Buyer beware of M8

[rover]

It is a little better Dave, but thank you for your comments.

The original post was baiting and after some defensiveness a number of good posts were made.

At some point the bait will be left in the water untouched, but this was better than the all out screaming matches of a couple weeks ago.

 

[lifevicarious]

To quote the article:
"There were four people abourd who carried Leica M8's" "Two of the other M8 users had more serious problems."

"About 85% of the trip's members were shooting with Canon gear, mostly 1Ds MKII. " "In all, 90 minutes of wet shooting produced six 1Ds MKII cameras which stopped working for one reason or another. Three of them recovered after a night of drying out."

"2 out of 4" VS "6(or 3) out of ~85% of 50 + backup units."
Statistics would say that I should take my chance with Canon gear in that type of environment.

Why would you take your chance on Canon gear? 85% of 50 is 42. Let's say 30 of those were 1ds's. Out of those 30, 6 failed which is 20%. So 20% of $6,800, weather sealed professional cameras failed? And this doesn't even take into account the 5D's that died as well. Nor does it include anyone that had a bad Canon body right out of the box (it sounds like one of these Leica bodies was bad right out of the box and brand new).

All in all, I would say Leica fared rather well considering this was in one of the harshest places in the world. A place Leica never claimed the M8 would work in yet it is a place that Canon marketing would like you to believe there 'weather-proof' 1 series cameras will work flawlessly.

 

[ywenz]

All in all, I would say Leica fared rather well considering this was in one of the harshest places in the world. A place Leica never claimed the M8 would work in yet it is a place that Canon marketing would like you to believe there 'weather-proof' 1 series cameras will work flawlessly.

Where did Canon claim that their 1 series camera is guaranteed to work flawlessly in Antartica? Please point me to that.

The Leica M8 is riding on a historic implication going all the way back to the M's film roots that is - a tough, reliable, "bang a nail in the wall with it" type of camera. The more brassing it shows, the more beautiful the camera is. Some excerpts fromt the Leica M brochure:

"Not many things last a lifetime. A Leica M often lasts longer Anyone taking photographs is normally at the heart of life. In the heat or cold, in the rain or dust. The M needs to be durable, reliable and robust under all conceivable conditions. The question of durability is always a top priority in the development of a new M model. This is why only premium materials are used for its body : brass for the top
and base plate and a high-strength magnesium alloy for the chassis. The digital technology components are also carefully selected to withstand years of use. Sophisticated production techniques and painstaking assembly guarantee decades of reliable operation, allowing photographers to enjoy their Leica M for as long as possible. For a lifetime in fact, often even by the next generation."

"Enduring quality Precision is the yardstick for production of a Leica. And no product leaves the Leica factory before all critical production steps have been rigorously tested. Products that can still be maintained after several decades are a genuine luxury these days, yet the Leica Customer Service department can still maintain and repair every M camera that has ever been produced."

"Optimum materials The sturdy top and strong base plate are cut from solid brass blocks using modern methods and are then given a black or silver chrome finish. The enclosed all-metal body is made of a high-strength magnesium alloy to ensure durability in professional use."

I guess the only thing we can conclude is that both Leica and Canon over promises, and I'll go with the low failure rate of the Canons rather than the 50% of the Leicas...

 

[StuartR]

I don't know, but I think anyone would have to admit that a sample size of 4 cameras is not enough to tell anything. Nor is a sample size of 50 cameras or however many canons there were. I think you can pretty much guarantee that the M8 would not have a 50% failure rate if you brought 1000 cameras into the conditions that they were used in...same thing for the Canon...a 15% failure rate is lower, but I bet it would be lower than that if there were 1000 cameras. Keep in mind that this was Antarctica in the summer, not the winter. Sure, it's still cold but not the lubricant freezing metal shrinking cold of the winter.

 

[Ben Z]

"Not many things last a lifetime. A Leica M often lasts longer..."

That's probably true, given the average age at which most people can finally afford one 😀 My M4 has aged a lot more gracefully since 1967 than I have 🙁

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Where did Canon claim that their 1 series camera is guaranteed to work flawlessly in Antartica? Please point me to that

The Leica M8 is riding on a historic implication going all the way back to the M's film roots that is - a tough, reliable, "bang a nail in the wall with it" type of camera. The more brassing it shows, the more beautiful the camera is. Some excerpts fromt the Leica M brochure:

You obviously don't own an M8, nor the M8 brochure which clearly indicates what are the operating temperatures for it (just like Canon does with its dSLR manuals).

If we are going by "historic implication"s (which means, that, historically, there's an implication that's been repeated over time, or, historically) I'd say that those who implicitly have something negative to say about Leica, historically, need to work out some issues.

I can point to Freud and Jung for that... :angel:

 

[Sailor Ted]

I'll go with the low failure rate of the Canons rather than the 50% of the Leicas...[/b]

Ben that's what you should do- go with the Canon as you did when you bought yours. I'll go with my Leica; I like my Leica better. By the way where do Canon photogs blog their Canons, I think I'd like to start posting there. Do you know?

Weird- very.

 

[trph_2000]

A few semi-related points:
I own a few M-bodies and lenses and am interested mainly in street
photography and reportage. I am waiting for the delivery of my M8 and
have fairly high expectations for it. As is the case with German cars
compared to Japanese, the mechanical qualities will likely be superior
but the electronics inferior.However,as has already been demonstated,
albeit with some difficulties, Leica so far seems prepared to fix and
upgrade the electroncs along the way. Myers's report on LL about
Leica's sales (of both digital and analog M's) from the PMA seems
encouraging. I have ony used a small P&S digital until now, and plan
to use the M8 to futher my overall computer literacy(i.e. digital processing
, file storage and transmission etc.).
Even though I am relatively inexperienced, I would also realize that
an RF is not the ideal camera for the tele type shots of wildlife that would
predominate on the trip in question,aside from any reliability issues.

It is very interesting to read Reichmann's posts about his several recent
trips to China, South Africa, Morocco and the Antarctic. It is safe to say
that he is a digital expert and devotee' and LL is definitely oriented this way.
Fine. Notice however, that in the discussion of every one of the trips, the
topic of Leica M comes up. Both in China and Morrocco, MR goes to great lenghts to say that the natives really don't like being photograped and
that the best kit for this work would be something analogous to an M system,
as far as size and stealth are concerned ,even if digital.He points out that big DLSR's with long white lenses are not taken to kindly by the locals. This caused him problems in China and the M8 was a help in this regard in Morroco. Even the g---dam penguins were less intimidated by the M !
For me, I will travel,within reason with the M8. I will take my M6 or MP
as well, with two lenses, and will have a reasonably good package of
digital with a good back-up , with small size and stealth.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Anyone who takes a camera on a very cold weather cruise without also taking a tightly sealable plastic bag to put the camera in before going back inside deserves what he gets -- a failed camera full of condensation. As I said on a different thread, it's not rocket science. It's more like high school physics. Even a fully sealed Nikon can fail if you do that to it. You can seal the camera against rain, but you can't seal it against condensation.

A fully sealed Nikon? Would that be a Nikonos? If that is the case I think that chances of success would be much higher than with any digital camera...

GLF

 

[HAnkg]

Well if you are planning on doing your shooting in Antartica, on the top of Mt. Everest or in the heart of the Amazon rainforest don't buy an M8. All those environments fall outside the manufacturers recomended operating conditions. That still leaves the other 99.999% of photographers as a potential market for the camera.

Generally I don't take my camera into any environment I couldn't survive comfortably in so I haven't had any problems. Shooting protraits of people, products and documentary type work in urban and rural environments -it's fine. Gigabytes of images daily without a hiccup. It's like my laptop -it's light, small and very portable. I could buy a ruggedized laptop that could survive the rigors of a war zone or the wilderness but then it would be heavy, expensive and unsuitable for what I really use it for. Like people who buy huge gas-guzzling SUV's to drive to the mall. Confident that they could take on the Sahara (if they wanted to).

I'm off now to shoot 20 sets of custom truck wheels and trucks all lit by a pile of strobes for a new ad campaign for an aftermarket automotive manufacturer. I expect the M8 will perform as flawlessly as it has for everything else I've used it for in the last couple of months.

 

[jaapv]

Actually I took mine into very adverse conditons: salt 100% humid air aboard a Trimaran in the Bahamas for a week. No problems whatever. The only thing that suffered was my appetite due to high winds 😀

 

[giellaleafapmu]

Generally I don't take my camera into any environment I couldn't survive comfortably in so I haven't had any problems. Shooting protraits of people, products and documentary type work in urban and rural environments -it's fine. Gigabytes of images daily without a hiccup. It's like my laptop -it's light, small and very portable. I could buy a ruggedized laptop that could survive the rigors of a war zone or the wilderness but then it would be heavy, expensive and unsuitable for what I really use it for. Like people who buy huge gas-guzzling SUV's to drive to the mall. Confident that they could take on the Sahara (if they wanted to).

I'm off now to shoot 20 sets of custom truck wheels and trucks all lit by a pile of strobes for a new ad campaign for an aftermarket automotive manufacturer. I expect the M8 will perform as flawlessly as it has for everything else I've used it for in the last couple of months.

Before I post I would like to write a warning: I am writing this just for the pleasure of discussion, I am not against Leica nor I like flames in newsgroups of people who share a great passion.

Having said this...I think what you write has some logical fallacies.

First, if it is water or low temperature what caused a failure in those Leica (and Canon) cameras, then you do not need to go to places where you cannot survive easily to have problems. Just going to the seaside or taking a picture of a relative learning to ski could be a problem.

Second, unlike the car or the computer example, here it is the delicate item to be the more expensive. A Leica M3 or any manual focus Canon (just to stay with the brands) would produce the same quality image, resist the rigour of the climate (or maybe just an occasional crash due, who knows, to the son of a friend who start playing with your camera unnoticed or a dog who trow you to the ground, all happened to me at times) and cost a fraction of the price of these cameras. Even the incredibly rugged Nikonos is not much bigger (surely it is not larger than Canon digital cameras) and is much cheaper than an M8...

Third even staying with the same quality and resilience and assuming you need the digital medium (as probably is the case for your automotive adverticement) I still cannot see much difference with, say, a 600US$ Olympus E somethign camera, but this is just matter of taste and I have just never really had the chance to make a real comparison, lens must be much better in the red-dot production...I hope.

Of course, there are cases in which they can be useful (street photograpy where you need to be relatively unnoticed if it need to be send by email or something like that) but I doubt this is the majority of the situations...

I like M8 but I think that it is perfectly normal to be a bit disappointed if a pro camera fail in the rain or because of cold. I would be for any piece of equipment costing to me a four digits bill... By the way, in Europe and South America I have never met any pro with an M8, is that common in North America?

GLF

PS
I do really like the M8...I am just curious and I like arguing but if I had more money I sure would buy one to complement my M4. Still I hope that at some point Leica will come out with something better...

 

[grduprey]

Too many complaints. my m8 has worked flawlessly, even at -10F and in the rain. the wb is about 20 times better and totally predictable when compared to my nikon d200. buy one and get out there and shoot photos. enjoy!

 

[HAnkg]

First, if it is water or low temperature what caused a failure in those Leica (and Canon) cameras, then you do not need to go to places where you cannot survive easily to have problems. Just going to the seaside or taking a picture of a relative learning to ski could be a problem.

The M8 is by no means delicate. I have not babied it and have used it professionally for several months, it has been just as reliable as my Canon 1Ds. That's my own personal experience not something I read online.

Third even staying with the same quality and resilience and assuming you need the digital medium (as probably is the case for your automotive adverticement) I still cannot see much difference with, say, a 600US$ Olympus E somethign camera, but this is just matter of taste and I have just never really had the chance to make a real comparison, lens must be much better in the red-dot production...I hope.

The quality exceeds what I got with my Canon 1Ds. I find the Canon L lenses I used (135/2 + 35/1.4 + 90TSE) to be in the same league as Leica glass. Again my own personal experience. If you can't see the difference between a $600 camera and the M8 then you can save yourself some money and buy the $600. camera.

By the way, in Europe and South America I have never met any pro with an M8, is that common in North America?

Most pro's use Canon/Nikon or medium format digital. I have used all the above but I don't base my equipment decisions on what someone else is using. It's been a long time since any rangefinder camera has been a mainstream choice, pro or otherwise.

Still I hope that at some point Leica will come out with something better...

Every manufacturer will come out with somethingt better a few years from now. If what you have meets your needs then there is no hurry. If the M8 fills some need you have now then go for it.

 

[StuartR]

I used my M8 in the single digits (F) this winter and it seemed fine. I brough the DMR to Iceland with me this winter and used it for hours in the freezing cold, dark, windy arctic night. It did not skip a beat. I was truly impressed. This is after I shot with it in the rain for several hours in Iceland in the summer (it was covered, but the humidity and condensation were extreme), so it handled both extremes really well. If the M8 performs as well (and it has for me thus far), it will work admirably in most any situation.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Does this mean that this season's American Idol is over?

 

[giellaleafapmu]

I knew I was going to cause this, once again I was just following the discussion and replyign to teh expensive car-Leica M8 parallel.

The M8 is by no means delicate. I have not babied it and have used it professionally for several months, it has been just as reliable as my Canon 1Ds. That's my own personal experience not something I read online.

I am sure it is, once again I was arguing assuming what they wrote in the original article was true.

The quality exceeds what I got with my Canon 1Ds. I find the Canon L lenses I used (135/2 + 35/1.4 + 90TSE) to be in the same league as Leica glass. Again my own personal experience. If you can't see the difference between a $600 camera and the M8 then you can save yourself some money and buy the $600. camera.

I am also sure that Leica glasses ar better than most. I must admit however that since I have been able to afford them I asked quite a few times friends who use both Leica and other gear to show me their photograps without telling me what they use to shot. Just to see if I really can see the difference or am I fooling myself into buying expensive stuff which really does not make any difference in my pictures. My own verdict is that sometimes I can see a difference
(flare, rendering of out of focus areas, a somehow different feeling) expecially in B/W and expecially with vintage lenses but many other times I cannot see much (nor can most of the other people with whom I made the tests). So far this was expecially true with digital pictures (but I have seen just a few M8 pictures printed, so it might have been a case).

Most pro's use Canon/Nikon or medium format digital. I have used all the above but I don't base my equipment decisions on what someone else is using. It's been a long time since any rangefinder camera has been a mainstream choice, pro or otherwise.

That is the same for me. Mine was just a curiosity. I would say that I go even further and still use film much more than most "amatour who sometimes charge for their pictures" do. I also always take a film camera for backup.

Every manufacturer will come out with somethingt better a few years from now. If what you have meets your needs then there is no hurry. If the M8 fills some need you have now then go for it.

Sure sure, I meant that I think it should be possible to produce a better camera now for the kind of money the M8 costs (I think the same also of the MP and the M7), but then again, maybe not because, as you said, rengefinder cameras are and will probably always be a niche of the market.

GLF

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Ah, crap, 24, Heroes, House, and Lost also had their season finale last month.

 

[HAnkg]

Some have not had as positive experience as I have with the M8, but I can only speak to my own experience. Leica makes some great glass, but so does Canon, Zeiss and Cosina, etc., When I shot film I shot exclusively medium format mostly with a 20 year old Plaubel 670 with a Nikkor lens (+ a Hasselblad). I like the M8 because it gives me quality similar to what I got with medium format film in a tiny package and I love RF focusing. I used the Canon 1Ds most of the time focusing manually. I have no particular attachment to the Leica brand but the M8's size and ergonomics suits me better then anything else out there right now. It is not the be all and end all of image quality (see 39MP medium format backs for the ultimate IQ) but it produces very good quality, good enough to meet my needs.

I will probably add a DSLR body again to complement the M8 when the Canon 1Ds MKIII comes out (or maybe the R10) for macro, tilt/shift and long lens work.

 

[jackal2513]

WGAF ?


how pointless

if you don't like it, dont friggin well use it
its just a camera

on the flipside, if you buy anything and then emotionally need to follow that up by sitting on a forum defending your purchase, then far better be it that you DONT BUY ANYTHING AT ALL !!!

a decent photographer can take a good pic with a pot noodle carton stuck inside an old mans sock in any case