Do you think the M8 is making RF cameras more Popular?

[Talus]

The M8 is nothing like a DSLR. It dosn't do any thinking.

Everything except Av is done manually. It's kinda like digital M7. Nothing fancy. Only the essentials.

Then I can see why they're selling like crazy.

 

[jaapv]

It sounds as though, with the M8, Leica has rediscovered its core customer base -- well-to-do people with plenty of money and style, who purchase the camera because it is "the best" but who otherwise don't know much about photography. Doctors, lawyers, those who take $300 bottles of wine quite seriously. These folks want and can afford digital, and no longer want to deal with the hassle of film.

Isn't that a little uncharitable to the talented photographers who scraped together the money to get this excellent tool, and to those doctors and lawyers that are actually first-rate photographers? A rich fool can and will buy any camera, be it an M8, 1DsIII or Hasselblad. I don't see this as an exclusive Leica affliction.

 

[newyorkone]

It sounds as though, with the M8, Leica has rediscovered its core customer base -- well-to-do people with plenty of money and style, who purchase the camera because it is "the best" but who otherwise don't know much about photography. Doctors, lawyers, those who take $300 bottles of wine quite seriously. These folks want and can afford digital, and no longer want to deal with the hassle of film.

That doesn't describe me at all. I think the M8 has broken out of this cliche, if anything.

 

[newyorkone]

The M8 is nothing like a DSLR. It dosn't do any thinking.

Everything except Av is done manually. It's kinda like digital M7. Nothing fancy. Only the essentials.

Something I like to do with my M8 is pretend it's a film camera. Turn off the preview option. Go out and shoot, only looking at my images afer the SD Card is full and they've been downloaded to my computer.

It gives me the waiting/delay factor of film, making my experience more enjoyable.

Me too. I turn off the auto preview and pretend. Saves battery life too 🙂

 

[HAnkg]

It sounds as though, with the M8, Leica has rediscovered its core customer base -- well-to-do people with plenty of money and style, who purchase the camera because it is "the best" but who otherwise don't know much about photography. Doctors, lawyers, those who take $300 bottles of wine quite seriously. These folks want and can afford digital, and no longer want to deal with the hassle of film.

There are a lot more well to do people with limited photographic skills buying Canon's top of the line, here as in every photographic market the DSLR totally dominates. The only thing that could dislodge Canon from it's top spot would be an Apple iPhone with a camera.

Of course the most famous trust fund baby with a camera owned a Leica: Henri Cartier-Bresson 🙂

 

[VinceC]

I really wasn't trying to be condescending. (And I'm someone who can appreciate a $300 bottle of wine because I own several vintage bordeaux in that range). I think Leica was in trouble before the M8 because this core customer was no longer interested in film cameras. We here on RFF benefit from these folks, because they keep our camera companies in business. In the same vein, Nikon's target customer is really the mini-van driving soccer mom who isn't into photography with a passion but wants to have a good SLR with a good name. The street I currently live on fits that demographic, and it's the mom's who've bought all the Nikon DSLRs to document their little ones. They're doing scrapbooking on their home computers and are a formidable market force. When I emailed around a batch of pictures I took of our kids' soccer games, several moms wanted to know what camera I used, and were a little puzzled when they found out it was a Nikon rangefinder using 50-year-old 105mm and 135mm lenses.

 

[Morca007]

No, I do not think it is expanding the popularity of RF cameras at all.

 

[gavinlg]

To answer your question, yes I think that it's providing quite a large customer base, urging a few people out of DSLRs and giving a little more popularity to RFs

 

[furcafe]

I agree that wealthy amateurs are a mainstay of all the camera companies & have been as long as photography has been a hobby (just look @ pre-WWII camera ads for Leitz & Zeiss Ikon, etc. & post-WWII ads for the Nikon & Canon, etc.) as there just aren't enough professionals out there @ any given time. I think pros, & their needs, serve as incubators of new technology & as models for the amateurs to follow, e.g., cameras w/high-speed autofocus & 10 fps auto advance may have been originally developed for pro sports shooters & photojournalists, but there are many doctors, lawyers, engineers, software executives, etc., who want to use the same or similar cameras to shoot their vacations or their kids's playing sports. I would draw an analogy to auto companies w/their sponsorship of racing teams, where you have the same people described above buying sports cars & SUVs that will never touch a racetrack or go off-road.

I really wasn't trying to be condescending. (And I'm someone who can appreciate a $300 bottle of wine because I own several vintage bordeaux in that range). I think Leica was in trouble before the M8 because this core customer was no longer interested in film cameras. We here on RFF benefit from these folks, because they keep our camera companies in business. In the same vein, Nikon's target customer is really the mini-van driving soccer mom who isn't into photography with a passion but wants to have a good SLR with a good name. The street I currently live on fits that demographic, and it's the mom's who've bought all the Nikon DSLRs to document their little ones. They're doing scrapbooking on their home computers and are a formidable market force. When I emailed around a batch of pictures I took of our kids' soccer games, several moms wanted to know what camera I used, and were a little puzzled when they found out it was a Nikon rangefinder using 50-year-old 105mm and 135mm lenses.

 

[MartinP]

Hmmmm, it would be interesting to think of the question the opposite way round. Is the M8 making rangefinder photography less popular ? Clearly not(?), so I ticked the yes choice.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I had a similar experience last weekend with my M6. I was at a party and someone came up to me and asked to see the picture. I told them that it was a film camera and they walked away disappointed.

A few years ago, I'd get the same reaction/questions (i.e. "how many megapixels?") with my M6. Since I got the M8, since both the M8 and M6 look pretty much the same to those who don't know the difference, I've been confusing people: sometimes my Leica is digital, sometimes it's film! It's "magic"... 😉

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Isn't that a little uncharitable to the talented photographers who scraped together the money to get this excellent tool, and to those doctors and lawyers that are actually first-rate photographers? A rich fool can and will buy any camera, be it an M8, 1DsIII or Hasselblad. I don't see this as an exclusive Leica affliction.

I agree. Interesting that tunnel-vision people always think of "Leica" in these terms, but, of course, it is an unsolved mystery as to why Nikon rangefinders are so expensive, both used and new.

But, going back to the "question" (which, anything Leica/M8 related is going to bring the usual suspects' toxins into play, unfortunately), I don't think the M8 is making RF cameras more popular. The M8 is making Leica cameras more popular, if anything.

The Cosina-Voigtlaender cameras and lenses are responsible for making RF cameras more popular in recent years. I don't think too many people would disagree with that.

 

[chunin]

If someone can not use a DSLR then that person is even less capable of using a RF unless that person just came out of a cave and have never seen anything that requires batteries and use a switch to turn it off and on. Probably the most advance item ever used by that person is a crank in which case the RF is just perfect.

Chunin Martinez

I just read the article about the surge in people coming to RFF. Do you think the M8 has something to do with that? Everyday I'm reading about more and more people switching over to RF because of their dissatisfaction with DSLR. Even if the M8 is out of someone's reach, I see more newbies getting into film via M6, M3's.

 

[chunin]

I'm in my second try eith the M8. Sold the first one because found the M8 pretty much useless in JPG mode. DNG mode was totally necessary to get good image quality as for some reason JPG was worse than a P&S camera. Now I'm back into the M8 because I got a good price on one with lens and all kinds of accessories from one of those rich guys who bought it because of the status symbol and found it to be too hard to use. I don't blame him. If you have never done any photography in the old fashion way of manual everything, the M8 is the worst choice. He settled for the D200 and the 18-200VR zoom which is a good choice. In general most people are better off with a DSLR and a zoom. If you have done your own B&W work in the darkroom then the M8 is fine.

 

[amateriat]

A few notes:

- Yesterday, I was taking a long walk with galfriend to Red Hook (again...that part of Brooklyn is so achingly addictive just to walk through, let alone photograph), met up with a few people I know there, and had dinner (recommendation: The Good Fork, fantastic dishes). We walked past a cafe when a woman at an outdoor table spotted my Hexars and asked "Is that the new digital Leica?" On her table was a Canon 1D with requisite 70-somethingorother zoom. Turns out she's a veteran shooter for the New York Times, and she has a more-than-casual interest in the M8, but is "waiting out the bug-fixes."

- In the last several weeks of coming to the rescue of distressed computer users, I've had at least five PC users tell me they were about to buy their first-ever Mac as a replacement; all made good on their intentions, and I've set up a bunch of iMacs and MacBooks as a result. There are about three other clients who have signaled their intentions to go Mac. A sea-change in effect? Can't say, but this is one "happenin'" niche.

I think the M8 has certainly helped bring the rangefinder camera back into the pro/enthusiast limelight, and into the minds of photographers who either (a) weren't aware of RFs at all, or (b) shooters who abandoned their RFs years ago – well before digital was even an issue of debate – for the 5fps siren song of the SLR. I think this is translating into a larger pool of "new" RF shooters, both film and digital. ("A rising tide...", and so on.) This is a Good Thing. RFs have been on the sidelines for several decades now, and that's not likely to change much, but its "niche" status will grow to what I believe will be a stable and sustainable level. Frankly, I think that's all that's needed to keep the RF flame burning. (The fact that the M8 appears to be driving M7 and MP sales as well doesn't surprise me too much.)

I'm not discounting Cosina (or Cosina/Epson) in all this, but when have either had a product that made the pages of Time or Newsweek?


- Barrett

 

[furcafe]

This has been discussed on the Nikon RF part of the forum, I think the consensus is that Nikon RFs are more expensive because many fewer of them were made compared to Leicas & even most models of the Contax RFs (Nikon having quickly switched to the F series SLRs, naturally) & significant collector interest in their land or origin.

IInteresting that tunnel-vision people always think of "Leica" in these terms, but, of course, it is an unsolved mystery as to why Nikon rangefinders are so expensive, both used and new.

 

[Olsen]

No. I don't think that the M8 make RFF photography more popular. - Stephen Gandy's Camera Quest pages (very good, Stephen!) and, indeed this RFF Rangefinder Forum plays a very important part in making 'RFF photography more popular'.

The M8's role is that it makes it possible to use the M-system lenses usable in the digital world. Although it is not a perfect digital solution, the M8 is an improvement to the Epson RD-1. The M8 shows the way forward. Which is important. Otherwise the M-system has no future.

 

[furcafe]

A non-cave-dwelling person can be fully capable of using a DSLR but still be dissatisfied w/them as a product class.

If someone can not use a DSLR then that person is even less capable of using a RF unless that person just came out of a cave and have never seen anything that requires batteries and use a switch to turn it off and on. Probably the most advance item ever used by that person is a crank in which case the RF is just perfect.

Chunin Martinez

 

[chunin]

Most people without photo background would find the concept of aperture and shutter speed daunting especially in this age of computer automation. Some would not want to learn it as RF cameras at least requires focusing and aperture control. In general, RF cameras are less satisfying as a product class. Only the few would find it otherwise.

A non-cave-dwelling person can be fully capable of using a DSLR but still be dissatisfied w/them as a product class.

 

[ZeissFan]

It's very possible that the presence of a digital Leica rangefinder has sparked some interest in the Leica name, film photography and hence film rangefinder photography.

This would be primarily among the enthusiasts, rather than the point-and-shooters (includes the dSLR and traditional P&S users) who want and expect full automation without any need to ever think about such mundane things as focusing and -- heaven forbid! -- aperture and shutter speeds.

Even so, any additional interest in another segment of photography can only be a good thing for film photography, as well as the photographer.