How many of you will buy the M8 or Digital M

How many of you will buy the M8 or Digital M

  • I have my unit pre-ordered already.

    Votes: 122 15.1%

  • Need more cash

    Votes: 141 17.5%

  • Will buy it for sure sooner or later

    Votes: 234 29.0%

  • Not interested or have no plans to get one.

    Votes: 311 38.5%
  • Total voters
    808
Anticipated delay ?

Anticipated delay ?

Hello,
This is my first post in this very informative and lively Forum. Congratulations Jorge and all those who make it so interesting. I was told by a Leica dealer that there would be a delay in shipping the M8 because of the filmware. Has anyone heard this ?
Roger
 
I have owned Niikon and Canon and I would NEVER buy the "beta" cameras that they release when they are first shipped, but I am glad that Leica is taking the time to tweak things BEFORE the camera goes out. I'm fairly certain that the camera when released will be nearly 100% and I'm firmly in line for one out of the the first production run. I hope the numbers released can fill my order.
 
Leica M8 body Price in CH

Leica M8 body Price in CH

Body list price in Switzerland will be : 6700 CHF with taxes = 6227 CHF without taxes = 3933 euros = 4994 $
 
Absolutely have no any interest in digital. I am shooting mostly b&w and some slide (only with my Contax 645). I have Konica Hexar AF, but planning to buy M7 with a couple of lenses.

regards,
Alex
 
A

A

Problem : b&w + slide photos become more and more expensive, especially in medium and large format photography, especially if you shoot a lot. Films get more and more expensive, chemical products and papers the same. Digital is no shooting cost, and much more efficient in processing speed, with now more than wonderful results in terms of image quality.
 
I've been watching the poll graph above, and have noticed the % of those "not interested" is gradually decreasing. It had been nearly 45% earlier, now down to 41.7%. And as we get closer to release date, the numbers of those announcing their pre-order is growing fastest, now at 13.4%!
 
Dougg said:
I've been watching the poll graph above, and have noticed the % of those "not interested" is gradually decreasing. It had been nearly 45% earlier, now down to 41.7%. And as we get closer to release date, the numbers of those announcing their pre-order is growing fastest, now at 13.4%!
Click to expand...

A problem with the poll is you can't change your mind. I already voted that I was interested but since then have pre-ordered. But I am still in the wrong bar graph


Rex
 
I cast my vote a while back for "Not Interested" but since then I have asked some questions of Tony Rose about the camera. Hopefully he will have some information for me that I will like. If that is the case then I will buy one. If not then the MP3 kit looks like it needs some love.
 
Well, first post here, and I haven't read all the thread (not that much time!) but since it's a poll...


I'm on the waiting list for an M8 and have put some money down already. I don't think I've ever been as excited by a camera as this one.

The biggest thing for me will be to see high ISO files. If they're as good as Leica is claiming, they will have a winner on their hands.

Why? Well, I own a Canon 1ds2 and a Leica R9 / DMR. The Canon is rock solid, for sure and a truly wonderful camera, but it's being sold. I will miss full-frame, yes, but for now that's not as important to me as the output.

The DMR and the 16bit sensor just makes prints I like better, without nearly as much PS work. It's that simple. Yes, I know how to tweak the 1 series output, but trust me, the DMR files end up being better prints. (And no, you *can't* make a 50 1.4 Canon lens look like a 50 1.4 Summilux in Photoshop. Sorry. Just shoot somebody's face who's strongly backlit, and you'll see exactly what I mean.)

So the DMR wins, and I expect the M8 to be even betteer. Well, except for noise... You need to nail the exposure with the DMR; it's not as forgiving as the Canon in terms of exposure--not at all. And noise plays a big role in that. The Canon is wonderfully noiseless when the DMR gives out entirely.

So if the M8--optimised for C1, ISO 2500, M glass--delivers on the image quality at high speed, I think it will be a relatively big hit for Leica. I like SLRs, but as a pro I also need a rangefinder: something small and really unobtrusive and uncompromising in terms of quality.

BTW--I just read here that someone thinks the DOF scale on Leica lenses is all wrong for digital? Well, it is, but on the newer lenses, anyway, the smaller sensor actually increases the effective DOF, so when you're street shooting, this is mostly a plus, not a minus.

Of course, now I only need to see what Canon announces at Photokina.
 
This is not an issue. Depth of field depends only on focal length and aperture. For the same focal length lens (for example, a 35 cron) the depth of field will be identical regardless of whether it is shooting light on to a full frame piece of film or a small digital sensor. So the scale on the lens will be correct for both an M8 and an M3.

Jamie Roberts said:
BTW--I just read here that someone thinks the DOF scale on Leica lenses is all wrong for digital? Well, it is, but on the newer lenses, anyway, the smaller sensor actually increases the effective DOF, so when you're street shooting, this is mostly a plus, not a minus.

Of course, now I only need to see what Canon announces at Photokina.
Click to expand...
 
With the smaller sensor you would need to step back farther from the subject to get the same amount into your frame as you would with 24x36 sensor. Greater distance from the subject will give you greater depth of field which will be accurately reflected in the lens scale.
 
HAnkg said:
With the smaller sensor you would need to step back farther from the subject to get the same amount into your frame as you would with 24x36 sensor. Greater distance from the subject will give you greater depth of field which will be accurately reflected in the lens scale.
Click to expand...

Stepping back is only one of your choices especially if your back is against the wall. Most people would use a shorter focal length lens to get the same equivelent field of view. So the DOF actually increases.

Rex
 
You are absolutely right about the fact that using a shorter focal length lens to give the same angle of view will result in increased depth of field. I was only addressing my remark to the depth of field markings on the lens barrel of a given focal length. A given focal length lens at the same aperture will give the same depth of field regardless of sensor size (or film size, as the case may be)

rvaubel said:
Stepping back is only one of your choices especially if your back is against the wall. Most people would use a shorter focal length lens to get the same equivelent field of view. So the DOF actually increases.

Rex
Click to expand...
 
rvaubel said:
Stepping back is only one of your choices especially if your back is against the wall. Most people would use a shorter focal length lens to get the same equivelent field of view. So the DOF actually increases.

Rex
Click to expand...

But with a 1.33 sensor not too much, in fact just over 1/3 of a stop.

ClayH said:
You are absolutely right about the fact that using a shorter focal length lens to give the same angle of view will result in increased depth of field. I was only addressing my remark to the depth of field markings on the lens barrel of a given focal length. A given focal length lens at the same aperture will give the same depth of field regardless of sensor size (or film size, as the case may be)
Click to expand...

Not quite. The final enlargement must be larger, hence a smaller COC hence a smaller DOF.
 
Last edited:
someone here said "2max years the specs will be obselete". Can someone explain this, does the paper the specs are written on fade or is printing on 8" x 10 '' paper no longer the same size and therefore cannot be done anymore? My Epson P700 still works and I can still print a 6x4 from it and that digital is about 10 years old now.
 
Jamie Roberts said:
Well, first post here, and I haven't read all the thread (not that much time!) but since it's a poll...


I'm on the waiting list for an M8 and have put some money down already. I don't think I've ever been as excited by a camera as this one.

The biggest thing for me will be to see high ISO files. If they're as good as Leica is claiming, they will have a winner on their hands.

Why? Well, I own a Canon 1ds2 and a Leica R9 / DMR. The Canon is rock solid, for sure and a truly wonderful camera, but it's being sold. I will miss full-frame, yes, but for now that's not as important to me as the output.

The DMR and the 16bit sensor just makes prints I like better, without nearly as much PS work. It's that simple. Yes, I know how to tweak the 1 series output, but trust me, the DMR files end up being better prints. (And no, you *can't* make a 50 1.4 Canon lens look like a 50 1.4 Summilux in Photoshop. Sorry. Just shoot somebody's face who's strongly backlit, and you'll see exactly what I mean.)

So the DMR wins, and I expect the M8 to be even betteer. Well, except for noise... You need to nail the exposure with the DMR; it's not as forgiving as the Canon in terms of exposure--not at all. And noise plays a big role in that. The Canon is wonderfully noiseless when the DMR gives out entirely.

So if the M8--optimised for C1, ISO 2500, M glass--delivers on the image quality at high speed, I think it will be a relatively big hit for Leica. I like SLRs, but as a pro I also need a rangefinder: something small and really unobtrusive and uncompromising in terms of quality.

BTW--I just read here that someone thinks the DOF scale on Leica lenses is all wrong for digital? Well, it is, but on the newer lenses, anyway, the smaller sensor actually increases the effective DOF, so when you're street shooting, this is mostly a plus, not a minus.

Of course, now I only need to see what Canon announces at Photokina.
Click to expand...

I've just looked at your website, Jamie. Very,very impressive. Just the kind of pro I'd expect to see reappearing now - with a Leica in his hands. welcome.
 
RHohne said:
someone here said "2max years the specs will be obselete". Can someone explain this, does the paper the specs are written on fade or is printing on 8" x 10 '' paper no longer the same size and therefore cannot be done anymore? My Epson P700 still works and I can still print a 6x4 from it and that digital is about 10 years old now.
Click to expand...
Hi Robert -- Welcome to RFF! As to the question, it all depends on what "obsolete" means. :) AFAIK, obsolete does not mean or imply "unusable," just outdated. Some say that every technological product is obsolete upon introduction to the market, because more advanced products are already being prepared to replace or enhance them. In that sense, I think, obsolete becomes a relatively meaningless term. Certainly specs become obsolete quickly as new specs are dreamed up. I'd prefer to consider that it means that the more advanced product is now on the market. So the "2 years max" could be a guess that within 2 years a more advanced/improved product will appear. How long has the Epson R-D1 been available; will it be "obsolete" upon the availability of the M8?
 
thanks for the welcome Doug. I own and use 2 rangefinders and even so they are 20 and 30 years old and have specs that are obsolete, they still let me create photos I enjoy looking at, that is to say, they are still within my specs for creating photos and probably always will be.
 
Last edited:
I'm waiting for Ken Rockwell's review. When he says it's a better camera than the Mamiya 6, I'll start saving...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom