Leica M8 ---> Not Happy!

I think the M8 is a camera that one has to grow into, get a feel for it's abilities. A zen experience like no other digital camera. Sure the M8 isn't for everyone but give it some time. Just because the camera doesn't fit your shooting style, don't post a thread calling it garbage. I remember when all the hype over the M8 was going on here Chris Weeks got his hands on one and wrote an excellent review. After seeing his photos & reading his review I simply came to the conclusion that most of the ones complaining about the M8 just simply didn't know what they were doing.
 
its unrealistic expect M8 to compete competitively against Nikon and Canon in the digital arena even from price point. Analog bodies from Leica never were cheap compared to SLR either.

There again it is RF and SLR differences. I notice that some people dont care about it and stare at images instead of to judge how is to use the camera. Thats good, maybe not it. Some buy ZM lenses because they are sharp, other buy Leica because superior ergonomics etc. What can we really do if none has even didnt released 2nd generation digital RF.

So I wish those people good luck with bricks or "mobiles" :)
 
Sorry to be a pedant (I'm a lawyer) but it is libel when the defammation is by written word, slander when spoken. In this case describing a professionals work as garbage may well be libel, as describing the M8 as garbage would probably be too. The fact that the expressions are opinion is not a defence (at least in Englih law). Worse still, it is not only the person who wrote the comment tbat could find themselves in trouble, but the forum and web hosetr itself for publishing it.

On the other hand, I think we all agree (including me as a lawyer) that the intrusion of the law into creative, technical and artistic debate on this and similar forums is not helpful. A modecum of self restraint is thus called for. Instead of describing other people's work, opinions or cameras as complete garbage or other such hyperbole, a more reasoned approach to the argument would be healthy. In my opinion.
 
Nick De Marco said:
Sorry to be a pedant (I'm a lawyer) but it is libel when the defammation is by written word, slander when spoken. In this case describing a professionals work as garbage may well be libel...
Click to expand...

Although it's a tangent, I'd love to know how many successful cases of either have been brought against critics of any artists' works. My admittedly uninformed guess is: virtually none. Critics publicly bash works of art (notably films) regularly, yet I don't see any of them (or their media sponsors) getting sued as a result.
 
Ara Ghajanian said:
I would like to thank the people who pointed out that FioreVelviamo's response was uncalled for. Whether you like my work or not is not the issue here, but I AM a professional and the comment made is slanderous. If you do a search on Google for my name, this post will come up. Thus a potential client may see that someone has called my work "garbage" and decide not to work with me. It's unlikely this will happen, but it is still a possibility and I take this comment very seriously.

Once again, my comments were made not to bash this camera, but to light a small fire under Leica's ass so that in the future they may offer us a camera that is worthy of the Leica reputation.
Ara
Click to expand...
No, the quote isn't slanderous - nor libelous, which is what you mean. It's a dramatic overstatement, following a precedent which you set!

Your points are generally reasonable, but by going beyond that and calling the M8 'garbage' you are merely using up bandwidth. You invited the petulant responses by posting such a petulant thread. To be fair, its one in a series which sadly demonstrates how impossible it seems to have any sustained, reasoned debate on the camera.
 
A few things need to be said here:
1: There is no mysterious Leica conspiracy to use an obsolete sensor etc.
The reason this one is used is because it is the very best sensor for a RF camera. If there were a better one Leica would use it.
2: The same goes for the full-frame wish. If it were at all feasable Leica would build it.
One only has to talk to the people that build and design it to realise that. In fact, Zeiss has stated repeatedly that they woul build one as soon as they could....
3.Many high-level photographers think the M8 files are as good or better than any camera in the 135 class. One may disagree, but the issue is at least open to debate.
The Germans have a nice expression for those who think anybody is able to build a better DRF at the present time: They live in Wolkenkukuksland....
 
leicasniper said:
"If you're the type of person who knows what they want, takes the time to see, and takes the time to process your files correctly (meaning shooting RAW), the M8 is better than anything out there."

Then why can't Leica sell more than 20,000 of them? I see this claim all the time; but, why wouldn't all of these top pros for whom the cost is no issue be using the camera with files "better than anything out there." Why are they wasting their money on Canon and Nikon?

I do, though, agree that, whatever the M8 is, it's not garbage.
Click to expand...

For any pro, cost IS an issue. If all you want is a jpeg for your news service or agency, the M8 is probably not the way to go. Leica doesn't have to sell 20,000 M8s. I'm sure it would be nice if they did. Leicas were never mass market cameras.
 
Last edited:
I think that the situation for both the two European camera producers are dramatic due to the drastic change in business environment. No, I will not draw another long rant about 'the falling dollar'. That's not neccessary. Now business here in Europe is in for a serious dip.

Obviously, to compensate for the very poor gross profit from the US market, Leica increased prices here in Europe. Here in Norway from about 27.000 to 38.500 - sales tax included. What Norwegian Leica enthusiast did was to travel to New York and buy their M-gear there, tax free, and save a sum greater than the flight ticket. If they bought a few lenses too, they had the whole trip covered, hotel fare and a dinner at Sparks Steak House - excellent by the way, included.

Hasselblad has also increased their prices here in Europe, obviously to compensate for losses on the US market. But now they have decided to 'run a campaign' with - essentially, selling H3's in Europe to 'American prices'.

Leica should do the same.
 
I find it hillarious that so many people always claim x equipment or y equipment is crap when in reality, it doesnt really matter if you are a good photographer.


A camera is a camera is a camera is a camera.


If Alex Majoli can use a point and shoot digital olympus 10mp camera and take as great reportage photos as he can, then im pretty sure this entire thread is moot as hell.


Its not the equipment, its the person behind it that makes the photos. Nothing is ever perfect so stop worrying about it.
 
As I said earlier, I'm talking about the noise issue. It has nothing to do with rangefinders per se. I love rangefinders and wish the M8 worked for me, but it doesn't BECAUSE OF THE NOISE ISSUE. Sorry I said it was garbage. Wow, I'm never logging into the M8 forums again. Say all you want about my photos now. You can ever say I have a small dick or whatever pleases you and helps you sleep better at night. I'll never see the responses. I'll lurk in the shadows of the Leica M forum. I have no complaints whatsoever with Leica film cameras.

You people are like the angry abusive father who beats his kid after a long day of work because the kid says "Dad, you look tired."
Goodbye,
Ara
 
"Dad, you look tired." = "Leica M8 ---> Useless garbage!"

Welcome to Ara's world!

As he (apparently) won't be re-joining us anytime soon, I suppose that it won't help to point out that if he had begun the discussion in a reasonably civil tone, it would not likely have degenerated as it did.
 
Last edited:
Ara Ghajanian said:
I want Leica to hear our voices and produce a better camera.

The funny thing is that if we all took the opinion of the M8 being "good enough", then Leica would just produce it for the next 50 years. I don't know about the rest of you, but I have to sell a lot of "garbage" to make $5500.
Click to expand...

It is amazing how all these rants turn out to be just to help Leica.

As a first digital M camera, and that is what it is, for me it is easily 'good enough'. Maybe I have been lucky but as the lucky guys dont come onto forums saying how great everything is, I feel that some balance is always required.

Jeff
 
Some basic rules of the Internet/forums. Whatever attitude you bring to the party is pretty certain to be reflected right back at you.
If you attack (and I'd say that calling the camera garbage qualifies as an attack) something that people care about, someone is going to get offended and respond in kind.
If you can't handle the flames, don't start a fire.
 
For me, the most maddening thing about using the M8 wasn't the noise issue, although I did find it annoying. It was the other problems that the camera had, i.e. the horrible AWB, the unreliability, etc. Some of the image "problems" that it has can be worked around if you take the time to massage the camera for the specific shooting environment one is in, and also take the time to massage the image further in post, but when you're using it as a photojournalist's camera – which I would – then the little idiosyncrasies that some people are keen to defend make it nigh unusable in the field, IMO.

The M8 has it's strong points. Some like it, some hate it, some are indifferent. But for me, even with my personal list of pros and cons, the big looming question in the room – the one that Leica needs to ponder – is: Is the M8 really worthy of the Leica name? My answer is "No." I'm sure some of you will agree and disagree.

To defend my point, I will simply ask you to compare the number of M8-bashing threads to the number of threads bashing the film-body M's. It isn't even a contest.

Any camera that has the name Leica on it should conform to a certain standard. That is what we, as Leica users, pay for: something that is as close to photographic perfection as can be achieved. Something that is reliable all the time and is of the highest precision. Something that I can turn to when I'm in trouble, knowing that I will still be able to get the shot. Something that won't decide to flake out on me when I need it most. Something that I don't have to second-guess in the field. As it turned out, the M8 was not that camera for me. I sent the M8 tester that I had back to the dealer and bought a used R-D1 instead, and I love it. It is reliable, consistent, and IMO it behaves much more like a camera should. I do wish it had an updated chip and a longer baseline, but for what it is, it's awesome and serves me well in the field. 'Nuff said.

I hope that when the M9 comes out I will be singing a different tune. But until then, I hope that those of you who are happy with your M8 bodies continue to enjoy them, and I hope that those of you who hate them continue to refuse to buy them; input from both camps will help Leica make an even better camera for the future.
 
Darren Abate said:
To defend my point, I will simply ask you to compare the number of M8-bashing threads to the number of threads bashing the film-body M's. It isn't even a contest.
Click to expand...

I won't disagree with much of what you said. But this is pretty unfair - the idea of comparing a new technology with one that is quite mature. It isn't a contest because it compares two very different things. Apples and oranges.
 
tbarker13 said:
I won't disagree with much of what you said. But this is pretty unfair - the idea of comparing a new technology with one that is quite mature. It isn't a contest because it compares two very different things. Apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

I feel it is fair because it asks people to compare two incarnations of "Leica" and what is worthy of the name and the premium. Leica could have taken care of a lot of the M8's issues through more R&D and field testing in the hands of pros.

But to make it more fair, we can change it to a comparison of M8-bashing threads to M3-bashing threads. That evens the "new technology" playing field a bit. :cool:
 
i don't know where i stand.
i shoot alot of music, and for good quality color photos i can not go over 640.
if i must shoot 1250 its going to be processed B&W.
i have had 4 go back ( i use 2 bodies) and now have a set that functions without menu quirks, dead pixels etc.

i was thinking that i should use a 5d for stage work, but the character of the leica lenses and the overall digital m8 look is quite desirable. i'm going to stick it out, now if i could find a noctilux for a decent price my woes would be over. i shoot with the 75 1.4 and a 35 1.4 asph, and a 50 1.4 on stage generally and the only thing that would help would be a noctilux.

check out my flickr,
or my website @ web.mac.com/j_lir
for some live music shots.

cheers
 
compromise

compromise

All the cameras I have ever used have been compromises. They all have sucked in one way or another, some more then others. The Canon 1 Ds was an oustanding camera by any objective measure compared to it's competition and I used it for 3 years but I hated the camera and it's ergonomics. I wanted to shoot digital so it was a compromise I was willing to make. For others the Canon 1 series ergonomics where great, no compromise at all. To each his own.

My favorite film camera of all time was by any objective measure a temperamental Rube Goldberg contraption with oddball ergonomics and a wonky delicate wiring harness. But I loved the Plaubel Makina 67 RF, it was a perfect fit for my way of working.

I wish someone would make the ideal camera for ME and I wish it cost $300. but until then I'll be using cameras like the M8. Frustrating and annoying in their faults, limitations and dumb design 'features' but better then alternative cameras for my way of working. One person's piece of crap is another's working tool.

Leica really fell short of the bar set by the film M's but I wouldn't set my expectations to high for a boutique manufacturer trying to produce a ground up digital camera design for a tiny niche market. That is not a formula for cost effective leading edge technology. So if paying a hefty premium for the privilege of looking through an RF finder instead of an SLR finder seems idiotic to you there are plenty of good DSLR's to choose from.

I shoot the M8 RAW between ISO 100-640 with the EV at -2/3 -that's more latitude and IQ then I ever had with E6 35mm film. I haven't had any problems with the camera and I'll continue to use it for what it's good for and pull out a DSLR or MF digital when the job requires it.

I hope Leica survives and the M9 is a lot better then the M8 but I'm not holding my breadth. In the meantime I'm happy to have the M8 warts and all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom