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
A full frame sensor M8 would surely beat the R-D1. But of course we can wait and see to judge the results. Any decision to buy will consider the quality of the M8 images versus its comprehensive costs...
 
jaapv said:
I know what you mean by the "look" but I tend to feel that to be at leastly partly due to the Canon technology. I can photoshop a scan to look pretty digital and my Digilux2 produces pretty much film-like results. But then beauty is in the eye of the beholder ;)
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a Canon thing per se. I think the differences are more generic and come down to factors involving film grain, bayer algorithms, etc. I guess I find digital capture a little too clinical for my personal work (though this is a very simplistic generalisation). I suppose I like a lot of films for the kind of 'organic' abstraction that I find difficult to replicate using digital. As an example, I still shoot a fair bit of Polaroid.
 
Nachkebia said:
jaapv : proove :)
Click to expand...

Film:
corvara0170-after.jpg



Digilux:
fastfood.jpg
 
When sun goes down everything is looking good :) you could have taken same picture with mobile :) show me normal shot in normal lighitng :)
 
We know that the M8 will have a 1.33x crop sensor and those of us who will be buying it will have to live with that compromise. ....... Given the choice between full frame and cropped frame (assuming all else is equal) I don't think many would choose the cropped version.[/quote]

IAN

But I don't think its a compromise. I think the 1.33 format is the "sweet spot" or best size for a high quality rangefinder format. In other words, if one was starting with a blank slate, the 1.33 format would be the end results. The only downside I see to the format is that we have to re- adjust are perception of what a given focal length will yield in 35mm equivelents. I'll admit that I have a little trouble with that too, but in the long run, I think I'll get it.

I think the full frame format lends itself better with regards DSLR's. The camera body necessitates a larger physical size (mirror box issues) and can absorb the bigger sensor more readily. On the other hand, the rangefinder format, really excels when the camera is trim and compact.

Rex
 
For reasons that we all know about, the M8 cannot be full frame so there's no point moaning about the fact it's not. If you don't like the crop factor with the implications on adapting to new angles of view and changed depth of field, don't buy the camera.

For us old dogs who are prepared to learn new tricks, shooting with a lens one step shorter and half a stop wider will produce images which are broadly similar to what we'd get with film, assuming we still used it of course.

As for how the thing draws images, I fully expect the M8 to stand any comparison and if you then factor in the size, quiet, weight, it's a sure-fire winner.
 
Nachkebia said:
When sun goes down everything is looking good :) you could have taken same picture with mobile :) show me normal shot in normal lighitng :)
Click to expand...
OK
Digilux2:
corv05042-after.jpg


And please, what mobile phone would that be ?? I want it !!!!!
 
Last edited:
i would buy this without hesitation if i had the money.
i think film & digital are brothers with different mothers (old music album reference).

but at 4500 usd, i'd either have to win the lottery or get a real job;)

joe
 
Rangefinders & Film & Full frame

Rangefinders & Film & Full frame

It occurred to me that this Forum has three threads that underlay almost everything else. They are all seperate issues but seem to get intertwined all the time.


*Rangefinder vs SLR

*Film vs Digital

*Full frame vs Crop

Everybody on this forum is on the same page with regards the rangefinder vs SLR issue. However, since only about 1% of camera users have any appreciation or knowledge of the advantages of the rangefinder, we better hope a digital model takes off. At least in our nitch market.

Because film is dead. Thats right, if a digital rangefinder doesn't have at least a little commercial success, This forum will slowly shrink as film and film cameras become less available. I like film (I have a darkroom), but lets face it.

The full frame vs crop thing is fun to argue about, but in the long term doesn't really mean anything. Market forces will determine the winner. Anyway, on this forum, the issue gets mixed up with digital vs film.

Over the next few months, the sucess or lack of success of the M8 will pretty
much determine if this forum stays as an active, contemporary site or slowly emerges as a historical, collector type site. I will stay aboard as I like both, but I hope the contemporary, digital side has success too. I wish therewas a slew of digital rangefinders available instead of just two.

Rex
 
Because film is dead...Anyway, on this forum, the issue gets mixed up with digital vs film.

with comments like this, no wonder we have film v. digital debates and not more of a camraderie between the 2.

declaring film is dead is just short sighted as far as i'm concerned.

joe
 
So I guess the M8 may become a huge success in the second hand market if it doesn't fullfill the high expectations many photographers put upon it.
 
back alley said:
Because film is dead...Anyway, on this forum, the issue gets mixed up with digital vs film.

with comments like this, no wonder we have film v. digital debates and not more of a camraderie between the 2.

declaring film is dead is just short sighted as far as i'm concerned.

joe
Click to expand...

Joe

Sorry for being a little more blunt than I meant. It's not that I don't like film because I do. I have four rangefinders, three SLRs, and two folders. I develop my own film and print real fiber based prints in a real darkroom.

But, eventially there will be less and less of us. That may be a shame, but thats going to be the reality. I don't think I will ever stop using film, myself.

I was trying to make the point that the rangefinder issue is different than the film issue. I certainly didn't mean to say that film isn't a wonderful media. My concern is that by linking filn with rangefinders too much, it might hurt the acceptance of rangefinders in the digital community. The usefulness and utility of the rangefinder spans across the film-digital divide. And frankly, I don't think there really is a digital-film divide for most of us.

Right now the two digital rangefinders that are available are too expensive. But in order for that to change, it is important that the M8 is a success. If it isn't, what chance is there that any other manufacterer will come to the show with a more affordable model?

I apologise for saying "film is dead" because it isn't. But commercially we cannot expect to finder much if any R&D going into film or film cameras. But that does not mean that the rangefinder is in the same perdicament. Or at least I hope so.

A comrade in film & digital

Rex
 
rvaubel said:
Joe

Sorry for being a little more blunt than I meant. It's not that I don't like film because I do. I have four rangefinders, three SLRs, and two folders. I develop my own film and print real fiber based prints in a real darkroom.

But, eventially there will be less and less of us. That may be a shame, but thats going to be the reality. I don't think I will ever stop using film, myself.

I was trying to make the point that the rangefinder issue is different than the film issue. I certainly didn't mean to say that film isn't a wonderful media. My concern is that by linking filn with rangefinders too much, it might hurt the acceptance of rangefinders in the digital community. The usefulness and utility of the rangefinder spans across the film-digital divide. And frankly, I don't think there really is a digital-film divide for most of us.

Right now the two digital rangefinders that are available are too expensive. But in order for that to change, it is important that the M8 is a success. If it isn't, what chance is there that any other manufacterer will come to the show with a more affordable model?

I apologise for saying "film is dead" because it isn't. But commercially we cannot expect to finder much if any R&D going into film or film cameras. But that does not mean that the rangefinder is in the same perdicament. Or at least I hope so.

A comrade in film & digital

Rex
Click to expand...



agreed.

i will always prefer the feel of a rangefinder camera over a slr.
not knocking the slr but i like rf's.
i also know that if there were only digital rangefinders left to shoot with that i would be shooting one, somehow.
i have commented lately, a few times in various threads, that we are a dwindling community and that any forward movement in the rf arena should be celebrated and fostered as much as possible. this certainly includes digital rf as well.

joe
 
Well, I'll be up for an M8. But not till the R-D1 dies.

It's no coincidence that so many RF lovers are suspicious of digital. There has only ever been film for those of us who grew up with RFs. I switched to digital a few years ago because I moved to London, and couldn't afford a darkroom, and though now amateur, I still love the RFs, and love the R-D1.

My other camera is the EOS 1Dm2, also a 1.3 crop factor camera, so I'd get the M8 to have two cameras with the same physical sensor size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom