mind the crop factor. I just used the next wider lens than usual. I especially liked the 28mm field, equivalent to a 32mm full frame. I didn't like that I couldn't manually enter the lens ID, and I didn't want to send my lenses in for coding. These were my main reasons for changing to my M9.

 

[peterm1]

Just because of the one fellow, peterm1, who is keen on monochrome, here is one with good tones. JPG, straight out of the camera, no editing. I'm not very good but this camera sure is. For a 10 megapixel sensor this pic blows up really well.

Thank you boojum. That's very nice. And I might say, that settles it! I am definitely going to start shooting in camera JPEGS in monochrome with my M8. (Something I really should have done years ago!) But since I have some contrast filters I may try using some of them too. When I do I will post some images here. 😎

 

[boojum]

Thank you boojum. That's very nice. And I might say, that settles it! I am definitely going to start shooting in camera JPEGS in monochrome with my M8. (Something I really should have done years ago!) But since I have some contrast filters I may try using some of them too. When I do I will post some images here. 😎

We all read a lot about how poor the M8/M8.2's are. They are flaky in some ways but when coaxed will give up some good images. Mine pretty much lives with the Canon 28mm LTM f/2.8 on it. That Canon is a nice lens and very affordable. I am glad you see the quality of the monochrome JPG's out of the camera. It has a nice softness when not used in direct light. You know what that Dane says, "Always wear a camera."

 

[boojum]

In response to a diminishing number of requests here is a string of photos which are not much but do illustrate what the M8.2 is doing for me, inside and out. I'll stop now.













Don was too cheap to turn up the heat so we always dressed as if were were outside. He was a good guy. He bought the farm this summer and is much missed.
​​​​​​​

 

[boojum]

I liked the color and the look of my M8.2 shots, and didn't mind the crop factor. I just used the next wider lens than usual. I especially liked the 28mm field, equivalent to a 32mm full frame. I didn't like that I couldn't manually enter the lens ID, and I didn't want to send my lenses in for coding. These were my main reasons for changing to my M9.

You can buy 6-bit coding rings from eBay, a couple of matte finish pens and do them yourself.

​

 

[Rob-F]

How accurately made and how high quality are these rings? I don't want to put anything cheap on my Leica lenses. Any recommendations?

 

[boojum]

How accurately made and how high quality are these rings? I don't want to put anything cheap on my Leica lenses. Any recommendations?

This is a simple product. It is the normal LTM to M-mount adapter, it's not rocket surgery. The difference is that they will have the six indentations to be filled in with white or black inks. Mine are usually Fotodiox but any will work. They run around $10 on eBay. Be aware that the lens being corrected for is the Leica lens. I have gone to no correction and find it better. YMMV.

 

[Rob-F]

Yes I have seen the six digit LTM to M adapters on eBay. I could use one for my 50mm collapsible Summicron, but the rest of my LTM lenses are Voigtlander, or FSU. So I wouldn't know what correction to use, if there even is one that fits. Is that what you meant by no correction is better? When they are non-Leica lenses?

I have some M-mount Leica lenses I'd like to have coded. Is there is DIY flange available for that? I know DAG will code lenses, but if there is a way to not have to send my lenses through the mail, I'd prefer that.

 

[Doug]

I would prefer to keep the original flange on the lens, then you can be sure the dimensions haven't changed. I would be concerned that the aftermarket flanges are correctly made with proper thickness, as this problem has been observed on some M/LTM adapters. Could remove the flange yourself and send that alone to DAG for coding. I sent several lenses to DAG... he sent the flanges out for machining and adjusted the lenses for precise focus.

 

[boojum]

Yes I have seen the six digit LTM to M adapters on eBay. I could use one for my 50mm collapsible Summicron, but the rest of my LTM lenses are Voigtlander, or FSU. So I wouldn't know what correction to use, if there even is one that fits. Is that what you meant by no correction is better? When they are non-Leica lenses?

I have some M-mount Leica lenses I'd like to have coded. Is there is DIY flange available for that? I know DAG will code lenses, but if there is a way to not have to send my lenses through the mail, I'd prefer that.

The deal is that these JPEG corrections are for Leica lenses. I found that the corrections overly darkened images on similar but non-Leica lenses and abandoned the practice. I asked Matt Osborne (Mr. Leica on YT) and he said he does not code any lenses he uses. And he shoots a lot of Leica lenses, but mostly B&W.

M-mount lenses without the indentations can be encoded but the coding will wear off because of abrasion. But, again, you are applying Leica corrections to a non-Leica lens. Remember the words above the entrance to Hell in Dante's Inferno: "Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here." As always, YMMV.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

The deal is that these JPEG corrections are for Leica lenses. I found that the corrections overly darkened images on similar but non-Leica lenses and abandoned the practice. I asked Matt Osborne (Mr. Leica on YT) and he said he does not code any lenses he uses. And he shoots a lot of Leica lenses, but mostly B&W.

M-mount lenses without the indentations can be encoded but the coding will wear off because of abrasion. But, again, you are applying Leica corrections to a non-Leica lens. Remember the words above the entrance to Hell in Dante's Inferno: "Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here." As always, YMMV.

I have 21 CV CS LTM. If I dial up exposure compensation, it gives well exposed images in JPEG1 under Leica 21/4 profile.

I also use Leica profiles for J3 and Canon 50 1.8. I could see the difference from no profile.

Matt Osborne is typical YT personality. You look at his images and asking yourself - it must be something else behind of those nothing special images to bring this income...