Sailor Ted
Well-known
It's not the arrow it's the Indian!
Greetings. I have been reading this forum for some months now after finding it while searching for information on the then upcoming Leica M8. I am a long time M6 shooter and a lover of the brand and range finder photography in general.
The IR issue:
At first I was appalled and could not figure out how Leica could allow such a problem to exist on a camera that will most likely make or brake the brand but I did not jump to conclusions and continued to search for answers believing that a method must exist on the apparent face of madness. What I have come to realize is that to have an exceptional range finder camera, one that could at some levels outperform the excellent digital images of Canon, not to mention the inherent issues of placing a lens so close to the digital sensor, certain compromises must be made. Without rehashing what should be obvious to all who are following this issue Leica has made certain decisions that allow the camera to offer what may be the sharpest “prints” (not monitor images but prints- you know on paper) in the digital 35mm format (cropped to 1.3 as it may be). In fact from what I can gather and from what some of my friends who now have the camera have told me, the Leica M8’s prints are nearly as sharp and posses a dynamic range of color almost identical to that of prints made from a Hassablad digital back camera up to the limits of 10mp print size. This of course remains to be seen by my own eyes however if true then I fully agree and support Leica’s choice to offer such image quality at the cost of IR color balance shifts.
Work arounds to IR color shifts:
Again from what I gather this issue can be dealt with provided the photog is willing to invest in IR cut filters combined with what will undoubtedly be a firmware revise and new C1 profiles for the M8 so problem solved. The issue for many to use filters seem to steam from the expense or a mental hang up regarding the use of a “filter” in front of virgin Leica glass. Frankly if the prints deliver performance in the ballpark of a $30,000 digital Hassablad then the “expense” of a handful of filters seems not worth discussing- this is my opinion.
Why can’t the M8 deliver the worlds best performance and not require the use of IR cut filters? To me the answer is simple- technology is not sufficiently advanced and or the pockets of Leica enthusiasts are not sufficiently deep to finance such a camera with out trade-offs. It seems ironic that those who wanted the M8 the most seem to be the least willing to put in the extra effort to get the best possible image performance and instead want the camera to “automatically” deliver the best possible results without the need to mess with profiles in C1 or purchase IR cut filters. If someone wants a camera that takes great pictures with a minimum of “fuss” then why not just buy a Canon DSLR? Really since the advent of the Canon A1 Leica’s have always required more of their photographers then did the wonder SLR’s from Nikon and Canon and it’s no different today. Get over it or get a DSLR.
My main issue with the Leica M8 is two fold. Number one none are available now nor would I purchase even if I could as I first want to wait until the firmware is upgraded a few times and to see if a recall is made to correct what I believe may be a problem not with the Kodak sensor and it’s “filter” but the mother board and it’s contribution to the banding / green blob issue. The other issue I have with the M8 is its use of a hunt and peck LCD menu for settings that should and could have been dealt with in an analogue fashion, as is the case with the RD-1s. So for now I have placed an order with Robert White for a brand new RD-1s and will be posting my photos taken over the years on Flicker and here in the gallery. Near the end of 2007 I will ultimately invest in either the M8 or a new option that I believe will present it’s self in a digital Zeiss Ikon near the end of 2007. I’m sure the M8 will prove it’s self to be one of the worlds most capable digital still cameras however for me it boils down to the user interface and for that I’ll stick to my M6, Bessa R2M and RD-1s. I have to think about the LCD menu issue and whether or not I'm willing to "hunt and peck" before biting the M8 bullet.
debate welcome : )
Greetings. I have been reading this forum for some months now after finding it while searching for information on the then upcoming Leica M8. I am a long time M6 shooter and a lover of the brand and range finder photography in general.
The IR issue:
At first I was appalled and could not figure out how Leica could allow such a problem to exist on a camera that will most likely make or brake the brand but I did not jump to conclusions and continued to search for answers believing that a method must exist on the apparent face of madness. What I have come to realize is that to have an exceptional range finder camera, one that could at some levels outperform the excellent digital images of Canon, not to mention the inherent issues of placing a lens so close to the digital sensor, certain compromises must be made. Without rehashing what should be obvious to all who are following this issue Leica has made certain decisions that allow the camera to offer what may be the sharpest “prints” (not monitor images but prints- you know on paper) in the digital 35mm format (cropped to 1.3 as it may be). In fact from what I can gather and from what some of my friends who now have the camera have told me, the Leica M8’s prints are nearly as sharp and posses a dynamic range of color almost identical to that of prints made from a Hassablad digital back camera up to the limits of 10mp print size. This of course remains to be seen by my own eyes however if true then I fully agree and support Leica’s choice to offer such image quality at the cost of IR color balance shifts.
Work arounds to IR color shifts:
Again from what I gather this issue can be dealt with provided the photog is willing to invest in IR cut filters combined with what will undoubtedly be a firmware revise and new C1 profiles for the M8 so problem solved. The issue for many to use filters seem to steam from the expense or a mental hang up regarding the use of a “filter” in front of virgin Leica glass. Frankly if the prints deliver performance in the ballpark of a $30,000 digital Hassablad then the “expense” of a handful of filters seems not worth discussing- this is my opinion.
Why can’t the M8 deliver the worlds best performance and not require the use of IR cut filters? To me the answer is simple- technology is not sufficiently advanced and or the pockets of Leica enthusiasts are not sufficiently deep to finance such a camera with out trade-offs. It seems ironic that those who wanted the M8 the most seem to be the least willing to put in the extra effort to get the best possible image performance and instead want the camera to “automatically” deliver the best possible results without the need to mess with profiles in C1 or purchase IR cut filters. If someone wants a camera that takes great pictures with a minimum of “fuss” then why not just buy a Canon DSLR? Really since the advent of the Canon A1 Leica’s have always required more of their photographers then did the wonder SLR’s from Nikon and Canon and it’s no different today. Get over it or get a DSLR.
My main issue with the Leica M8 is two fold. Number one none are available now nor would I purchase even if I could as I first want to wait until the firmware is upgraded a few times and to see if a recall is made to correct what I believe may be a problem not with the Kodak sensor and it’s “filter” but the mother board and it’s contribution to the banding / green blob issue. The other issue I have with the M8 is its use of a hunt and peck LCD menu for settings that should and could have been dealt with in an analogue fashion, as is the case with the RD-1s. So for now I have placed an order with Robert White for a brand new RD-1s and will be posting my photos taken over the years on Flicker and here in the gallery. Near the end of 2007 I will ultimately invest in either the M8 or a new option that I believe will present it’s self in a digital Zeiss Ikon near the end of 2007. I’m sure the M8 will prove it’s self to be one of the worlds most capable digital still cameras however for me it boils down to the user interface and for that I’ll stick to my M6, Bessa R2M and RD-1s. I have to think about the LCD menu issue and whether or not I'm willing to "hunt and peck" before biting the M8 bullet.
debate welcome : )
Last edited:
M
mad_boy
Guest
Welcome to the forum.
That is a nice (and long) first post.
Looking forward reading more from you.
mad_boy
That is a nice (and long) first post.
Looking forward reading more from you.
mad_boy
FrankS
Registered User
Yes, welcome, and thank you for this thoughtful post.
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
Welcome, and thanks for your posts, just one point , I really struggle to see the M8 producing images comparable to the Hassie digital backs, expecially the 39MPix one.
From Sean's review the sharpness seems to be on par with the $2500 Canon 5D, still quite an achievement considering the lower pixel count and the smaller sensor.
From Sean's review the sharpness seems to be on par with the $2500 Canon 5D, still quite an achievement considering the lower pixel count and the smaller sensor.
T
Todd.Hanz
Guest
good thoughts, welcome!
Todd
Todd
Sailor Ted
Well-known
fgianni said:
I hear you and agree however from what I'm hearing from a few that have made the comparison the quality of images, when in print (not on a monitor) are on par with that of Hassablad prints up to the size constraint of a 10mp image. Regarding the Canon, even on my low rez monitor (by comparison to a quality print on quality paper) I can see a significant difference between the two brands - in favor of the M8.
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
Sailor Ted said:
That's an interesting point, maybe Sean could add another part to his review and try to do some printing, if the prints from the M8 are so much better then the high cost would be justifiable, and some of the shortcomings will be acceptable as part of the compromise.
Sailor Ted
Well-known
fgianni,
After the lamb basting Sean took from his fair weather friends because he did not notice a Magenta shift due to IR I'm sure he's keeping a low profile but we shall see.
Hopefully Leica's target market are not the same people who sit in these forums day in and day out beating Leica to death because the M8 requires a work around for top performance- customers/ fans/ whatever like that would kill any company and do not deserve a brand putting it all out to try and make them happy. Pearls before swine I say. I may be new around here but I was here to do my research and I think I've figured out the M8 secret- because Leica did not make compromises exceptional images are possible- the devils in the details.
Or I'm wrong : ) We need to get a professional digital printer, one who works with Hasseblads and Canon to do some side-by-side comparisons. Perhaps the performance will be realized not by just comparing a few dry still life’s but by looking at the overall impact of several prints taken over a wide array of subject matter under different lighting conditions. After all Leicas have never been the studio cameras of choice AFAIK.
After the lamb basting Sean took from his fair weather friends because he did not notice a Magenta shift due to IR I'm sure he's keeping a low profile but we shall see.
Hopefully Leica's target market are not the same people who sit in these forums day in and day out beating Leica to death because the M8 requires a work around for top performance- customers/ fans/ whatever like that would kill any company and do not deserve a brand putting it all out to try and make them happy. Pearls before swine I say. I may be new around here but I was here to do my research and I think I've figured out the M8 secret- because Leica did not make compromises exceptional images are possible- the devils in the details.
Or I'm wrong : ) We need to get a professional digital printer, one who works with Hasseblads and Canon to do some side-by-side comparisons. Perhaps the performance will be realized not by just comparing a few dry still life’s but by looking at the overall impact of several prints taken over a wide array of subject matter under different lighting conditions. After all Leicas have never been the studio cameras of choice AFAIK.
Sparrow
Veteran
Sailor Ted said:
I wonder how it can be that this performance is possible? Logic would suggest that the out of focus IR component of any print would destroy fine detail and contrast change as well as degrading edge sharpness, don't you think
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Sparrow said:
Non issue- use IR cut filters. Read my original post and wait for the reports to start coming in regarding the Leica's exceptional print performance.
It's beginning to seem like a lot of "leicaphiles" are little more then non-photographers playing with their toys and taking happy snaps to view on Dell monitors. Please note I said “a lot" and certainly not "all."
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Sailor Ted said:
Sean is active and well on his own site and the Leica users Forum.. It is sad he was squeezed out of this forum
I think the point is not about sharpness,Francesco. I would assume that aspect to be a undisputable basic fact on the 5D as well as on the M8.fgianni said:
Last edited:
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
jaapv said:
You are of course right, colour accuracy, fine detail resolution, noise at all the ISO settings, colour space, they are all important and measurable, it is when things start to be compared using subjective critera that I start to feel uncomfortable, mainly because what is subjectively better for me may not be the same for someone else.
If you have to put $5000 towards a camera, either you are a lot richer than I am ($5000 are about a couple of orders of magnitude above my impulse buy treshold), or you want some measurable reason for doing it.
Last edited:
Sailor Ted
Well-known
Don't miss the forest for the trees
Don't miss the forest for the trees
Or you like to work with rangefinder gear, no NEED to work with rangefinder gear to work at your best and you find the "subjective" results of a given tool to your liking. Of course you will also need to posses the self-confidence to "trust" your subjective criteria as it relates to the overall print above pixel peeping and other more "objective" criteria.
Some photographers are also artists and for them the best tool is the tool that enables them to make prints they deem "art." Many photogs work is technically "correct" but lacks artistic expression IMO. It's kind of like missing the forest for the trees and I am not pointing the finger to anyone in particular just stating my opinion.
Don't miss the forest for the trees
fgianni said:
Or you like to work with rangefinder gear, no NEED to work with rangefinder gear to work at your best and you find the "subjective" results of a given tool to your liking. Of course you will also need to posses the self-confidence to "trust" your subjective criteria as it relates to the overall print above pixel peeping and other more "objective" criteria.
Some photographers are also artists and for them the best tool is the tool that enables them to make prints they deem "art." Many photogs work is technically "correct" but lacks artistic expression IMO. It's kind of like missing the forest for the trees and I am not pointing the finger to anyone in particular just stating my opinion.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
fgianni said:
I fear my reasons for buying the M8 are all subjective, as they have been over the last 35 years for buying Leica's.
(and acquiring a number of other things in general as well) If human beings were different, there would be precious few marriages around. Having said that, I find I'm rather good at rationalizing after the fact.
Last edited:
Toby
On the alert
jaapv said:I fear my reasons for buying the M8 are all subjective, as they have been over the last 35 years for buying Leica's.
If you buy a camera for non-professional use why shouldn't it be a subjective decision? For many users the M8 is like the sportscar you only drive at the weekends, it's not a logical or rational decision, it's an indulgence and as soon as people own up to this rather than trying to depict it as a mainstream pro camera (which it will never be) the sooner the whole M8 debacle will calm down.
boilerdoc2
Well-known
I agree that it is strictly an indulgence, for me anyhow. However, I want the best at my stage in life and have worked hard for it. Does the M8 have limitations and growing pains? Yep! Nothing is perfect the first time around. Look at the divorce rate! Would you do it again though (get married)? Yep again! Leica will get it right. I just don't like waiting, but I know the result will be worth the wait.
That is an awesome first post Ted!
Steve
That is an awesome first post Ted!
Steve
blakley
blakley
If you buy a camera for non-professional use why shouldn't it be a subjective decision?
For that matter, if you buy a camera for professional use, why shouldn't it be a subjective decision? It is an artistic profession, after all...
For that matter, if you buy a camera for professional use, why shouldn't it be a subjective decision? It is an artistic profession, after all...
fgianni
Trainee Amateur
Sailor Ted said:
Oh I have no problem in trusting my own subjectice criteria, and I usually put my own subjective observations even before lab tests, but here lies the problem, since no one is going to send you a set of prints to compare before you buy, you will have to trust someone else's subjective criteria, so it is not about self-confidence, but more about taking a gamble.
Measurable criteria are the same for everyone, so while I consider them less important than my own subjective observations, I definitely give them more weigth than someone else's subjective observations, this because what is subjectively good for me may well be subjectively rubbish to you.
In conclusion subjective observations are the best way to choose a camera for yourself providing that they are your own, otherwise you will be better off sticking to objective criteria.
Of course if your subjective criteria is: "I want a digital RF Leica brand and don't care about anything else" then fine, it's just that for that kind of money I require a bit more than that.
