If the M8 had been the worlds 1st Digital Camera . . .

M

Ming Rider

Film, the next evolution.
Local time
6:34 PM
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
302
. . . what would we be saying about it?
Technological marvel or flawed wannabe? Perfect camera or could do better?
 
Last edited:
If it had been the first digital camera, nobody would have bought it at any price. It took years of other digital cameras before any Leica user was in the least interested in a digital M. HCB, after all, shot film! :)
 
We'd probably be saying if it had a reflex mirror and a viewing prism it'd be a pretty decent camera!
 
1st.

1st.

The M8 was the worlds first 10 meg. digital rangefinder and the last I checked it still is. My conclusion is, the camera with out a doubt is a engineering marvel. Bill
 
Last edited:
If it was the world's 1st digital camera then I would probably have one! (In this real world I blew my money already on other digital cameras & lenses!)
 
Hmmm..we would STILL all be using film!!!! ~

The M8 is really a nice camera for using old LTM lenses for that "instant result", but it has it's issues (no matter how much I clean the sensor it's nasty dusty - ughh!) .....and pix stopped down to f8 or higher are full of black spots, it really frustrates me, for the price they cost new they should have an automatic cleaner for the sensor, what a mess!

And battery live sucks, need (3) batteries just to go out on assignments etc.

Tom
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
It would still have been overpriced, elitist and useless.

Just ask anybody who never owned one...

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Kev

P.S. It's been bugging me for ages. Are you `the` Roger Hicks of Amateur Photographer Column fame?
 
"The M8 was the worlds first 10 meg. digital rangefinder and the last I checked it still is."

And it is because no other camera maker had any reason to make one. Leica had no choice. Leica only made one because it was make it or die. They weren't innovating for the sake of innovation. They were innovating out of desperation.
 
Ming Rider said:
Roger,

Couldn't have put it better myself.

Kev

P.S. It's been bugging me for ages. Are you `the` Roger Hicks of Amateur Photographer Column fame?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the same Roger Hicks. And his wife is Frances, also an excellent writer and photographer. Roger and Frances have authored a number of photography books.

And if the M8 had been the first digital camera, it would have been a technological marvel and still overpriced. Anyone remember those first digital SLRs that AP was using? I think they were something like $20,000.
 
is this thread an attempt to minimise all the known and exhaustedly discussed issues the M8 has and try to make it more acceptable? It would make more sense though, as the M8 has so many flaws that are almost unbelievable for a camera that high and released after some generations of digital were around already. It would make more sense they couldn't sort the IR issue out and then tell their customers to get filters to correct it, as it would be a first timer's attempt at an unknown world.... Also the bad image quality at iso 640 and up would make more sense, as technology would still be a bit primitive.

But, it was NOT the first digital camera, so it's just a pretty expensive so-so and technologically challenged camera.
 
umcelinho said:
Also the bad image quality at iso 640 and up would make more sense, as technology would still be a bit primitive.
Click to expand...

That's a personal matter of taste. For me the "bad quality" begins at ISO 1250. I think the noise at ISO 640 is visible but doesn't look bad at all.

This camera is not perfect but I don't see so many flaws.
 
If the M8 had been the first digital camera it would've blindsided the photographic community, torpedoed the film industry, and leapfrogged Leica from collectors' dandy to #1 innovative camera maker . Folks have to remember what a digital camera cost 10-12 years ago, and what it was capable of delivering in terms of resolution and noise.

But the M8 wasn't the first digital camera, and at the time it was introduced it was already noticeably behind the curve on several fronts. And I say that as one who has and does own one(...Roger ;)). And if not for it being a Leica rangefinder I doubt it would have been accepted. If Nikon or Canon had brought out a DSLR with the same ISO noise and the requirement of expensive IR filters on each lens, I believe it would have been a total dud in the market at any price...certainly at nearly five grand. And just to repeat, I own one and I intend to keep using it, because it fills a need for me (and because I can't stomach selling it considering what I could get for it vs what I paid :mad:)
 
Last edited:
Ten years ago, a 2 Mega-Pixel compact delivered `stunning` picture quality. It was impossible to imagine that an even bigger sensor could be made and a 4 second start-up time was `blindingly` fast.

A Pentium 500mhz was `dizzyingly fast` and 64mb of RAM was `more than enough`.

The original Mini Cooper S handled `sublimely` and was `lighting` quick.

Ferguson Hi-Fi's delivered `life like` sound quality.

Nowadays, they're all tosh compared to the modern stuff.

Would the M8's faults have paled into insignificance or not even been considered or noticed 20 years ago.
 
Ming Rider said:
Would the M8's faults have paled into insignificance or not even been considered or noticed 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

Probably not the ones that stopped it dead and necessitated an extended stay in Solms' repair department...considering the early-adopters of digital were almost exclusively working press photographers.

But your entire premise is like asking "If the M1 had been introduced during the Crusades would its faults have been considered?" Probably not, because it was a far more advanced weapon than a broadaxe. But it doesn't change how an M1 compares to an M16.
 
If the M8 was the first digital camera, then other manufacturers would use it as an example of the failure of digital and a Nikon F7 would exist today:p
 
Last edited:
Ben Z said:
If the M8 had been the first digital camera it would've blindsided the photographic community, torpedoed the film industry, and leapfrogged Leica from collectors' dandy to #1 innovative camera maker . Folks have to remember what a digital camera cost 10-12 years ago, and what it was capable of delivering in terms of resolution and noise.
Click to expand...

+1

(stupid 10 character warning :-( )
 
Pickett Wilson said:
"The M8 was the worlds first 10 meg. digital rangefinder and the last I checked it still is."

And it is because no other camera maker had any reason to make one. Leica had no choice. Leica only made one because it was make it or die. They weren't innovating for the sake of innovation. They were innovating out of desperation.
Click to expand...
Would that be the same reason they made the S camera? And if no other manufacture was interested how do you explain, Epson R-D1. If you change your statement ( out of desperation ) to ( out of the necessity for competition) I could agree with you. Bill
 
The R-D1 was some engineer's personal wet dream, not a serious effort by Epson to get into the rangefinder game. :)

The S is also a desperation measure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom