Does it make sense to buy a used Leica M8?

[rrobinson]

As a long time Leica M user, I am thinking of adding a used Leica M8 to compliment by Nikon D300. With the lower selling prices of used M8's (around $2500 in mint condition), I am getting close to buying one. However, after reading about the general level of disappointment in the M8 (see fredmiranda.com), I am having 2nd thoughts. How reliable is the M8? Is the performance as good a more current digital cameras (Nikon D700, etc.)? And, is $3,000 a decent price for a used Leica M8 with Carl Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 lens? Is the CZ lens a good lens choice for the M8?

Thank you for your opinions!

 

[35mmdelux]

For the casual user I think the M8 is good enough. For the pro not so.

A used 50 Zeiss C-Sonnar costs about $700+/- (US). The CV certainly is a good lens choice.

 

[Frank Petronio]

My casual use of a friend's M8 showed me the files were not much different than a Nikon D80, two or three stops less capable than a D700 depending on how you judge such things. What you get are getting is about equivalent to the sensor from a $600 DSLR (Canon Rebel, Nikon D60) in a beautiful ergonomic body with a great menu system and, of course, rangefinder focusing. But given the electronics inside, I wouldn't expect it to be any more reliable than the $600 DSLR (which means it should be fine in 99 out of 100 cases.)

Buying used I'd definitely want to know the repair history. There were some lemons.

 

[noimmunity]

The D700 surpasses the Leica M8 in many ways. However, at lower ISO, the M8 files look better to my eyes, and then there are all the obvious differences between SLR and RF.

It sounds like you don't have any M lenses, whereas you certainly already have F lenses. Perhaps the D700 with a fast prime would do what you want. It wouldn't be hard to rent one and find out before you commit to an M8.

But maybe you really want the shooting experience of an RF and nothing else will do.

The M8 is very satisfying IF you understand it on it's own terms and don't expect a "film M with digital back".

Buying used, I would wait to find one that was purchased recently. Some troubles, esp with the sensor, in early models have been ironed out (for the most part). Best would be to have one that is still under warranty (worth paying for). Ask the seller about all the normal troubles before buying.

The ZM C Sonnar that you mention produces lovely files on the M8 and is one of my favorite lenses for it. But with the crop it is a little on the long side for a main lens. I'd think you'd want to pair it with a 24/25/28. For a single affordable lens choice, just get a fast 35.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

My casual use of a friend's M8 showed me the files were not much different than a Nikon D80, two or three stops less capable than a D700 depending on how you judge such things. What you get are getting is about equivalent to the sensor from a $600 DSLR (Canon Rebel, Nikon D60) in a beautiful ergonomic body with a great menu system and, of course, rangefinder focusing.

As someone who uses the M8 weekly, I find this assessment very very very very very very off the mark.

If only my Canon 5D (or ::choking::, my Canon Rebel) created the files my M8 creates, I'd be shooting the 5D a lot more.

I've also tried a Nikon D60, D90, and a D700. No way.

You do not process M8 DNG files just like you would the raw Canon or Nikon files. Different beasts.

So, if you threat the unicorn just like the centaurs, you are bound to get horned.

 

[ampguy]

I use the M8 daily (JPGs only) but also have a DSLR and RD1 around. I'd agree that it's basically equivalent to a D40 or low end Pentax in technology, the ISO is good in color to 640/800, maybe 1250 for b/w.

It's a better feel and less crop than the RD1, though the RD1's ISO and 6MP are possibly better. I'd rather have the RD1 with good Leica lenses, than an M8 with CV or Zeiss lenses, just my opinion.

 

[Frank Petronio]

Gabriel -- I've seen some really nice work from the M8 but I attribute that to the skill of the photographer in post, and some of the tweaking that Leica did with the camera itself -- but it still uses the same sensor as other older, less expensive, prosumer compact DSLRs. If we were going on specs alone, it is comparable to a 2005-era digital and those now sell for only about $500 or so.

Which is my point -- if the OP isn't up to speed on all this digital stuff then we probably shouldn't except him to be be as fussy are you are, at least right off the bat.

 

[Keith]

At $2500.00 for an immaculate used example with a reliable history it's a dream camera and there's no reason not to have one IMO ... at new price, not so much!

 

[didjiman]

What planet is this? Did I waddle into the dp*eview forum?

Find another 10MP CCD sensor in a "consumer" dSLR and we can talk about credibility.

 

[MCTuomey]

I use the M8 daily (JPGs only) but also have a DSLR and RD1 around. I'd agree that it's basically equivalent to a D40 or low end Pentax in technology, the ISO is good in color to 640/800, maybe 1250 for b/w.

It's a better feel and less crop than the RD1, though the RD1's ISO and 6MP are possibly better. I'd rather have the RD1 with good Leica lenses, than an M8 with CV or Zeiss lenses, just my opinion.

Not to be contentious, and admitting I'm new to the M8, if you rely on the M8's jpg engine only, you're cutting the M8's capability off at the knees. Its jpgs aren't special; the jpgs from my 6 yr old Canon 1D are much better, for example. M8 RAW files in Capture One: something very special. Lots of banter about needing to shoot RAW with the M8. I think it's true. I'd echo Gabriel's comparison, maybe a bit less enthusiastically, to the 5D's files.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

The M8 is a very polarizing camera. I think the only way to determine if you like it is to shoot with it. The web is useless. You can find "tests" proving it is better than any digital camera on earth, including 60 MP backs on Hasselblads!

Buy one cheap enough and you should be able to get your money back if you try it and don't like it. That's probably the best bet.

 

[gdi]

but it still uses the same sensor as other older, less expensive, prosumer compact DSLRs. If we were going on specs alone, it is comparable to a 2005-era digital and those now sell for only about $500 or so.

Which of those cameras used the same sensor? I may try one.

 

[gdi]

The M8 is a very polarizing camera. I think the only way to determine if you like it is to shoot with it. The web is useless. You can find "tests" proving it is better than any digital camera on earth, including 60 MP backs on Hasselblads!

Buy one cheap enough and you should be able to get your money back if you try it and don't like it. That's probably the best bet.

That's true - go to the site mentioned and you'll see that a "physicist" proved that it is impossible to focus an M8 (or any RF camera) !

Truly polarizing, and there is more misinformation about than any other camera.

Yes it can be focused, no the sensor doesn't heal itself after being dropped, yes the files are so close to a 5DI no one could tell the difference in print, no it does not rival 4x5 (or 6x7 for that matter), yes you can learn to process high iso and get reasonable noise levels. No it is not camera bling for the Rich, or oppressive Capitalists (buying one doesn't mean 5 common folk are denied a 450D) any more than a 1DII (~ $4500 new) was.


If you like it it will probably do, if you don't it won't.

 

[Frank Petronio]

gdi - I don't pay attention enough to know whether Nikon or Pentax use the same chip, but since they don't make chips either, they are at the mercy of the chip makers. And just like PC processors and AMD versus Intel, the competition keeps them comparable.

 

[Bobfrance]

I bought and ex-demo M8 from Leica in Manchester. It came to me at a good price, had a full 2 year warranty and free UV/IR filters. They also threw in a couple of straps and an extra battery.

Oh, and I think it's a superb camera!

 

[JNewell]

M8 used: check carefully the pricing of refurbs vs. used. They are often very, very close, and the refurbs will have a one year LUSA warranty.

Files: I also shoot a D300 and D200 with "pro" level Nikon lenses. The M8 files are like jewels compared to those files. They need next to no post processing compared to the Nikon files - perhaps just a small WB tweak as long as the firmware is v2.x.

 

[noimmunity]

The M8 is a very polarizing camera.

The Leica Polarizer.

 

[kbg32]

I have to agree with Gabriel. Nothing compares to M8 files when processed properly. My 5D is great, but the M8 is something special...

 

[mani]

gdi - I don't pay attention enough to know whether Nikon or Pentax use the same chip, but since they don't make chips either, they are at the mercy of the chip makers. And just like PC processors and AMD versus Intel, the competition keeps them comparable.

Frank - I don't want to be rude, but isn't it better to at least do the bare minimum of checking before you make embarrassingly wrong statements like this?

PS: well I decided my response is rude - and I don't want to be combative. But I'm not going to delete my post because I'd say that in giving an opinion and taking part in forum discussions, we all have a responsibility to at the very least not contribute information that's purely and simply made-up, without any relation to the facts.

 

[Ben Z]

I've had an M8 since July '07. Before that and still, I have a Canon 20D, and for the last few months, a 5D (MK1, got a refurb). I shoot only RAW/DNG. The M8 files need less post processing, but only the area of sharpening is attributable to the camera. The Canon files need some additional tweaking to minimize chromatic and other aberrations that are attributable to the lenses. But once processed with the optimum workflow specific to each camera, the final prints at least up to 20x30 that I've gotten are very equal to each other in quality, and it boils down to the same pros and cons of rangefinder vs SLR that have always existed. Having never shot a 5D-II or a 1DS-III I can't comment on how those chips compare to the M8, with more than double the pixels.

If I were buying an M8 today I would be looking for a demo M8.2. I believe the shutter may be more durable/reliable, and I prefer the recalibrated framelines. Buying a used or demo M8.0 and then paying $2K for an upgrade would put me at or above the cost of a demo M8.2. But if I were to get a used M8.0 I would unquestionably get an official Leica demo with the official Leica 1 yr warranty.