It's a heartbreaker

Athena,
And your point is? And this forum is for what? Surely not JUST a place for those who do not own an M8 to cast dispersion on the camera and those of us who enjoy it? The arrogance of people who denigrate M8 users when we present our side of the M8 story especially after they (you) throw the first stone is beyond me.

Ted
 
Last edited:
Unlike you, Athena, Ted has actually been contributing constructively to the discussion on this thread. And it's particularly ironic that you would be criticizing him, given that your contributions amount to ridiculous statements such as these:

"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!"

Right, and I'm still waiting to hear all about the better digital rangefinder which is currently available, or about to be released by one of those Japanese companies.

"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."

Pompous nonsense.

"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."

Again, which digital rangefinder does the M8 not surpass?

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

A disaster? Right, that's why the M8 is back ordered everywhere, in spite of the (fixable) early issues. (As an aside, I suppose you also judge the quality of a film by its first weekend box office receipts.)

Tony C.
 
rsl said:
It's a heartbreaker.

......

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.
Click to expand...

As for the M8, I agree with your sentiments -- but I'm responding because it's great to see you writing about the ol' IBM Series 360. That could be a very painful and long thread indeed, if we went there. I won't get into it; I gather it might be O/T.

As for everyone else, I didn't mean to interrupt your arguing.
 
Last edited:
I cannot believe we are rehashing this one again. The original poster is clearly sympathtic to Leica and rangefinder yet has not been internet-savvy enough to see through an Internet dust-storm. rsl - what is your first name btw?- those of us that have not been swept away by hype have bought the camera - used it and found it was a true Leica in the old tradition with relatively minor teething troubles. If you read the net critically and discard hysteria and empty parroting you'll see that a considerable number of them, me included have decided to buy second bodies, use phrases like "from my dead clammy hands" "uncomparably good print quality" etc. Ask yourself what you value more: sweeping denouncements by posters who have not even ever seen the camera or at best have handled it for a few minutes or maybe hours, or the testimonials by those that are actually out there using it, some for days, most for weeks, some like me for months.
 
Tony C. said:
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.
Click to expand...

Tony: I do not discount the potential of the M8, or at least its prospective successor models, to be excellent tools. I am not altogether confident of anointing the M8 with such a designation since two of the seminal qualifying characteristics - reliability and consistency - currently appear elusive to the M8. Even so, nearly any camera can be used to great advantages and results in hands driven by strong determination, creativity, and skill. Witness some (by no means all) of the bodies of work created with "toy" plastic cameras.

My remark that the M8 is a "limited" photographic instrument is neither sniping nor criticism; it's simply a matter of fact with regard to the basic rangefinder camera design. My M7 is a fine selection for casual close-range work. But I don't think I'd bring it along to cover a hockey game or a shuttle launch. Conversely, there's basically nothing I could not easily cover with my dslr cameras.

I really don't mean to inflame folks. The ORIGINAL post by RSL expressed grave disappointment with, and consequent rejection of, the M8 due to its reported defects and anomalies. My response was that the camera is better than Internet commentary might suggest. If someone's in his late years and really wants to use a digital rangefinder there's no reason not to just say the hell with it and get an M8. There are, after all, only two digital rangefinders on the planet - The M8 and the Epson R-D1.

p.s. Thank you for your remarks regarding my Chicago images, Tony. C'mon back -- Chicago is a terrific place for a nosey lens!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Leica's are not suitable for everyone or for every style of photographic endeavor. I do not have an M8 yet and I have not used my M6's for a few years. I shot the attached shot with my Canon MKII 1DS and 14mm lens. The clang of the mirror and shutter was so loud, it woke up one of the sleepers who then (rightfully so) glared at me for the next 2 subway stops until I exited to proceed home.

I enjoy this type of photography and am willing to purchase the M8 with whatever flaws it may have. There are certainly plenty of opportunities to criticize the attached photo, but it is still one that I enjoy despite its "flaws".

I have seen enough work from the M8 to know that its resolution, form factor, contrast, and whatever other technical metrics that one wishes to measure are adequate for excellent images enlarged to at least 11x14 (perhaps beyond) which will satisfy my needs. It is a personal decision.

Will I dump my Canon - no way. It has served me well and there are times that it will do a task that would be a stretch for the Leica.

Will I dump my Leica lenses that I own because I have read credible sources stating that Zeiss currently has a slight technical edge over Leica lenses? No, because my current lenses are old friends and I know what to expect and appreciate their character. Lenses are similar to guitars to me - each guitar/lens has its own voice and I stick with those that strike a chord with me.

Again the best camera in the world is the one in your pocket or belt pack that you pull out to record an image that you see or imagine and derive from your environment.

Expression is a personal thing and occasionally it gains more universal appeal. Images can touch others even when not technically perfect or conforming to tried and true rules such as golden ratios etc.

So take whatever equipment you have and shoot - do not lament this or that. At the end of the day, it is a personal decision whether or not to upgrade/acquire one's equipment inventory.

I hope to see some images that you like - taken with whatever camera that you use.

Cheers

Mike Abshier
 

Attachments

  • Ships in the Night.jpg
    Ships in the Night.jpg
    244.4 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
jaapv said:
I cannot believe we are rehashing this one again. - used it and found it was a true Leica in the old tradition with relatively minor teething troubles.
Click to expand...


That's great news Jaapv.

I'm a wedding photographer who uses and depends on two Leica M's, a new MP and a well serviced 60's M3. Love them both and they NEVER let me down. Totally dependable and reliable.

I always convert to digital for processing and album design, so the M8 will save me considerable effort.

So my question of you and Sailor Ted - can you confirm that the M8 is now so much in the Leica tradition that I can confidently now sell my film M's and buy a single M8 plus a spare battery and some cards and take advantage of the M8's reliability and dependability.

The posts on this Forum have caused me to hesitate from this, but you guys now have sufficient experience with the new camera to give a reliable answer on this.

Obviously, I depend on my M's to eat and keep a roof over my head. The MP and M3 have been so good to me, but it's time to move on.
 
rolo said:
That's great news Jaapv.


So my question of you and Sailor Ted - can you confirm that the M8 is now so much in the Leica tradition that I can confidently now sell my film M's and buy a single M8 plus a spare battery and some cards and take advantage of the M8's reliability and dependability.

The posts on this Forum have caused me to hesitate from this, but you guys now have sufficient experience with the new camera to give a reliable answer on this.

Obviously, I depend on my M's to eat and keep a roof over my head. The MP and M3 have been so good to me, but it's time to move on.
Click to expand...


hi Rolo, I am not Jaap and not Sailor Ted, but I have some experience with the M8 in your field (wedding pics) I can only advice you to make sure when you buy your M8 to have a back up camera ready to go.
The first hundred shots you take with it you have to keep in mind that quite some pics cannot be used because of dust and grease that will invade the sensor (breaking in period as some call it) You will have to clean the sensor on a regular basis.
Next what happened to me is a complete lock up of the camera every now and then, only to be " re-set" by removing the battry and replacing it again...you do not want that to happen at the critical YES moment...
(This happened to a lot more owners)

Other then that the camera does a great job I find.
But for above reasons, it did not bring in a penny yet!! for me it was even a bigger investment, because I did not own any glass yet..so just imagine I own the M8 since beginning november last year, now it is in solms for upgrade, which might take another 3 weeks, which brings an investment without return for at least 3 months.

Basicaly my advise would be to sit back and wait for a M8 version without the initial problems mentioned...after that..it will be near to impossible to find a better camera to do the job!

Reginald. Ireland
 
I cannot presume to tell you what to do - but although it is a real Leica M and as such of supreme build quality, it is and remains a digital product through the nature of things. If my livelyhood depended on it I would not even begin to consider to have just one digital camera with me on assignment - be it Leica, Canon, Nikon or any you care to name. Or even any film camera for that matter. Even a Rolls Royce may require the services of the AA - more so than a Toyota as a matter of fact. Having said that, this seems to me to be an ideal wedding photographers tool, and , quite apart from all hoohah about image quality one thing is certain: any high-end digital camera will beat scanned film by magnitudes, simply by eliminating the scanning process.On top of that, it takes me considerably less than five minutes to convert and photoshop a M8 file, as opposed to what? fifteen? for scanning and working a film shot, or about ten for a Canon 10D file.
 
Athena said:
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.
Click to expand...

I agree. That why my digital camera is a Nikon D200.

On the plus side - Leica can get away with more because of its very small and loyal base. Compare the banding problem on some Nikon D200s to the M8 fiasco. Only a small percentage of D200 cameras exhibited problems under normal circumstances. And another subset of the total population of cameras only banded under extreme lighting conditions at certain ISOs. Yet many Nikon users called for a complete recall. Nikon solved the problem and fixed affected cameras only.

And then there are folks who will proclaim the M8 superior to all other digital camera. That it rivals MF digital. Yeah, right. Has anyone making that claim used a really good DSLR? Leica is better at digital imaging than Nikon, Canon, or Sony? It must be the little red dot. Or the magical glass transforms the digital sensor.

I just can't see spending money on an M8 to fund Leica's very steep learning curve. They really should stick to making absurdly priced lenses for other manufacturers' digital bodies. Or sell Leica to Kodak or anyone else who wants it.

Need a digital street camera? Stay with your DSLR.
 
Last edited:
RObert Budding said:
And then there are folks who will proclaim the M8 superior to all other digital camera. That it rivals MF digital. Yeah, right. Leica is better at digital imaging than Nikon, Canon, or Sony. It must be the little red dot.

I just can't see spending money on an M8 to fund Leica's learning curve. They really should stick to making absurdly priced lenses.

Need a digital street camera? Stay with your DSLR.
Click to expand...

Err...slightly misinformed-the digital part is Kodak and Jenoptik, not quite newcomers in digital circles I believe. Please tell me what gave you the impression that anybody is interested in a quality contest? The point is- it is a camera of comparable picture quality to other top digital camera's - but it is a rangefinder, a system that quite a number of street photographers find superior to SLR's in their line of work/hobby. As for absurdly priced lenses, well, a lot of really nice things in this world might well be absurdly priced in your philosophy. Fair enough, but fortunately for diversity and progress, there are some that disagree. Maybe you are looking at the wrong learning curve.
 
Last edited:
it seems to me that a lot (well mostly all) of folks are very quickly forgetting the learning curves that nikon, canon etc. went through and are going through while producing cameras. the m8 is quickly labeled a "fiasco" and leica openly critiqued while we forget and forgive canon, nikon, olympus etc. for their less than "perfect" attempts at cameras. beyond the few owners on this forum have any of you all actually shot with an m8? a d1x? a d2x? a 20d? and so on??? they ALL had issues and some of them had real serious issues! the d1x was a $4,000 camera that would blow out highlights like you've never seen before. i had so many error messages on a 20d once the weather sank below 0 degrees i finally gave up on it. (and yes i tried a variety of cf cards) "err 99" messages on almost all aftermarket lenses? purple halo's on the 10d?!?
the d1x went on and spawned the d2x... the 10d to the 20d. and so on. are we boycotting or predicting the financial collapse of nikon or canon?
all cameras, REPEAT ALL CAMERAS have their limitations and issues. i know of problems on the 10d, 20d, 1d, 1d mk2, d1, d1h, d1x because i have used them all extensively in a professional environment. you make your choice and learn to make said particulair choice sing. period.
as for leica, folks have been predicting their demise for quite some time now... "the m4 was the LAST great film camera they built"
"the m7 is a dinosaur"
the m8 a "fiasco"
last time i checked, leica makes more than just an m8. as a matter of fact they make more than just cameras.
the issues that have been identified on the m8 will be addressed (AS HAVE ALL MAJOR ISSUES ENCOUNTERED BY ALL COMPANYS). Leica will continue to make excellant cameras. so will canon, panasonic, nikon, olympus at nausea.
i have been putting at least 1 roll of film a day through an m6 for a very long time now and it has NEVER failed me. ever. and that is why i will DEFINATELY be purchasing an m8.
end of very boring story.
john
 
Hello rsl —

I share the same (almost) perspective of age as you. I, too, sometimes think it a chore to drag around a DSLR — in my case a 5D — and so returned to the wonderful world of film rangefinders for most of my personal work.

Since you could not manage a darkroom, something I gave up long ago and do not miss, maybe consider farming out C-41 development to a local lab and scanning the negs. This is a viable way to go and in many ways offers the best of both worlds.

A good scanner and some Voigtlander equipment puts you in business for much less than the cost of an M8. You could be making your street photography while waiting for Leica to sort things out.
 
tedwhite said:
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
Click to expand...
Ted, Yes. I've considered that for a long time -- even buying an M4, which was my old love. But I don't really want to get back into tanks and reels and dark bags and storage bottles and funnels etc., etc. I'm a software engineer with a little company that's now a one-man show -- still working because I love that too. I'm also a retired Air Force officer and I have thousands of negatives, going all the way back to 1953 when I was a fighter pilot in Korea. I have a very good negative scanner and I've scanned hundreds of the my negatives. You can see a few at www.rslstudio.com. Once you get into digital it's awfully hard to go back to film. The D2X does superb work, but I still want a good street camera.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Ken, Right. Seems to me I paid about $650 for my brand new M4 with 50mm Summicron f/2. That was a chunk of money in those days but not the kind of chunk Leica is asking for the M8. Of course our government's driving the dollar down hasn't helped much.
 
rsl said:
Ken, Right. Seems to me I paid about $650 for my brand new M4 with 50mm Summicron f/2. That was a chunk of money in those days but not the kind of chunk Leica is asking for the M8. Of course our government's driving the dollar down hasn't helped much.
Click to expand...
But, on the other hand, a Triumph TR4 was 4000 $ then. And a Exacta SLR maybe 150$. Circumstances change, perspectives change. I paid 3500 Dutch guilders for a M6 body in 1991. The minimum wage was about 1400 guilders then. A M8 is 4195 Euro now, the minumum wage 1400 Euro = 3000 guilders.Relatively the M8 is less expensive than the M6 if one (conservatively) counts 1000 Euro for the sensor.
 
jaapv said:
I cannot presume to tell you what to do - but although it is a real Leica M and as such of supreme build quality, it is and remains a digital product through the nature of things. If my livelyhood depended on it I would not even begin to consider to have just one digital camera with me on assignment - be it Leica, Canon, Nikon or any you care to name. Or even any film camera for that matter. Even a Rolls Royce may require the services of the AA - more so than a Toyota as a matter of fact. Having said that, this seems to me to be an ideal wedding photographers tool, and , quite apart from all hoohah about image quality one thing is certain: any high-end digital camera will beat scanned film by magnitudes, simply by eliminating the scanning process.On top of that, it takes me considerably less than five minutes to convert and photoshop a M8 file, as opposed to what? fifteen? for scanning and working a film shot, or about ten for a Canon 10D file.
Click to expand...


Jaapv,
I am a professional wedding photographer. I take 4 cameras and 2 flashguns to each wedding, plus a monolight and umbrella. Carry two cameras and leave two in the car in case of emergency.

The question was on reliability and dependability not image quality or scanning negatives (which the lab does by the way). I find image processing 150 frames from 500 is about equal with film (from scan) or digital, but it seems to be common practice to shoot almost twice as many frames with digital and that adds a lot of time at the reviewing end. Since Christmas Eve I've reviewed over 2,000 images and prepared proofs for client review.

So, whilst not guaranteed, a Leica M, even one that is 50 years old, is utterly reliable for shooting a non-repeatable event. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you are suggesting that level of confidence.

Don't get me wrong, I want two M8 bodies for this job as two fast prime lenses need to be on hand and I will still carry backup cameras, but the reliability of Nikon or Canon is necessary for event use and to truly justify the Leica brand values.

Best wishes and regards
 
rolo said:
Jaapv,
I am a professional wedding photographer. I take 4 cameras and 2 flashguns to each wedding, plus a monolight and umbrella. Carry two cameras and leave two in the car in case of emergency.

The question was on reliability and dependability not image quality or scanning negatives (which the lab does by the way). I find image processing 150 frames from 500 is about equal with film (from scan) or digital, but it seems to be common practice to shoot almost twice as many frames with digital and that adds a lot of time at the reviewing end. Since Christmas Eve I've reviewed over 2,000 images and prepared proofs for client review.

So, whilst not guaranteed, a Leica M, even one that is 50 years old, is utterly reliable for shooting a non-repeatable event. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you are suggesting that level of confidence.

Don't get me wrong, I want two M8 bodies for this job as two fast prime lenses need to be on hand and I will still carry backup cameras, but the reliability of Nikon or Canon is necessary for event use and to truly justify the Leica brand values.

Best wishes and regards
Click to expand...
Well, Rolo, I am not a professional ( at least not in your sport😉) but an amateur with 50 years experience, of which 35 Leica. And you read my post right. I would not call the M8 as reliable as the film M'6. Having said that I would make the same comment on a Canon 1DsII versus a Canon 1V. So even as an amateur, who travels and photographs extensively, I am picking up my second M8 tomorrow. A vote of confidence in the camera - but not a vote of confidence in matters electronic....Having said that, I always travelled with two or three M or R bodies in the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom