Peter Klein
Well-known
fgianni said:
Last October at the LHSA meeting in San Francisco, Stephan Daniels of Leica spoke to us about the digital M. He asked us how many of us might buy a B&W-only digital M if Leica made one. (This would indicate that they're at least thinking about it.) Quite a few of us raised our hands.
There would indeed be significantly more sensitivity, and a bit more resolution. Of course, "might buy" is somewhat distant from "will buy," but there is interest.
--Peter
nrb
Nuno Borges
IMHO full frame just describes a sensor that will allow 35 mm lenses to behave like 35 mm lenses, the exact way they were designed to behave, and not produce irritating cropples.jaapv said:
jdos2
Well-known
Claro, esta... Oops!nrb said:
Of course, senhor, you are right. There are lots of folks fighting the "Full Frame Battle," right now, trying to distort the criticism of sensors smaller than the 135 film the sensors themselves have been used to replace. Distortion of the argument is easier than accepting the criticism that smaller-than-135-sized sensors force folks to buy new lenses if they want to take pictures with similar perspectives (and depth of field) to what they were used.
Ah, I see Leica is releasing a new wide angle lens for this camera. Wonder if it'll be as cheap as their 21mm? Or if their 35mm Summicron (ASPH) will be as cheap as their 50mm Summicron to make up for their lack of "standard lens" in the smaller sensor?
I'm guessing that the manufacturers are just tired of normal/wide angle photography and want us to start using the easier-to-make longer formerly "standard" lenses as now the "normal" lenses, forcing us to have a tighter perspective.
Have a Pasteis de Nata for me, please, and a cup of "Chave d'Ouro" (Uma bica!), and take a nice picture of bronze Fernando Pessoa (Rua Garret). I miss Lisbon so.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Nobody is forcing you to buy anything you don't want to...jdos2 said:Claro, esta... Oops!
Of course, senhor, you are right. There are lots of folks fighting the "Full Frame Battle," right now, trying to distort the criticism of sensors smaller than the 135 film the sensors themselves have been used to replace. Distortion of the argument is easier than accepting the criticism that smaller-than-135-sized sensors force folks to buy new lenses if they want to take pictures with similar perspectives (and depth of field) to what they were used.
Ah, I see Leica is releasing a new wide angle lens for this camera. Wonder if it'll be as cheap as their 21mm? Or if their 35mm Summicron (ASPH) will be as cheap as their 50mm Summicron to make up for their lack of "standard lens" in the smaller sensor?
I'm guessing that the manufacturers are just tired of normal/wide angle photography and want us to start using the easier-to-make longer formerly "standard" lenses as now the "normal" lenses, forcing us to have a tighter perspective.
Have a Pasteis de Nata for me, please, and a cup of "Chave d'Ouro" (Uma bica!), and take a nice picture of bronze Fernando Pessoa (Rua Garret). I miss Lisbon so.
RIVI1969
Established
Well, the Leica Digilux-2 even when is "old" considering the new products flow, is the only digicam that after 3 years or so of its launch still retains a top-retail value. I just saw one go for $1500.00, basically the same for a new Nikon D200.
I guess the M8 will be a top seller so if we expect one for less than 4 grand, maybe we will wait for 4 years or so.
I guess the M8 will be a top seller so if we expect one for less than 4 grand, maybe we will wait for 4 years or so.
I intend to buy the Zeiss DigIkon which will/should/might come out 1-2 months after the Digital M and cost half the price (hopefully a tad less than the RD-1 now). :angel:
Mark Norton
Well-known
Given Zeiss's habit of shouting about new products from the roof tops before they are available, I think we would have heard about it by now.
Eddyboy
Newbie
Larry Kellogg said:
If I gave the impression that I thought CD was better than vinyl, that was not my intent. Just because I can't hear a difference means very little. I can't hear my wife most of the time. My sole intention is to convey my opinion that digital capture will supersede film. And, like the CD, it will happen very fast.
Larry Kellogg
Established
Eddyboy said:
With enough amplification, a good turntable , and good speakers, you won't be able to hear your wife.
That's the point....I think vinyl is different than CD, not always better or worse, just different. I think too much is made of declaring something as the winner. I don't believe vinyl playback or film is going to disappear from the planet tomorrow. These things will be around for years to come. I do agree with you that digital capture will continue to cut into the market share for film. Maybe the best films will be left around because there will be enough demand for them while the lower quality ones will be discarded. That is not always a bad thing. The quality of turntables is probably better now than ever probably because there isn't any profit margin in building low quality turntables...
Regards,
Larry
edlaurpic
Established
I have already made deposits for two M8's.
edlaurpic
Established
I should have added that, prior to putting my down payments on two M8's, I sold my Canon 1DS MII, as I have hardly used it since I got my R-D1. I never was comfortable with a DSLR compared to how good it feels to use a light, small RF with everything that comes with RF photography. I also sold some other gear that was gathering dust. I will keep, for the time being, a 5D for macro and long telephoto. The reason I am buying two M8's is because I want two digital M RF bodies. If I like the M8 well enough, I will get rid of the R-D1. However, if it turns out that I decide to keep the R-d1 as the second RF body for M lenses, then I will sell one of the M8s (and probably make money to boot).
bluepenguin
Established
in my opinion 5k is too much for M8. i can't affort it ....
nrb
Nuno Borges
5 K is too much, especially considering the much shorter life expectancy of digital cameras
Kevin
Rainbow Bridge
People should spend money on commodities after they have been properly tested by one or more unbiased parties, meaning this discussion should be taking place at the end of the year when the camera has become available to those parties.
Talk is cheap. Or is there some kind of ego-thing going on here, like at Flickr?
Talk is cheap. Or is there some kind of ego-thing going on here, like at Flickr?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Considering the amounts of money other people squander on -in my eyes- worthless stuff, surely this is purely subjective... What about the top-of-the-range Canon and Nikonnrb said:
DSLR's, btw? Those run up to something even more hefty that the humble
M8.All is relative.. I would love to spend some holiday time in my old haunts in Botswana. At $ 1000,-- a person a night that is destined to remaina pipedream forever.bluepenguin said:
Last edited:
Ben Z
Veteran
nrb said:
Hmmm. The Canon 1DS-II seems to be built to the same standard as the 1V, good for 150,000 shots before a $200 shutter replacement and then on to another 150,000. If the M8 can do that, I don't see much of an argument here.
Bob Ross
Well-known
That is the proper course for the wise, cautious and prudent person, but it sounds kind of dull to meKevin said:
In the case of the M8, we have a product based on a successfull line of products made by a firm with a reputation for excellence. The M8 is actually simpiler than today's DSLRs, with the absence of AF, sophisticated matrix metering, mirror dampening & viewfinder brightness issues. The field testing by mature, experienced & professional photographers done by Leica is extensive. You can argue about independence, but these are people who want the camera and want right, because they will be using it hard for years. The field testers aren't looking at the camera academically like some on-line review site expert who will move on to the next interesting new product. I do like cameras where the professional photographer has a say in the design and features, because they will be using it. They wont give us charts and samples to oggle over and nit-pick and we might not ever know who they were, but we'll feel their contributions when we use our M8s.
Bob
w3rk5
Well-known
I don't think I would buy one even if I had the money. I think it costs too much for what it is, and what it will eventually be in a couple of years.
Mark Norton
Well-known
Bob Ross said:That is the proper course for the wise, cautious and prudent person, but it sounds kind of dull to me
Thanks Bob for a little light. It's certainly possible to sit on the fence forever and wait for other people to tell you how good this camera is. I prefer to buy one and make up my own mind.
There's a lot of talk about this camera being over-priced but I don't understand why, for example, the D2x at the same price or higher doesn't receive the same criticism. If anything, we're expecting the image quality of the M8 to be better than the D2x.
Leica are a premium brand and their camera and lenses are expensive because of the time and trouble they take to make them, the quantities in which they make them and to some degree, the country in which they make them. Would I like Leica to make them to a lower standard in order to reduce the price? Not at all.
Dougg
Seasoned Member
I think some are already arguing (as they did with the Epson) that the M8 is simply not competitive with today's pro dSLRs... I'ts missing TTL viewing, zoom lenses, auto-focus, program-AE, a dozen or more scene-type modes, etc. How can one take Leica seriously in the face of this scant capability?Mark Norton said:
"Not competitive"? Of course not, that's the point; it's a rangefinder, thus with quite a different user interface. If one needs all the features of a dSLR then that's what one should get and the RF's are overpriced; if one prefers the Rangefinder Way, isn't it great to have a couple of those on the market too...