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
Surely any decision to buy should be based on the merits, if any, of this new camera and its corresponding value for money.
 
Will said:
Jaapv,

You don't have to defend your choice, the only person you need to justify the purchase is yourself.
Will
Click to expand...

I showed this post to my wife. She didn't agree....
violent-smiley-031.gif
 
It will be a good seller. There is a large segment of the analog rangefinder popoulation -- albeit possibly a minority -- who have been waiting for this camera. They will definately sell more then 10,000 units for the first year or so.

I'm not interested, however, because I'm satisfied with film and like the mechanical nature of Leica Ms. I also don't want to go out and purchase a 28mm lens to account for the 1.33 crop factor. I can see myself only making the digital plunge if film or good processing disappear. Until then my inclination is to stick with what I have.
 
Surely film is much more fun than digital, and there is no need to buy any new wide angle lenses to compensate for the crop factor that this camera is said to still use.
 
jaapv said:
General disclaimer:This post is based on a generalisation and was not written with any specific member, real or imagined, in mind.
It seems to me that there is an increasing number of posts rationalising decisions made with any argument imaginable, spurious or not. In addition it seems other members are challenged to justify choices they made. Unfortunately I bait easily, so I decided to defend my choice for the M8 -once-
*start of r(f)ant*
When Leica first announced their intention to build a digital M I swung between:"Why?, the M is perfect as it is"and "I want it now!". So I decided to analyse my photographic hobby.
I have been taking photo's for 53 years now. Starting with a 6x9 box camera,I progressed through a succession of Agfa Click's and Clack's to my fathers Agfa Silette. The first real camera I bought was an Exacta SLR, followed by an Olympus OM1 set. Then I bought a used M3 and since then I was never without a rangefinder: M4,M6,M6TTL despite occasional digressions to midformat photography.I even shot a Safari using a Mamiya 645 and 500 mm & 1.4xconv. Beside that I shot SLR's, Leica R3,R4,R5,R7, mainly for wildlife.
Then digital arrived and I traded my Leica R system for a Canon 10D and was very happy with the result until a local camera shopowner (he knew what he was doing ;)) gave me a Digilux2 "to try out". The Canon is relegated to photography needed for my work and occasional wildlife and I only use the Digilux2 and M6TTL.
So I found four things:
1.It seems that my whole photographic progression has been a quest for excellence (at any rate of equipment).
2.I seem to be irrevocably wedded to the Leica M system for over 30 years.
3.I found I was delighted to regain my freedom to "darkroom" my colour photography again when digital arrived, and I digital gave me back my inspiration, but I hate scanning. So I will have to go digital for 90%.
4. For me current digital quality is as good or better than film
This can only lead to the conclusion that the M8 is just right for me.
Now the main purpose of this post is to explain that it is utterly useless to try and tell me that I should not buy the M8 because
a. It will be worth only 10$ one week after I purchase it.
b. Leica will introduce a "full frame" M9 within three months and if not Leica it will be Suzuki.
c. Digital is horrible and will never replace the Daguerrotype.
d. The 250 MP 12000 ISO sensor is just around the corner.
e. This camera is overpriced by 900%.
as all these considerations are as irrelevant to me as my reasons are irrelevant to anybody else.
*end of r(f)ant*
And I wish everybody happy shooting with the camera of his/her choice! :) :)
Click to expand...

My 'digital M' is a Panny DMC-LC1. I know what you are saying about the D2. Great color.

I will not be buying the M8.
 
Will said:
Did you budget-in a diamond necklace with your M8 purchase?





Will
Click to expand...
New Suzuki Swift I fear....But she has really used up the Alto she has now. Like I did my M6TTL :D
 
jaapv said:
New Suzuki Swift I fear....But she has really used up the Alto she has now. Like I did my M6TTL :D
Click to expand...

you win some, you lose some...

but that's getting out of proportion...
 
JohanV said:
I just found a Belgian website where it's advertised at €3.900. No pics yet, but they are taking orders

http://www.fotorembrandt.be/content/4513/site/?id=3756

sorry, it's in Dutch...
Click to expand...

That would be 3900 Euro including VAT!?! That is a lot better than I expected. It's only 400 Euro more than the analog leicas! Not that I have this kind of cash in my pocket, but the outlook on buying one someday has much improved.

Wim
 
mac_wt said:
That would be 3900 Euro including VAT!?! That is a lot better than I expected. It's only 400 Euro more than the analog leicas! Not that I have this kind of cash in my pocket, but the outlook on buying one someday has much improved.

Wim
Click to expand...

I suppose it is inclusive of VAT, as the M7 is priced at €3.495 which is the inclusive price iirc.
 
I think it's curious that a Belgian company can be offering a camera for sale which hasn't been launched yet and for which only the most tentative pricing is available, US $4995 + tax. By my reckoning, that puts it at €3995 + tax, depending on the exchange rate you choose. Or £2750 + tax.

Seems to me their offer price is based on this simple conversion. Whether they will honour pre-orders at that price remains to be seen.
 
dexdog said:
Sometimes bigger is better. I can't imagine anyone arguing in favor of a camera that used APS-sized film. I would much rather spend 3K on a Canon 5D than 5K on a Leica digital.
Click to expand...

I am all for full frame: 8"x10" negs that is. Leica's first mistake was to introduce that 35mm film; they should have stuck to glass plates and sheet film. Real photographers use real cameras: full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.
 
petermcwerner said:
full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.
Click to expand...
Perhaps a forum dedicated to rangefinders mostly dedicated to a format with no practical use, is...what then?
 
I'm more likely to stay with film in the RF world, and maybe buy a D200 when some money comes around. The only reason I'd opt for digital over film would be for a very VERY fast, powerful camera for doing things like sports and internet marketing photography where image quality is second in value to efficiency.

I played with a D200 a couple days ago. What a nice camera. Never though I'd say that.

I'll never be leaving film behind when it matters, though. Today, I scanned a panoramic crop out of the center of one of my 645 frames. I have this 279 MB file now. 47MP of totally crisp image area (velvia scanned at 4800dpi on the Multi Pro in 35mm multi format mode). If I were using the whole 645 frame, that would come out to about 90MP. And no softness at 100%.
 

Attachments

  • full.jpg
    full.jpg
    210.9 KB · Views: 0
  • crop.jpg
    crop.jpg
    201.8 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
petermcwerner said:
I am all for full frame: 8"x10" negs that is. Leica's first mistake was to introduce that 35mm film; they should have stuck to glass plates and sheet film. Real photographers use real cameras: full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.
Click to expand...

I hope you are joking. I can't believe your not. I agree that 10x 8 large negs are wonderful. But you have to agree that some of the greatest images shot, and for that matter probably the majority have been shot on 35mm film. I had a epithany a few years back and realised that the actual camera and format wasn't really that important. It was the eye of the photographer and their personal vision.
 
Talent is important when capturing the image.

Pixel or grain peeping is relevant come printing time - to a degree. It's like getting dressed up for a date or bathing before an interview - you need to do it because presentation DOES matter, regardless of the content.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom