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

I don't own one, and there's a reason for it:

I never understood how it is/was possible that users of Leica cameras, always very critical about performance of their lenses (rightly so, I guess, considering the price of the Leitz lenses) accepted to have to use IR filters on said lenses to have acceptable blacks.

If we were talking about some 1st generation camera, or about a cheapo digital "Holga" or something alike, who cares, but for the price of an M8, and considering Leitz had plenty of examples with other manufacturers, it should have been nearing perfection (if possible at all) !

There's a lot of talk in general about Leitz quality control, the high standards they want to achieve, etc .., but how then was/is such a thing possible ? Cars are called back to the factory for lesser faults ...

Not to bash Leica (I own a M6TTL since short, and I love it), but the M8 ? No thanks ...

Stefan (ducking for cover :D).
 
Pickett Wilson said:
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.
Click to expand...

If understand you correctly, you are saying, Leica spends millions of Euros for R & D and creative manufacturing, because they are desperate and has nothing to do with innovation and competition. In short Leica’s mission statement would be something like this,
( We make cameras because were desperate ). Would that some it up? Bill
 
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. Who do you think they are competing with? Nobody with the M9. And if the S doesn't fly, they are in serious trouble. It's a critical time for Leica camera.
 
Any of you who hate your M8 , ill swap you an M4-p and a iiif . Not a fair trade at all , but it'll relieve you of the pain of owning the M8, please reply via PM.
 
-doomed- said:
Any of you who hate your M8 , ill swap you an M4-p and a iiif . Not a fair trade at all , but it'll relieve you of the pain of owning the M8, please reply via PM.
Click to expand...

Well, I'm glad I don't have the pain of owning one :), considering S/H prices versus the price of a new one.
 
I don't hate the M8, I don't own it. If i did I'm sure I'd find something i think they could have improved , but not enough to damn it as a horrible camera.
So many people seem to complain when something isn't to their exact standard and then dismiss something as crap, cars ,cameras, motorcycles,(insert mechanical/electronic device), or lenses because of such issues rather than using the tool as intended , to make photos. So much time spent worrying about high ISO performance and best image quality ,when some of the most iconic images haven't been perfectly focused or shot on the best possible film yet they seem to endure .
Ill take an M8 when i can afford it.
 
-doomed- said:
I don't hate the M8, I don't own it. If i did I'm sure I'd find something i think they could have improved , but not enough to damn it as a horrible camera.
So many people seem to complain when something isn't to their exact standard and then dismiss something as crap, cars ,cameras, motorcycles,(insert mechanical/electronic device), or lenses because of such issues rather than using the tool as intended , to make photos. So much time spent worrying about high ISO performance and best image quality ,when some of the most iconic images haven't been perfectly focused or shot on the best possible film yet they seem to endure .
Ill take an M8 when i can afford it.
Click to expand...

I agree that one does not have to complain about missing features, etc .. (one should know a camera's features before buying it), but having decent blacks out of the box, is that called a "feature" with Leica, or asked to much and nothing to worry about ? Would you have accepted a color film that renders black as the M8 does ?

Stefan.
 
Last edited:
I used a 7-track computer tape to store the images from the first digital imager that I used. 32x512 images, two 16-element Sensors that scanned the image.

If someone had given me an M8 at the time, I would have figured it came in Doc's DeLorean. But that movie came out 4 years later than the Digital Imager that we built.

Oh, and My Mom and Sis really like the M8. I uploaded the images of the kids before coming back home.
 
If the M8 had been the worlds 1st Digital Camera . . .


... there may have been some justifcation for the beta testing program they inflicted on us! :D
 
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...

More venomous "straw-man" nonsense from the resident brand apologist, who evidently has never had to use a camera for anything other than taking personal snapshots.

I shot weddings with a brace of M6 TTL's, tried the M8 when it came out, then immediately sold my Leica kit to buy the Canon 5D, which is still THE game-changing, landmark camera of the digital era. The M8 is, in comparison to both the 5D and the film M's, a toy. A very nice toy, but a toy nonetheless.

As to the original post: "If" is often the biggest word in the English language.
 
back alley said:
another thread about to be closed...
Click to expand...

. . . please Mr Moderator, for why? I bow to your superiority (slurp slurp, lick lick) but I thought this was a pretty decent thread, with good honest debate, argument and fisty cuffs.
 
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson said:
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up. Who do you think they are competing with? Nobody with the M9. And if the S doesn't fly, they are in serious trouble. It's a critical time for Leica camera.
Click to expand...

I think your overlooking one small fact. Most people think of Leica as a camera company, when in fact they are a lens company first and foremost. Leica could stop making cameras tomorrow and do just fine. Their largest profits are in lens, high end and low ( Panasonic ) and binoculars plus scopes and the very profitable medical optics manufacturing. Glass is where the profit is not metal. Bill
 
gliderbee said:
I never understood how it is/was possible that users of Leica cameras, always very critical about performance of their lenses (rightly so, I guess, considering the price of the Leitz lenses) accepted to have to use IR filters on said lenses to have acceptable blacks.
Click to expand...

You assume that the IR filter has a negative effect on the lens performance. But I don't think this is true at daylight.
It may be different at night with lots of artificial lights. Then you may experience some "ghosting" from reflection effects between lens and filter.
But it's absolutely right, that the use of filters is more impractical and more expensive than using the lens without filter.
 
The toy I use the most

The toy I use the most

kevin m said:
More venomous "straw-man" nonsense from the resident brand apologist, who evidently has never had to use a camera for anything other than taking personal snapshots.

I shot weddings with a brace of M6 TTL's, tried the M8 when it came out, then immediately sold my Leica kit to buy the Canon 5D, which is still THE game-changing, landmark camera of the digital era. The M8 is, in comparison to both the 5D and the film M's, a toy. A very nice toy, but a toy nonetheless.

As to the original post: "If" is often the biggest word in the English language.
Click to expand...

I prefer the Nikon d700 to the Canon 5d, and I prefer my M8 to both. Yes the d700 is a great camera, and I use it when I need the (very) high ISO's, but even 'crappy' M8 shots at ISO 1250 have a soul that the d700 files don't have (it's not just the Leica-lens, the beautiful sensor does it's part too). Besides that, it's much nicer to work with a small RF, but everybody here knows that.

I don't know how to make a poll, but wouldn't this be a funny one (I'm pretty sure I haven't seen it yet):

- I have commented on the M8, and I use one (and I print)
- I have commented on the M8, and I have never touched one, seen one in real life

I can imagine many more options, but it boils down to these two I guess.

PS With this I'm not addressing you Kevin, since you used it and didn't like it.
 
Last edited:
alifil said:
I prefer the Nikon d700 to the Canon 5d, and I prefer my M8 to both. Yes the d700 is a great camera, and I use it when I need the (very) high ISO's, but even 'crappy' M8 shots at ISO 1250 have a soul that the d700 files don't have (it's not just the Leica-lens, the beautiful sensor does it's part too). Besides that, it's much nicer to work with a small RF, but everybody here knows that.

I don't know how to make a poll, but wouldn't this be a funny one (I'm pretty sure I haven't seen it yet):

- I have commented on the M8, and I use one (and I print)
- I have commented on the M8, and I have never touched one, seen one in real life

I can image many more options, but it boils down to these two I guess.

PS With this I'm not addressing you Kevin, since you used it and didn't like it.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing an option :):

- I have commented on the M8, and I don't use one because I've seen and touched one in real life and couldn't live with it's "features".

Your two options suggest that once you have had one in your hands, you have to like it, like it or not :).

Stefan.
 
"Leica could stop making cameras tomorrow and do just fine. Their largest profits are in lens, high end and low ( Panasonic )

Leica camera is not profitable NOW. They are not doing "fine" NOW. They have been losing money for years. And while the lens on my LX-3 says "Leica," that plastic autofocus thing sure wasn't made in Solms. :)
 
@ gliderbee

Yes, you're right. But sometimes I get the impression that one has to dislike it, like it or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom