How many of you will buy the M8 or Digital M

[thurows]

Can I change my vote what with all the problems that surfaced?

 

[sf]

I can honestly say that now I have an educated decision on this. I am certainly NOT going to buy it. I have read enough and seen enough to deter me, and today I went down to the local expensive camera store and played with theirs. It doesn't feel like I thought it would. It is a nice camera in some ways, but it lacked something.

 

[nrb]

Yes! Among other things, it lacks a full frame sensor to be able to face Canon's better endowed competitors...

 

[climbing_vine]

To you. Others may have a different judgment on "better". Care to define "better"?

Sorry, I shouldn't have said "better" as that goes back to the subjective arena. I should have said: "more accurate". Those who maintain til the end of the world that vinyl is more faithful, has more range, etc, often cannot even tell you which is which on hearing alone.

 

[fgianni]

My intention was originally to run my RD-1 to the ground, and as soon as it failed (given the lack of support I guess it will be irrepairable) to get the M8, but given the latest news, I guess I'll end up using RF only with film, and put my digital money on the 5D or its successor, really $5000 for a camera with such issues is simply not acceptable to me.

 

[fgianni]

Actually there is one think Leitz can do to make me buy the camera:

Get rid of the CFA in front of the sensor, and adjust the firmware to output 16bit monochrome (maybe add options for sepia, duotone or things like that, but it's not essential), then I'll be orderig mine straight away!

 

[Joe Mondello]

Had one (wasn't a great example) returned it but am now considering it again.

 

[Ronald M]

No way. I can buy film for the rest of my life for that money.

Wish they made the equivalent of a Nikon D200 or Canon 30D for my R lenses. They will go way overboard and come up with something 15% superior, but will cost 10x as much.

Their arguement always was a lesser camera would ruin their reputation. But they have been rebadging Japanese stuff for years now.

I bought a Nikon D200 last week. It is a lovely camera.

Attaching a portrait of my grandaughter on the Nikon, one light shot

 

[jaapv]

Wish they made the equivalent of a Nikon D200 or Canon 30D for my R lenses. They will go way overboard and come up with something 15% superior, but will cost 10x as much.

The Digilux 3 takes R lenses, so do all Canon EOS mount cameras.

 

[dee]

i may buy an M8 ... but am in a wierd space - even weirder than the usual Asdee dee's location !

Almost no income or prospects ... but a legacy which will allow about enough for an M8 , maybe a couple of lenses and an adaptor for my screw thread russian lenses .
it makes no sense at all , but provided that i have a new i-mac as well - I can keep on taking pics and won't have to worry about the expense of developing .

Of course , a budget SLR , would do all that i really demand ... but a Leica is just a dream - glitches or not !
I am not too bothered by obsolescence - my Canon G2 digibox creates fine images within it's modest abilities , and the M8 would , hopefully be a companion for life , not just for a year or two .
dee

 

[nrb]

I may buy an M8 when its price drops to normal. In the meantime I'll be using my M2 and R2 with film, or my 5D, XT and e20 as digital cameras.

 

[shadowfox]

I voted "Not interested" because I've seen an M3 or M2, it can be a timeless treasure that I'll be happy to pass on to my daughter.

There's no way I'm going to pass on a computer masquerading as a camera 50 years from now (what's the likelyhood that it's still working?).

 

[migtex]

wait! I'll wait some more years until I can get the RD-1s very old, get and adapter and use my SC nikon mount lens.... or the M8 get's to 1000 bucks and use my SC nikon mount lens with an adapter.. or Nikon makes one Digi RF and I can use my SC nikon lens (with or without adapter) ....... now, the Sigma DP-1 looks very very ...charming?!

 

[rsl]

I voted "Not interested" because I've seen an M3 or M2, it can be a timeless treasure that I'll be happy to pass on to my daughter.

There's no way I'm going to pass on a computer masquerading as a camera 50 years from now (what's the likelyhood that it's still working?).

50 years from now, what's the likelihood your daughter will be able to buy film?

 

[NickTrop]

Never.

Might irritate a few folks here but this is my straight up opinion. I can't, for the life of me, see putting Leica glass on a sensor, especially if it's under 12 megapixels. Rangefinders are for film. They're for shooting 35 b&w (mostly), developing your own (or have a lab make your proofs). making contact prints, enlarging the keepers, old school.

I could envision the engineers at Leica scratching their heads - if not resisting outright, the concept of a digital rangefinder like a chef at a high-end restaurant sickened by some ignorant customer putting A-1 steak sauce on a fine kobe steak. I agree with the chef. If you want to put A-1 steak sauce on a kobe steak, you clearly don't appreciate what you have before you, and should be eating the shoe leather $8.99 New York strip blue plate special at the diner down the road. But if you've got the cash to pay for it... g'head knock yourself out. We'll happily take your money (even if we're laughing or cringing at you back in the kitchen...)

Same applies to slapping Leica glass on a digital Leica body.

 

[cmogi10]

When I can afford it...

so never.

 

[jaapv]

Never.

Might irritate a few folks here but this is my straight up opinion. I can't, for the life of me, see putting Leica glass on a sensor, especially if it's under 12 megapixels. Rangefinders are for film. They're for shooting 35 b&w (mostly), developing your own (or have a lab make your proofs). making contact prints, enlarging the keepers, old school.

I could envision the engineers at Leica scratching their heads - if not resisting outright, the concept of a digital rangefinder like a chef at a high-end restaurant sickened by some ignorant customer putting A-1 steak sauce on a fine kobe steak. I agree with the chef. If you want to put A-1 steak sauce on a kobe steak, you clearly don't appreciate what you have before you, and should be eating the shoe leather $8.99 New York strip blue plate special at the diner down the road. But if you've got the cash to pay for it... g'head knock yourself out. We'll happily take your money (even if we're laughing or cringing at you back in the kitchen...)

Same applies to slapping Leica glass on a digital Leica body.

I fear you have fallen into the magapixel trap. The M8 outresolves any 135 film ever made. The diffraction limit of the sensor is exactly matched to the current crop of apo and asph lenses. " Lesser " lenses fall short of the resolution rendered by the sensor. My 60x40 prints compete with mid-format and are actually better. I respect any decision to stay with film, but this argument is totally beside reality. this is the camera that has finished off 135 film, I fear - with great sadness as a film lover....

 

[rsl]

I fear you have fallen into the magapixel trap. The M8 outresolves any 135 film ever made. The diffraction limit of the sensor is exactly matched to the current crop of apo and asph lenses. " Lesser " lenses fall short of the resolution rendered by the sensor. My 60x40 prints compete with mid-format and are actually better. I respect any decision to stay with film, but this argument is totally beside reality. this is the camera that has finished off 135 film, I fear - with great sadness as a film lover....

Jaap, The M8 certainly delivered the coup de grace, but the first two cameras to blow past film resolution were the Canon 1Ds Mk II and the D2X. Yes, the megapixel war is over except for those, like Japanese soldiers cut off on Pacific islands after WWII, who haven't gotten the word.

 

[Joe Mondello]

Had one (wasn't a great example) returned it but am now considering it again.

And indeed I now have a fine example which focuses correctly and looks like it will serve me well. Anxious to get out and shoot with it this week.

I was tempted to try a film Leica again, but realized that after a dozen years of digital workflow, the idea of going back simply doesn't tempt me a bit really.

To say the M8 is "a computer masquerading as a camera" is to never have used one! But that's JMO of course.

 

[NickTrop]

I fear you have fallen into the magapixel trap. The M8 outresolves any 135 film ever made. The diffraction limit of the sensor is exactly matched to the current crop of apo and asph lenses. " Lesser " lenses fall short of the resolution rendered by the sensor. My 60x40 prints compete with mid-format and are actually better. I respect any decision to stay with film, but this argument is totally beside reality. this is the camera that has finished off 135 film, I fear - with great sadness as a film lover....

Cool. A $5000 digital rangefinder body that "possibly" outresolves my 30 year old $40 Yashica GSN 35mm film rangefinder evident on a "60x40" print. Ain't technology grand? All that and a built-in undocumented "easter egg" - a random infrared "feature" - and you don't even need to run out and buy a Wratten 87! PM me when Leica makes a digital that out-resolves my $100 Iskra folder film camera, please.

$5000 digital body... Come again with who's fallen into the "megapixel trap"?

PS/Edit: Response all in fun.