Have an M8? Have it on Order? Played with one?

[MP Guy]

Well,

If you are lucky to have an M8 or have played with one I would like to hear your thoughts on what could have been done better. This is not a thread for complaints but rather ideas. We are all so excited with the new product that we may fail to see what could be improved.

Thats all 🙂

 

[jaapv]

I would have liked the small LCD to show the ISO as well....

 

[BJ Bignell]

The VF was incredibly clear, and the shutter speed indicator in the VF was very easy to read, even with glasses on. The camera firmware froze up while scrolling through images using the arrow buttons; this is supposed to be fixed in the release firmware. Otherwise, it felt as solid as an M3, or better. I can't say it was silky-smooth, though, as it has no gears!

 

[Ben Z]

or have played with one I would like to hear your thoughts on what could have been done better.

1. A few more megapixels would've been nice, but not as essential as a full-frrame sensor. The crop factor is livable (I live with a 20D which is worse) but annoying. If nobody had a FF it would be different, but Canon does and it works really well. Yes it's a different horse being an SLR and there are special issues with the rangefinder lenses. But the M8 also costs twice as much as the 5D.

2. I can't comment on the noise at higher ISOs because I haven't checked for myself, but given the M Leica's pedigree as a low-light camera, I would have hoped it would be an industry leader in that respect.

3. A built-in adjustment for the eyepiece diopter would've seemed like a reasonable feature to expect in a $5000 camera.

4. Some way other than scrolling through a menu to change the ISO. On my 20D I have the LCD set to "off" (no review flashing under my eye) except when making the very occasional change to some parameter.

5. On the same note I would've liked to see some kind of opaque cover for the LCD, matching the vulcanite.

6. On that note, I was never thrilled with the slippery cover texture on my MP and wish the M8 had the nubbier cover from the M7.

7. A thumb rest where the advance lever used to be, as an aid to one-handed shooting.

8. Some way to fit AA batteries, even if it's an add-on to the bottom plate. The fact is I don't use my cameras much in-between trips but once in a while I want to grab it and go and don't have time to charge up a battery. It's also nice to know if you get caught short with all your spare batts depleted, you could grab a set of AA's from any local store and keep shooting at least until you could get to a plug for charging.

9. I don't see why they couldn't have kept a standard flash socket somewhere, even if not where it is traditionally on an M Leica. No longer being able to use a flash along with a clip-on viewfinder seems like an unncessary downgrade, like the botched redesign of the eyepiece on the MP.

 

[erikhaugsby]

I did post this earlier as a seperate entity. Regardless, I feel as if it fits well into this thread.

As I only have an M2 to compare, size and heft comparisons might vary for those of you who have M6s or 7s.

The body is noticeably thicker, and feels strange on first pick-up, but I quickly got used to the size and it felt just at home very soon after I started shooting. It feels extremely solid and robust, though it has very little mass. It is well balanced with the current model 35 'lux ASPH.

The VF is of a small magnification (.68x), and is impossible to use with both eyes open. The RF patch seems shorter, but longer, than the one in my M2. The VF is very very bright, and has the newer Ms blueish tint. The shutter speed display in the VF, present only for AE is very annoying as the speed has a bad habit of bouncing around sparatically and is displayed in decimal form (accurate to the hundreths), e.g. 1.53 seconds.

The shutter is ridiculously loud. I'm going to compare the sound effect (as opposed to the actual sound pattern itself) to a DSLR with the mirror slap, though there is an (obviously) difference in the actual sound. It seems to take an extremely long time between exposures, as the shutter needs to reset for the next shot; this is where the noise factor of the moving steel blades really became unbearable. There seemed to be no variation in sound between 1/60th second and the top speed of 1/8000th second. I would hesitate to use it in any form of wedding or like ceremony based solely on the shutter noise.

The LCD displayed images with an extremely blue tint. NB: I went through all the White Balance presets, none of them seemed to rectify the situation; I, however, did not get to play around with manually setting the Kelvin temperatures.

The ISO range is from 160-2500, which the Leica rep claimed was an "extremely useful range, (ISO) 2500 is equally useful for avaliable light shots." I'm not completely sold on the narrowness of the range (give me 125, 400, and 3200 any day) and the minimal number of odd-increment steps inbetween (160, 320, 640, 1200, 2500). I was told that this is the final production ISO range for the M8, though that is not to say that the M9, M10, etc. will not have a further expansion.

 

[mad_boy]

I have only seen pictures so far, so these coments are not based on experience.

I would value a version without the LCD screen.
in stead a traditional ISO dial on the back.
With old time M's there was no 'chimping' either.

It would be cheaper, lighter, thinner, more sturdy since screens break.
If I would want to see the pics I'd put the sd-card into my PDA.

I also would like a larger time wheel that comes to the front of the camera,
such that it can be rotated easier with the finger tip.

And as suggested before, a AA extended battery pack bottom plate replacement would be nice as well.

Last but not least a half resolution low light feature.
From what I understood, in all camera's, when the ISO value is changed, the signal from each pixel gets magnified, which results in the associated noise.
One coud as well go from 10 Mpics to 2,5 Mpics (still enough for a reasonable print) and use the collected (added) signal from 4 adjecent pixels. This would effectively quatriple the iso value (i.e. from 2500 to 10000) without adding more noise. Nice.....

mad_boy.

 

[jaapv]

The RF patch seems shorter, but longer, than the one in my M2

😕 Could you care to elaborate, please This one I don't get.

The shutter is ridiculously loud. I'm going to compare the sound effect (as opposed to the actual sound pattern itself) to a DSLR with the mirror slap, though there is an (obviously) difference in the actual sound. It seems to take an extremely long time between exposures, as the shutter needs to reset for the next shot; this is where the noise factor of the moving steel blades really became unbearable. There seemed to be no variation in sound between 1/60th second and the top speed of 1/8000th second. I would hesitate to use it in any form of wedding or like ceremony based solely on the shutter noise.

This is not the way I experienced it, nor any other person that handled the camera. Most came to " about the same level but longer than the M6" Maybe you picked up a maladjusted pre-production camera.

give me 125, 400, and 3200 any day

Digital sensors react differently than film The actual range is 200 through 3200.

and the minimal number of odd-increment steps inbetween

You'll be hard put to differentiate 1/3 stop increments on film. Why would you want to on digital, where, when shooting raw, there is plenty of fine-tuning in post-processing?

And as suggested before, a AA extended battery pack bottom plate replacement would be nice as well

.


I'm sure somebody, maybe even Leica, will work out this accesory in due course.

 

[DaveSee]

[snipped]
7. A thumb rest where the advance lever used to be, as an aid to one-handed shooting.

I have not held an M8, but the film/shutter advance lever gets a lot of use on my Ms... and I do a lot of one hand shooting (for some reason).

rgds,
Dave

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

I did handle the M8, and I think that a lot of the "thoughts" on other threads about what could have been better on the M8 have been, up to date, more whinning than not. Yet, there is some concensus about which ones they could have thought it thoroughly much better:

1) The lack of rewind lever. They could have made this available, and still made it an option to use it to activate the electronic recocking of the shutter, or not (in which case the lever would be unmovable). Yet, you get used to this rather quickly.

2) The (audible) noise. Clearly not the shutter, but the recocking. Why, oh why not make it mechanical? Why? I thought they had the technology licked; a matter of adopting it, while perhaps "difficult", Leica engineers are known for ingenuity. It still is far better than virtually all SLRs I've ever handled. Close call with the Leicaflex SL (the one I had was very quiet).

3) Crop factor. At 1.33x, it's passable. But full-frame would certainly have been a blow-out. Unfortunately, this is also not an issue for me, for I've been used to the miserable 1.6x crop factor for years, but I am not taking that particular crop factor any more, not for new "serious" gear. No way.

4) ISO in an always-available LCD. 'nuff said

Everything else is great and/or cosmetic.

 

[Trius]

You'll be hard put to differentiate 1/3 stop increments on film. Why would you want to on digital, where, when shooting raw, there is plenty of fine-tuning in post-processing?


.


I'm sure somebody, maybe even Leica, will work out this accesory in due course.

Not to go OT, but when shooting chromes I can differentiate 1/3 stop differences, at least side-by-side. A 1/3 stop difference might not disqualify an exposure unless of course the shot it is at the edge of acceptability already. But 1/2 stop increments is probably sufficient for digital/raw.

 

[jano]

I played with it for about 10 minutes like the day the NDA was released. The chromatic aberration when shooting the lux 50 wide open was pretty severe. Hopefully they "fixed" that (if it can be?). Would be nice to see a button for changing iso, instead of through the menu. And maybe a little skinnier 🙂 I walked away wanting the MP right next to it 😱

 

[JohnL]

(snip) ...
You'll be hard put to differentiate 1/3 stop increments on film. Why would you want to on digital, where, when shooting raw, there is plenty of fine-tuning in post-processing?

The Canon 10D I used to have had full-stop ISO increments. The 5D I have now has 1/3 stop increments. I virtually never use them. You can easily tune the exposure in 1/3 increments using aperture and shutter speed the way we always did. Anyway, I have heard (but cannot vouch for it), that the camera internally uses EC for the 1/3 stop ISO increments. In other words, if you set an intermediate ISO value, you get the same noise as you would at the next higher full stop. Not a big issue since the noise on the 5D is the lowest in the business, but it does mean (if true) that the intermediate stops are "faked".

 

[varjag]

I only handled one for some 15-20 minutes, so only superficial comments.

I can't say M8 is loud. I held it side to side with MP and the volume is about equal. Both are louder than my old beaten Contax.

As already mentioned, making a separate ISO dial could've been a nice touch. Since the rewind knob is gone it could be an ideal place for ISO selector. Sure you can't change ISO on the run in film Ms, but M8 is no film camera - you couldn't chimp with film either. Which brings me to the 2nd point, display and controls.

Are they really a must? I know a number of R-D1 owners here have a habit of shooting with LCD closed, so it can be done with digital just as well as with slide. M8 is targeted at a confident user, it has no program mode anyway. Get rid of LCD and buttons on the back, and implement a few essential settings as simple switches under baseplate. It would make camera more durable, elegant, slimmer, lighter and a tad cheaper at that. LCD with controls for those who need it could be purchased separately, mounted on a bracket or hooked down from accessory shoe, and attached via USB jack.

Also, something to ensure a better grip could be nice too.