GrahamWelland
Well-known
usayit said:
That just proves you don't know what you're talking about. The electronics and image processing of the M8 produce fabulous images that I struggle to equal with my D2X. I consistently find that I get more keepers with my M8 when I travel than any camera system I've owned before, including M6, XPAN, R-D1 and a variety of Canon film and Nikon DSLRs. Only the images from my Kodak digital back/Mamiya challenge the M8/M glass on a regular basis.
The M8 is built like a tank and is a simple joy to use. Handling the camera in the store for a few minutes CANNOT tell you much about the use and handling of the camera - like any M camera, it becomes second nature to use and becomes a tool once you know what you are doing with it.
As an analogy, you can't gauge the qualities of a Porsche Carrera by driving it around the dealers parking lot, especially if your experience to date is a Ford Taurus.
usayit
Well-known
I borrowed the M8... did more than just testdrive in the shop... Sheesh.
I absolutely never said that the images from M8 were subpar (there we go again Leica owners on the defensive). I simply stated that it does not meet my expectations... it is far from what I expected from Leica's M line..... you only have to look at the Leica M8 forum here to know that the design is far from flawless. If you don't see that then you are just completely blinded by the M8 you already invested in.
Next you are going to say that all cameras are flawed. No kidding... but my expectations for Leica is a lot higher than "other" cameras.
I repeat... no where did my postings compare the M8. I'm just saying that Leica could have done far better if they were a bit more proactive. If allowed for the "years of engineeing" invested in the M8, Leica could have done far better than the current release of the M8.
the flaw in your analogy is that this fellow knows the M3 M6 and MP. He's not comparing a ford to a porsche.. he's comparing a 80s vintage porsche to a 2000s vintage porsche... In the 20 years that lapsed, I think it is natural to expect a lot from the latest iteration of the porsche line. If the differences between an 80s porsche and a brand new one in the year 2007 were subtle and flawed, I'd be just as disappointed.
BTW.. A Rolex with Casio internals would time just as accurately as a Rolex with Rolex internals. I'd still choose the 100% Rolex.
I absolutely never said that the images from M8 were subpar (there we go again Leica owners on the defensive). I simply stated that it does not meet my expectations... it is far from what I expected from Leica's M line..... you only have to look at the Leica M8 forum here to know that the design is far from flawless. If you don't see that then you are just completely blinded by the M8 you already invested in.
Next you are going to say that all cameras are flawed. No kidding... but my expectations for Leica is a lot higher than "other" cameras.
I repeat... no where did my postings compare the M8. I'm just saying that Leica could have done far better if they were a bit more proactive. If allowed for the "years of engineeing" invested in the M8, Leica could have done far better than the current release of the M8.
the flaw in your analogy is that this fellow knows the M3 M6 and MP. He's not comparing a ford to a porsche.. he's comparing a 80s vintage porsche to a 2000s vintage porsche... In the 20 years that lapsed, I think it is natural to expect a lot from the latest iteration of the porsche line. If the differences between an 80s porsche and a brand new one in the year 2007 were subtle and flawed, I'd be just as disappointed.
BTW.. A Rolex with Casio internals would time just as accurately as a Rolex with Rolex internals. I'd still choose the 100% Rolex.
Last edited:
usayit
Well-known
.. makes me wonder....
While Leica said a DRF was not an easy task and most likely not possible, Epson released the R-D1. Soon after.. the M8 was released.
If Epson NEVER released the R-D1, I wonder if Leica would have allowed for a few more years of "engineering time" before releasing the M8. If so, would that version of the M8 be a little more my expectations.
While Leica said a DRF was not an easy task and most likely not possible, Epson released the R-D1. Soon after.. the M8 was released.
If Epson NEVER released the R-D1, I wonder if Leica would have allowed for a few more years of "engineering time" before releasing the M8. If so, would that version of the M8 be a little more my expectations.
matt fury
Well-known
usayit said:
OK, very well played!
edit: PS, a Rolex with Seiko internals would be much more accurate than a Rolex with Rolex internals.
GrahamWelland
Well-known
usayit said:
You are playing the insinuation game again. The M8 would have appeared when it did regardless of the R-D1. Leica's point was that it wasn't going to be as simple as people assumed to produce a working M camera without a reduced sensor, vignetting and IR sensitivity that would satisfy the quality demands of Leica. They were correct and even then have struggled to produce a flawless camera. Its really only due to post-processing that this is possible now for colour images.
Let's not forget that the R-D1 is hardly a flaw free camera yet these seem to be overlooked by most. I have, and enjoy, both cameras and use UV/IR filters on both, correct for vignetting and live with the UI quirks (some appealing, some not) of both.
What I think the R-D1 did do was validate the DRF market for Leica. The R-D1 was already discontinued quite some time before the M8 saw the light of day.
As regards the Leica SNAFU's - well the original M format vignette problem exhibited by the Epson was tackled successfully via the lens coding/processing, although the IR sensitivity was definitely a mis-calculation by someone at Leica - they screwed up. (Btw, the Epson does it too!).
Would it have been better for Leica to wait even longer before releasing the M8? Probably not - you have to actually be around to launch a camera and the days of Leica were (are?) definitely numbered. For now, they have been extremely successful with the M8 and new lenses although many customers are kicking and screaming over their nose bleed pricing. I'm sure that eventually a version II product will follow and new exotic materials and processing techniques will overcome the physical & optical limitations of the M platform and digital vs film capture.
If you don't feel that the M8 is right for you, fine. Just don't justify your choice by trying to describe the system as being like a Casio inside a Rolex body - it isn't. :bang:
usayit
Well-known
GrahamWelland said:
Oh really..you sound so sure of yourself. There is just no way to know for sure... but notice how Nikon and Canon new product release dates are influenced by each other.. No doubt Epson had an impact.
From a company that has little to no Rangefinder history... From a company that doesn't lead in the digital camera market... From a camera that is a fraction the cost of an M8... the flaws were noticed and overlooked as expectations were set properly. Isn't it amazing that the R-D1 does so well stacked against the M8?
I buy a Toyota econobox.. I'm willing to overlook stuff.. I buy a high end Lexus.. I will ~not~ overlook stuff.
R-D1 did validate the DRF market for Leica... I think that alone influenced the release date. BTW.. R-D1 was discontinued in the UK in mid-2007 while the M8 was released late-2006. So NO, R-D1 was no discontinued "quite some time" before the M8.
Leica "SNAFUs" as you put it isn't what I expect out of Leica. The IR sensitivity miscalculation??? that should have ~not~ passed QA and marked acceptible for market. If there was no way to address the IR issue with today's technology, then it should have been addressed at the release of the camera.
(I'm in the software development industry.. way too much software is marketed i the same manner. Get out now.. patch up later... which is just plain wrong. But consumers have learned to live with it because "everyone" does it).
You might be right on that part... again.. wonder what if Epson continued to be a direct competitor?
Ok.. so a Kodak inside a Rolex body... better?
The M8 is definitely a capable camera... but Leica could have done better. IMO, other than packaging digital internals inside a Leica M shaped body, there is not much there to get excited over.
I can justify my answer anyway I see fit... afterall it is all still an opinion.. and it doesn't have to agree with yours. Why so defensive over a posting expressing my choice, feelings, and opinion?
You can say all the no-so-good things about the R-D1 that made you choose the M8. I'm not going to be defensive at all.. its your opinion. But threads like this is proof enough that it is a camera that stands on its own... no doubt the user interface of the R-D1 is brilliant (even though the camera itself is not perfect).
GrahamWelland
Well-known
usayit said:
Well, as someone who neither uses or owns one I guess that's your opinion. It kind of reminds me of the letters you read in car magazines from sixteen year old experts discussing the finer points of why they won't be recommending the latest Ferrari to their parents.
usayit said:
I'm just bored and fed up with non-Leica folks making out that the M8 is somehow a lemon. It isn't. I use it almost every day and it is simply a superb imaging platform. You'll be horrified to know that I have TWO of these no good, deficient, over priced, under-achieving 'Casio/Kodak in a Rolex' peices of junk so obviously there's no hope for me.
I'm really not trying to convince you of how great the M8 is (it is), just that I'm bored with the assertions of people who don't use it that it's a crappy timex movement in a Leica package (it isn't).I actually agree with you that the SNAFU's shouldn't have occured but they did so we have to live with them. Nobody seriously believes that the IR problem wasn't known about before the camera launched - obviously someone in product management/marketing/engineering decided that it wasn't a critical flaw (and I repeat, it's also present in the R-D1) so they screwed up and launched with it. Hopefully someone's head rolled for that one.
usayit said:
Actually, I've had two R-D1's - I sold the first one when I bought my M8 and then subsequently bought another because I missed the 'character' of the camera - it is a joy to use. I don't need to rail on the deficiencies of the R-D1 because I actually like it and use it and still own one. I didn't buy the M8 because of disatisfaction with the R-D1, I bought it because of the capabilities of the camera that matched my needs. I personally think that the R-D1 is a classic landmark camera and will be seen as such in the future, as will the M8.
Anyway, like they say, opinions are like a**holes - everyone's got one - so I'll leave it at that. I'm going to let this conversation gracefully whither on the vine ....
leicashot
Well-known
usayit said:
You're comparing '80+' years of engineering to a 'few' years of engineering and expecting 'what' exactly?
nrb
Nuno Borges
It's not the M8 being a worthless camera. It simply isn't worth its price tag presently.
Last edited:
usayit
Well-known
) I think the M8 is far from a lemon. It is a good camera. Honestly... I think it is a GOOD camera! I repeat... my opinon = M8 GOOD CAMERA.GrahamWelland said:
) why would I be horrified that you own two M8s? Good for you. You found something that makes you happy. I'm HAPPY for YOU! (I never said they were junk).
BTW.. "You'll be so horrified to know I own two Canon DSLRs junk one of which costs more than an M8". It sounds just as dumb turned around doesn't it?
) I'm no "non-leica" folk. If I was wouldn't my expectations be a lot lower? I do own a bit of Leica stuff. I'm happy with what I do own.
) nrb basically said what I was explaining in detail. The M8 is a good camera, just not worth the present price. I continued to explain why and how it does not meet my expecations. Thats it. Why is it my reasons so wrong and defensive.
) People keep disregarding non-M8 owner's opinions as invalid. Isn't that kinda dumb to expect that negative points about a product is only valid for owners of said product? Why would I own an M8 if it didn't meet my expectations? Then.. why would my reasons for owning an M8... so that my opinons are valid?
OooooooOOoo.. now thats mature.. You shouldn't be threatened by opinions on the internet.. as you said. ... we all have opinions. and I hold everyone's opinion HIGHER than a**holes.. even yours
Last edited:
usayit
Well-known
A Leica M8 resulting for "YEARS" of engineering and design.leicashot said:
To bring the watch analogy back... The first Rolex electronic quartz driven watch was produced with outsourced internals which was shared with other watches. They only produced 1000 prior to going into a full blown effort to develop inhouse. The result (5 years later) was a wonderful Rolex designed and built Oysterquartz movement. A movement that became world known for quality. A Rolex watch with quartz movement with the quality only acheivable through 5 years of R&D.
I'm not a watch kinda guy (don't own one actually)... I have absolutely no doubt that Leica can acheive the same thing Rolex accomplished. I have no doubt that if Leica played their cards right the M8 could have been the Oysterquartz of cameras rather than the 1000 Rolex's with quartz movement purchased from another company. < Disclaimer.. the whole content of this posting is the opinon of usayit >
Last edited:
nrb
Nuno Borges
Hope you feel happy with your M8 for many more years. And that you buy many another small frame digital M whenever they put it to sale.
What fails me is not so much the camera itself but the willingness to pay whatever high price for a device that doesn't produce significantly better images than much cheaper cameras.
What fails me is not so much the camera itself but the willingness to pay whatever high price for a device that doesn't produce significantly better images than much cheaper cameras.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
nrb said:
:bang::bang: :bang:
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
nrb said:
Well it all depends on the level of disposable income of the buyer.
Since I am not rich, and I would have to save for a while to get one, I want more for my money, and I am not prepared to put the effort of saving my hard earned cash for a camera that I consider having too many flaws for such a price tag.
Of course if my personal income was in the region of £100000+ then I would have one by now, because the price would be in the range of an impulse buy.
I think it all boils down to this, the richer you are, the more likely you are to accept flaws in a product that you want, simply because you can afford to.
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
JNewell said:
Try shooting one entire day on the M8 without ever chimping at the LCD.
Iron Flatline
Guy in a Suit
A "both" would be nice
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
fgianni said:
When I keep my Luigi case on it I never look at the screen. I prefer shooting that way and getting "surprised" when I "develop" it.
msendin
Member
After thinking it a LOT, I just bought an RD-1 instead of an M8.
I have had several Leica M bodies and finally kept only my M3. The logical step seemed to be the M8 but I personally feel it is just too "young", I dont like to accept the IR and other minor issues on such expensive camera.
I plan to enjoy my RD-1 for ¿two? years till a new revised digital M appears. Then I will probably get one.
I have had several Leica M bodies and finally kept only my M3. The logical step seemed to be the M8 but I personally feel it is just too "young", I dont like to accept the IR and other minor issues on such expensive camera.
I plan to enjoy my RD-1 for ¿two? years till a new revised digital M appears. Then I will probably get one.
indianavince
Member
You are off subject. I shoot DSLR (Fuji) and Leaf with Hassey.
I like Epson... simply because I could not tollerate a $4500 M8 needing serivce that takes more than 10 days to accomplish... heck I would expect a free replacement if the camera fails in the first 6 months.
I like Epson... simply because I could not tollerate a $4500 M8 needing serivce that takes more than 10 days to accomplish... heck I would expect a free replacement if the camera fails in the first 6 months.
georgef
Well-known
I do NOT own an M8, but do an RD1. I came to some money a while back that would have afforded me either, and I ended choosing the RD1. Not from IQ perspective, not from a line legacy one either (there is none there ).
But I traded my 1D series CANON, my 5D and all my really good L glass for the change in system simply because, well I was very bored with my SLRs.
I know this may be a bit out-of-focus as a start to this post, but I am comming to the point, bear with me...
I ended up with the RD1 becasuse to me, it is an analog camera with a computer in it! I gave up film a long time ago and will not really ever get back to it. But the RD1 really, is a "real" camera in the sense of the photographer's handling of it. It has slowed my shooting down to my "quality" speed from my "quantity" speed.
I did not go with the M8 because after trying it out at a local store here a few times, it allways felt like a computer that takes pictures.
Please, do not quote me and respond with "..its a real LEICA, it feels like a real LEICA etc...". I believe you.
Just for me, the RD1 both design-wise and handling wise hit the mark!
...and my thumb never felt more at home! It is now getting back to its original shape after years of DSLR atrophy...
I think photography is about personal comfort levels, and to that there are RD1 folks and there are M8 folks and there are both. None is wrong or right. Don't get caught in the spec bean-counting game! I would only own a HOLGA if it put a smile on my face everytime I used it.
Peace!
).But I traded my 1D series CANON, my 5D and all my really good L glass for the change in system simply because, well I was very bored with my SLRs.
I know this may be a bit out-of-focus as a start to this post, but I am comming to the point, bear with me...
I ended up with the RD1 becasuse to me, it is an analog camera with a computer in it! I gave up film a long time ago and will not really ever get back to it. But the RD1 really, is a "real" camera in the sense of the photographer's handling of it. It has slowed my shooting down to my "quality" speed from my "quantity" speed.
I did not go with the M8 because after trying it out at a local store here a few times, it allways felt like a computer that takes pictures.
Please, do not quote me and respond with "..its a real LEICA, it feels like a real LEICA etc...". I believe you.
Just for me, the RD1 both design-wise and handling wise hit the mark!
...and my thumb never felt more at home! It is now getting back to its original shape after years of DSLR atrophy...
I think photography is about personal comfort levels, and to that there are RD1 folks and there are M8 folks and there are both. None is wrong or right. Don't get caught in the spec bean-counting game! I would only own a HOLGA if it put a smile on my face everytime I used it.
Peace!