It's a heartbreaker

[rsl]

It's a heartbreaker.

I've been a photo addict since about 1942 when I was twelve and built my first darkroom. In the sixties I traveled a lot and photographed all over the country with a view camera, a Rolliflex, and three Leicas: a IIIf, M2 and M4. I even bought the M4 brand new with a 50mm f/2 Summicron. But in 1972 we moved into a new house that had 7 bathrooms, counting the one in the garage, and no place to set up a darkroom. So, after I got back from a second year in Southeast Asia I sold all my equipment.

For about thirty years I've been sorry I sold my Leicas, especially the M4. Eventually, in 2000, when Casio came out with the first 3 megapixel camera I got back into the game with digital and I've been shooting almost daily since -- nowadays with a D2X. But I love street photography, and the D2x is no street camera.

Then Leica announced the M8 and I was ecstatic. Once again I'd be able to work with a small, fast, quiet, black, street rangefinder. I watched the announcements and got ready to buy my M8 and 35mm Summicron for street work. Then the whole thing fell apart. I started reading about the problems my prospective new treasure was having with purple blacks, green blobs, streaking, erratic white balance, shots that never got to the SD card, etc.

Now what? I've been reading M8 discussion threads for days now and I've about come to the conclusion that Leica has had it. That Leica executives rushed this incomplete camera out in time for Photokina reminds me of the ad agency executive who braced an agency "artist" and told him, "I didn't say I wanted it to be good. I said I wanted it by Thursday."

It all seems very unLeicalike. I'm pretty sure panic has set in at Leica and that the "fixes" are going to be required "by Thursday." The problem is that with Leica's financial problems, if the M8 doesn't get fixed by "Thursday" they're out of business. But if the "fixed" M8 comes in at the same level of reliability as the released M8 they're out of business. It seems to me there's a high probability that the rushed fixes will be like the classic problem with the old IBM 360 operating system. Every time IBM did an upgrade to the system they fixed about 5,000 bugs but they introduced about 5,000 new ones.

All I can do is wait and keep my fingers crossed. I want that M8 in my hand, but not with purple blacks, green blobs, streaking, erratic white balance, or erratic storage to the SD card. If I can't have a properly functioning M8 then I'll have to keep doing street photography with my D2X or D100 and hope and pray that someone else will come out with the camera the M8 should have been.

It's a heartbreaker.

 

[Sailor Ted]

I disagree- please search on Flickr for images taken made with the M8 or see my photos with this camera. Far from a dog the M8 is the finest digital camera in the world today save for medium format monsters that don't play the Leica "street photo" "available light" shoot anytime anywhere game.

I felt as you do however after scratching beyond the knee jerk reactions I found a different story. I then purchased the camera effectively "putting my money where my mouth is" and I could not be more pleased with the results.

 

[Keith]

I sense your dissapointment with Leica and I congratulate you for not being as venemous about it as others have been. Your experience and your age have obviously made you fairly uncompromising with products that aren't quite right ... and fair enough! I hope to hell that Leica do sort the problems out and I hope you buy one and are happy with it ... and I hope faith in the company is restored all around.

As you said ... in the meantime you still have your D2x ... and I know that I will be staying with fim in a rangefinder until I am totally confident in Leica's commitment. I hope they just don't throw the towel in and abandon the concept totally as Epson appear to have done!

Cheers.

 

[CameraQuest]

It's a heartbreaker.
The problem is that with Leica's financial problems, if the M8 doesn't get fixed by "Thursday" they're out of business. But if the "fixed" M8 comes in at the same level of reliability as the released M8 they're out of business. .

I for one disagree.

As far as I can tell, Leica is on firmer financial ground now than any time since it was owned by the Leitz family many decades ago.

The reason is the new billionaire Austrian majority share holder, Mr. Kaufman. Behind the scenes I know for a fact he is making no secret of his commitment to Leica and a total turnaround for the company.

It may take awhile, and there may be a few bumps along the way, but this guy has the bucks to make it happen!

Stephen

 

[Athena]

I'd like to say "I feel your pain" but I do not for a very simple reason.

I continue to fail to understand why anyone would expect a company that has a long, hallowed history of making probably the finest mechanical instruments for shooting film imagery would consequently know the first thing about making electronic, digitally-based image-making gear!

There is notihng, anywhere, in the corporate culture of Leica to suggest that they would have any capability of transferring their film-based expertise to the digital milleu.

Unlike the Japanese firms, they did not invest early on in digital photography to "come up the learning curve" of the technology. Instead, they waited forever amd then figured they could buy-in - without the know-how, capital or capability of producing a "killer product" that would surpass all the others.

This was a predicted disaster by many and not a surprise.

If you want to own a label in the digi camera world - buy the Leica. But a label is all you're going to get.

 

[Keith]

The reason is the new billionaire Austrian majority share holder, Mr. Kaufman. Behind the scenes I know for a fact he is making no secret of his commitment to Leica and a total turnaround for the company.


How often have we heard some billionaire make such grandiose statements until he realised that the venture may turn him into a mere 'millionaire'?

 

[stevenrk]

I for one disagree.

As far as I can tell, Leica is on firmer financial ground now than any time since it was owned by the Leitz family many decades ago.

The reason is the new billionaire Austrian majority share holder, Mr. Kaufman. Behind the scenes I know for a fact he is making no secret of his commitment to Leica and a total turnaround for the company.

It may take awhile, and there may be a few bumps along the way, but this guy has the bucks to make it happen!

Stephen

That's surprising because it goes against what I've read and what Jenopix seems to suggest in their explanation of why they cancelled the sale of Sinar shares to Leica: "Jenoptik intends to avert damage from Sinar AG due to unclear ownership structures."

Stephen, when you speak of behind the scenes info, exactly what are you refering to?

Steven

 

[Sailor Ted]

If you want to own a label in the digi camera world - buy the Leica. But a label is all you're going to get.

Really based on what? Does the M8 create substandard images- compaired to what? Canon? I think not.

 

[Sailor Ted]

Here is what one can expect from the M8 and an inexpensive CV 12mm lens.

As always click on my Flickr link for the full res image.

 

[tedwhite]

RSL:

You could always avoid imagined (or actual) catastrophe and buy an M7. With the money saved you could buy an excellent film scanner and be right smack in the middle of digital. Plus you'd be back on the street with your "small, quiet, fast, black, street rangefinder."

As I haven't the bucks yet for the film scanner, I've been making crisp black and white 8X10's in my darkroom and scanning them in to the digital world with my Epson 4990 flatbed.

Ted

 

[Ken Tanaka]

"RSL": As someone a few clicks later than you, but still early enough to recall the IBM 360 operating system (and its countless quirks), I understand and share your disappointment with the M8's birth defects.

But, to be balanced, it's not quite as bad as Internet jabber would suggest. No, it's not completely reliable or predictable. No, it's not really worth anything close to its list price. But it can record a good image under many, maybe most, circumstances.

So if you're really as forlorn as you portrayed, and you are willing to sublimate all considerations of price/value, I'd certainly move forward with getting an M8. Based on the dateline you cited I think that it's far more sensible to just enjoy your photography using anything you want to use. Who cares whether or not Leica is a good investment? You're buying their camera not their stock.

If you do get an M8 I offer one last suggestion: stay away from chat boards like this. Just enjoy the camera for what it is, not what it might have been or might become.

 

[Sailor Ted]

No, it's not really worth anything close to its list price.

Ken has any Leica been worth its asking price in your opinion? I say "asking price" because I believe many people never purchase a new Leica film anything- they buy used, Zeiss, or more often Bessa CV. If an M7 is "worth" $3500 and if an a la carte Leica M is worth north of four grand then the M8 is worth its asking price- the savings in processing alone make this an accounting reality. As to shooting film and then scanning I have better things to do- not fun in my book. In fact if this were a viable business option Leica would be making a killing as this has been their digital solution for several years and the market has overwhelmingly rejected this. Let’s see how many digital film scanners there are in two years time.

My guess is Leica cannot make money off internet discount used camera buying hounds (just a hunch) and needed to produce a viable world class digital camera and they have, and it costs five grand. Leica has never been in the business of making inexpensive cameras. They have been in the business of making cameras that are fractionally better then their competition and charging a premium. Nothing's changed.

Ted

 

[Tony C.]

While I understand that some may be prone to hyperbole with respect to the M8, I find the extreme negativity, or disappointment if you prefer, expressed by some on this thread, to be over the top.

No one could have reasonably expected Leica, or any other company (including the Japanese companies which enjoyed such a head-start with digital) to come up with a perfect digital rangefinder right out of the box. But to suggest that the M8, even with its early problems and imperfections, is not a solid and exciting effort, is nonsense.

Why do I say that? For the following reasons.

There are many, like me, who prefer the rangefinder experience, yet were not comfortable with a "wet" darkroom. A digital rangefinder which is capable of producing (at least) excellent images, allows us to process those images digitally.

The Leica lenses, including earlier versions, are, as a group, indisputably superb. The M8 allows one to use those lenses, and to actually broaden their potential, in the digital domain.

The physical design of the M8 is, according to many who have more M rangefinder experience than I, quite good on balance. Not perfect, obviously, but still in essence a finely constructed rangefinder which is straightforward to operate.

From my standpoint, those who are bitterly disappointed, or (absurdly) dismissive, either suffer from unrealistic expectations, are over-emphasizing the importance of cost, or don't really know the camera and are pre-judging.

It is far too early to make any kind of final, harshly critical pronouncements. As has been pointed out on other threads, many of the early problems with the M8 are likely to be solved with firmware updates. Yes, the IR issue will remain, albeit with simple work-arounds. The body should have better moisture proofing, and the battery design leaves something to be desired. But this is a first step, and a very good one by most accounts.

Finally, a few months down the road, when the 'net is teeming with superb images taken by those who didn't get caught up in the M8's limitations, but rather embraced its potential, the silly predictions of Leica's demise will rapidly fade into obscurity.

Regards,

Tony C.

 

[Ken Tanaka]

Ken has any Leica been worth its asking price in your opinion?
Ted

Yes. In the M's earliest and most popular days (mid-1950's through most of the 1960's) these cameras and lenses were well within the boundaries of professional and dedicated amateur budgets. They delivered terrific performance and value relative to their marketplace peers. Their owners could depend on these simple little cameras and well crafted lenses for many years. That the largest market for these cameras and lenses is the 2nd hand market is a testament to this fact.

Today, however, the M8 is more of a curio than a practical camera. While enthusiasts are enamored by the M's nostalgic design and will exhaust themselves singing its praises, the fact is that the M8 is a comparatively limited instrument by today's digital standards. It's not necessary to elaborate on this point, as it's self-evident.

Nevertheless, the M8 plus one lens carries a price tag that's over 10% of the median U.S. worker's annual gross income. This pricing is, in part, due to the expensive rather socialized German labor that builds the cameras. It's also inflated by the knowledge that the true believers constitute the main primary market. As long as the camera can take a picture and not pose a safety hazard these folks will buy them. But in coming years it's unlikely that there will be much of a secondary market for M8's, particularly after the Leica engineers "discover" a "breakthrough" that leads to an M9 that can't double as a night scope. (It's also vaguely possible that one of the other major camera brands smells opportunity and begins making a rangefinder...but it's a long-shot.)

But someone who really enjoys M-style shooting, who wants to use a "digital M" today, and who's in his/her contemplative years should really not give a damn about such blather.

 

[Sailor Ted]

Ken,
Good to know that here in the US the "gross" annual workers income is around eight grand.

Wow,
Ted

 

[Tony C.]

"more of a curio than a practical camera...a comparatively limited instrument by today's digital standards...it's self-evident."

Come on, Ken, you're kidding, right? Impractical? Limited? Is there a better digital rangefinder on the market? Is the M8 not capable of producing really fine digital images? You really do need to elaborate, in spite of your arrogant dismissal of any possible reason to do so.

"the M8 plus one lens carries a price tag that's over 10% of the median U.S. worker's annual gross income"

Yes, and what percentage does the unnecessary $30,000 car or truck represent? The house with two extra bedrooms? How many median U.S. workers buy expensive cameras, or ever did?

"As long as the camera can take a picture and not pose a safety hazard these folks will buy them."

Condescending crap, which, by the way, tends to weaken whatever meaningful arguments (still waiting) you may have.

 

[Ken Tanaka]

While I understand that some may be prone to hyperbole with respect to the M8, I find the extreme negativity, or disappointment if you prefer, expressed by some on this thread, to be over the top.

No one could have reasonably expected Leica, or any other company (including the Japanese companies which enjoyed such a head-start with digital) to come up with a perfect digital rangefinder right out of the box. But to suggest that the M8, even with its early problems and imperfections, is not a solid and exciting effort, is nonsense.

Why do I say that? For the following reasons.

There are many, like me, who prefer the rangefinder experience, yet were not comfortable with a "wet" darkroom. A digital rangefinder which is capable of producing (at least) excellent images, allows us to process those images digitally.

The Leica lenses, including earlier versions, are, as a group, indisputably superb. The M8 allows one to use those lenses, and to actually broaden their potential, in the digital domain.

The physical design of the M8 is, according to many who have more M rangefinder experience than I, quite good on balance. Not perfect, obviously, but still in essence a finely constructed rangefinder which is straightforward to operate.

From my standpoint, those who are bitterly disappointed, or (absurdly) dismissive, either suffer from unrealistic expectations, are over-emphasizing the importance of cost, or don't really know the camera and are pre-judging.

It is far too early to make any kind of final, harshly critical pronouncements. As has been pointed out on other threads, many of the early problems with the M8 are likely to be solved with firmware updates. Yes, the IR issue will remain, albeit with simple work-arounds. The body should have better moisture proofing, and the battery design leaves something to be desired. But this is a first step, and a very good one by most accounts.

Finally, a few months down the road, when the 'net is teeming with superb images taken by those who didn't get caught up in the M8's limitations, but rather embraced its potential, the silly predictions of Leica's demise will rapidly fade into obscurity.

Regards,

Tony C.

Tony: I'm not sure what category you place my remarks into. As I've noted several times on this site, I'd very much like to have a digital M. But I realize I don't NEED one and can wait until the design is refined. I also indicated that the current M8 is not as much of a train wreck as Internet comments would suggest.

The Net is unlikely to ever be teeming with "superb" images taken with M8s for several reasons. First, the M8's price and availability will keep it solidly in the "other digital" margin. Second, the limitations of the Internet as a photo gallery diminishes most of the characteristics that might distinguish the M8 or Leica lenses. Third, the quality of a camera does not osmotically buoy the skills of its owner. Nearly all of the initial M8 images I've seen have been pretty run-of-the-mill friends/family/street mimicry stuff that could have been recorded with nearly any digital camera.

Again, I look forward to having a really good digital rangefinder...perhaps a future version of the M8. But, in my opinion, the M8 is just not worth the expense for ME at this time. In my perspective, all that matters is the picture. I don't list my equipment on boards like this like service ribbons. Ownership does not equal accomplishment. Whether I used camera-x or camera-y to make an image is largely irrelevant. If the image sucks it sucks no matter what the resolution or medium.

 

[Sailor Ted]

I sincerely doubt Ken's statements or half-cocked observations waxing for the "good ol days" and their lower prices will sway many. I seem to recall houses were "somewhat" cheaper back then too.

 

[Tony C.]

Ken:

You're right, "teeming" is too broad a term. I do, however, believe that you will see examples of the work of many pro and serious amateur photographers which will reflect the quality of the M8. Will the internet-based examples be as clear-cut as prints? No, of course not.

I certainly agree that "the quality of a camera does not osmotically buoy the skills of its owner", and also that many of the initial M8 images have been ordinary. But the extraordinary ones point out the potential of the camera, do they not?

Like you, I am looking to create fine images, and the cameras and lenses are simply tools to use in that process. I just don't see how you can discount (except from a narrow "value" standpoint) the potential of the M8 to be an excellent tool.

By the way, I do like a number of your Chicago series images. I grew up in Evanston.

Tony C.

 

[Athena]

I sincerely doubt Ken's statements or half-cocked observations waxing for the "good ol days" and their lower prices will sway many. I seem to recall houses were "somewhat" cheaper back then too.

Geez, by now I think it's obvious that you love your M8 and will criticize and disparage anyone who disagrees with your conclusion.

So the purpose of your continuing comments is?