jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I don't see you keeping very quiet about your opinions, DaveAusDLK said:>But what if I'm just a crap photographer and feel self conscious about it?
Then enjoy your cameras and keep quiet about it!
But then, you are certainly not a crap photographer. Congratulations on you succes in publicizing! 
Harry Lime
Practitioner
TJV said:
Bingo! We have a winner.
I've shot with everything from a Canon 1Ds to the D100 etc and the M8 is only digicam I have ever handled that gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside.
HL
TJV
Well-known
Brilliant! Now... let us put a stop to this thread...
Athena
Well-known
Film M's were around for what? Around 50 years or so. And before that were the screw-mounts.
And there are people here still shoot the earliest M's and even their ancestors.
Do you think anyone will be shooting a M8 in fifty years? Or even in five?
Good luck to the first adopters - I must say, if nothing else, the M8 has created a "gold rush market" for IR filters!
And there are people here still shoot the earliest M's and even their ancestors.
Do you think anyone will be shooting a M8 in fifty years? Or even in five?
Good luck to the first adopters - I must say, if nothing else, the M8 has created a "gold rush market" for IR filters!
N
Nick R.
Guest
Athena said:
How many people will be driving their $35,000 automobiles in fifty years? Or even five?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Athena said:
I think your avatar looks a bit...err....magenta?
Tony C.
Established
Athena,
I must say that your posts on this thread are very consistent. Consistently weak and tedious, that is.
There is no comparison whatsoever between the mechanichal M models and the M8. The reason is, as you may or may not know, that the M8 is digital. So, while it would also be accurate to say that the abacus was used for far longer than any digital counterpart, and is still being used by some, would you therefore argue that they are superior to a calculator?
More to the point, the original Apple Macintosh computer had plenty of limitations, and was used for a very brief period of time before being displaced by a more advanced and refined model. Would you suggest that the people who bought those original Macs were idiots for not waiting for a more advanced iteration?
The same question could be posed for any number of different types of digital products. That is the nature of digital: the technology advances so rapidly that each generation produces (to some degree) superior products.
I should add that everyone who has been following this thread will, if nothing else come away knowing one thing: ATHENA believes that the M8 is OVERPRICED, BADLY FLAWED, and that those who are buying them are WASTING THEIR MONEY.
So I suppose I should also give you credit for effectively getting your points across. It's just a shame that you've done such a poor job supporting them.
Tony C.
I must say that your posts on this thread are very consistent. Consistently weak and tedious, that is.
There is no comparison whatsoever between the mechanichal M models and the M8. The reason is, as you may or may not know, that the M8 is digital. So, while it would also be accurate to say that the abacus was used for far longer than any digital counterpart, and is still being used by some, would you therefore argue that they are superior to a calculator?
More to the point, the original Apple Macintosh computer had plenty of limitations, and was used for a very brief period of time before being displaced by a more advanced and refined model. Would you suggest that the people who bought those original Macs were idiots for not waiting for a more advanced iteration?
The same question could be posed for any number of different types of digital products. That is the nature of digital: the technology advances so rapidly that each generation produces (to some degree) superior products.
I should add that everyone who has been following this thread will, if nothing else come away knowing one thing: ATHENA believes that the M8 is OVERPRICED, BADLY FLAWED, and that those who are buying them are WASTING THEIR MONEY.
So I suppose I should also give you credit for effectively getting your points across. It's just a shame that you've done such a poor job supporting them.
Tony C.
N
Nick R.
Guest
Take it easy, dude. We have too few women posting here as it is.
Tony C.
Established
Nick, with due respect, how is her gender relevant?
I'm not prone to being harsh, but when someone (male or female) restates a personal opinion again and again, without adding a thing to the discussion, I think that the thread would be better of without them.
Tony C.
I'm not prone to being harsh, but when someone (male or female) restates a personal opinion again and again, without adding a thing to the discussion, I think that the thread would be better of without them.
Tony C.
HAnkg
Well-known
No need to get pissed off about comments folks. Insulting a camera is not the same as insulting a person.
As to whether people will be using their M8 in 50 years, who cares? As an available light color camera it produces better images then 35mm 800 ISO high speed color negative film today. I hope that Leica finds ways to make the cameras cheaper and more disposable. I'm not looking for a family heirloom -I want something I can make images with today, that handles like an M and images like an M. In the future I'll pick up an old Rollei TLR or M3 and admire the zenith of industrial mechanical objects, then I'll go take pictures with my carbon, plastic, ceramic digital imaging device.
As to whether people will be using their M8 in 50 years, who cares? As an available light color camera it produces better images then 35mm 800 ISO high speed color negative film today. I hope that Leica finds ways to make the cameras cheaper and more disposable. I'm not looking for a family heirloom -I want something I can make images with today, that handles like an M and images like an M. In the future I'll pick up an old Rollei TLR or M3 and admire the zenith of industrial mechanical objects, then I'll go take pictures with my carbon, plastic, ceramic digital imaging device.
Tony C.
Established
HAnkg said:
Hank,
I appreciate your even tone, and your contributions to this thread have been concise, on point, and uniformly excellent.
I also regret having gotten a bit angry, resulting in that highly critical post.
Having said all of that, I'd like to point out that it was hardly a matter of Athena criticising the M8, and my criticizing her in return. A few quotes from her "contributions" to this thread follow. And in each case, she is not simply criticizing the camera, but those who have the audacity to view things differently, and those at Leica who clearly put a tremendous amount of time and energy into the creation of a cutting-edge, albeit imperfect product.
There are those of us who can also afford what you can - but who seek value over brand prestige.
Enjoy your M8 - but it will never be worth its price because, while it is expensive, it lacks "value".
Geez, by now I think it's obvious that you love your M8 and will criticize and disparage anyone who disagrees with your conclusion.
I continue to fail to understand why anyone would expect a company that has a long, allowed 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.
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.
Best regards,
Tony C.
Athena
Well-known
Tony C. said:
Dear Tony,
Reading the above, you sound so "emotional".
Perhaps you need to get in touch with your rational, masculine side once in a while?
I won't bother you anymore. Obviously you need to calm yourself down.
Maybe a glass of Chardonnay would help tonight with a visit to the day spa tomorrow?
back alley
IMAGES
life seemed so damn peaceful before the m8 was released.
it's a friggin' camera folks - not the peace accord.
if people want one and have the means, great!
and if you think it's a waste then great too!
but trying to sway each other is a big waste of time.
it's a friggin' camera folks - not the peace accord.
if people want one and have the means, great!
and if you think it's a waste then great too!
but trying to sway each other is a big waste of time.
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Nick R. said:
Does RFf have an affirmative action program? Since when is answering an illogical post with a cogent response met in such a way? I see nothing wrong with, or anything unduly harsh in Tony's post. Seemed spot on in my opinion- perhaps you should research her posting history?
Ted
Last edited:
HAnkg
Well-known
Yes, Tony some of those posts are personal, pompous and obnoxious. But over the top bloviating is par for the course on the net. Letting yourself get drawn into that level of personal invective is like pissing in the wind. Ignore it, or if it really bothers you filter it out. There are enough posts about the merits and drawbacks of the equipment under discussion that you can carry on in parellel to the flamebait. Life is to short.Tony C. said:
KM-25
Well-known
Why don't you just get a nice M4, M6, M7 or MP and start shooting?
It's not like you cant shoot film, it is still there, and will be even if it takes an M9 to be the stunner we all really want from a digital Leica.
I for one won't be getting an M8 because it crops the very finest lenses in the world and to me that is the real heartbreaker, I simply wont stand for that.
Get a real Lieca: an M4, M6, M7 or MP, you will love it!!
It's not like you cant shoot film, it is still there, and will be even if it takes an M9 to be the stunner we all really want from a digital Leica.
I for one won't be getting an M8 because it crops the very finest lenses in the world and to me that is the real heartbreaker, I simply wont stand for that.
Get a real Lieca: an M4, M6, M7 or MP, you will love it!!
rsl said:
Last edited:
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Certainly not; I did for the otherwise unobtainable batteryBen Z said:First of all, I hope you're not proposing it a reasonable economic strategy to buy a second M8 to get 2 more free filters
The filters were a bonus
KM-25
Well-known
rsl said:
Even as a full time pro, I have found it to be really easy, refreshing actually...you shoot, then you advance to the next frame and move on, you shoot again, then you move on.
rsl
Russell
KM-25 said:
I answered that question earlier in this thread, but it's a fair question so I'll answer it again.
As I said in the entry you quoted, I worked for years with a IIIf, M2 and M4, and I loved those cameras, especially the M4. But I've been working with digital for nearly seven years now and it's awfully hard to go back to film. I don't have room for a darkroom in Colorado or in Florida, so I wouldn't be making gelatin-silver prints. I'd scan the negatives or transparencies into Photoshop. But processing Tri-X at the sink means tanks, reels, dark bags, beakers, storage bottles, etc., etc., and bulk film winders. Processing color means sending it out, which is a pain and, nowadays, an unnecessary delay.
Furthermore, though I suspect you'll disagree, you can get a lot better color with digital. You also can switch back and forth between ISO without having to rewind a roll of film and switch or having to carry several cameras. Furthermore, I can carry enough digital storage in my back pocket to fill a suitcase in rolls of film.
As far as the crops are concerned, my D2X and D100 crop at 1.5X instead of the M8's 1.3X, and it's never been a problem. All you need is a shorter lens.
Ben Z
Veteran
rsl said:
...and with one notable exception, without front IR filters
...and with one notable exeption, without having to go into a menu