Leica M8 ---> Not Happy!

[Nh3]

If you were a true professional you would have never bought the Leica M8 in the first place. Secondly buying the 5D was a bad idea because you could have bought the Nikon D3 and shot at ISO 6400 with no problem.

So, my conclusion is that you're either a Canon fanboy or a shill because your rant does not hold water and the plug for 5D is too obvious.

 

[willie_901]

While noise measurements alone can not fully summarize the aesthetic potential of a given sensor, this web site contains direct comparisons of the chroma and luma noise of several DSLRs and the M8.

The following link compares the 5D and the M8.

http://kammagamma.com/articles/noise-analysis-db.php?camera1=3&camera2=13

Each comparison is briefly discussed at the end of the page.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

Can I have your M8?

Can I have your M8?

Ill give you $2500.00 for you garbage M8. By the way what camera did you use to take all the red pictures on your
Free Flicker account?
Id like to see your professional web site. Bill

 

[FioreVelviamo]

Ill give you $2500.00 for you garbage M8. By the way what camera did you use to take all the red pictures on your
Free Flicker account?
Id like to see your professional web site. Bill

I'm interested too... but it seems it is an insulting request.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

M8 bashing

M8 bashing

I never could understand all of the M8 bashing when there is nothing to compare it too. It’s always Canon this or Epson that and yet nether Co. makes a comparable camera. Like it or not, in the hole wide world the M8 stands alone. I believe in this day of advanced technology and all of the great camera company’s, Leica is the only Co. to take the challenge to R & D the M8.
I for one am grateful they put there money and reputation on the RF digital line. Now lets see how long it will take these other big name companies to build a DRF camera. In two years I’ve seen nothing.
With all of this said you will still see every day, DSLR people telling the rest of us the M8 is a failure. Bill

 

[delander]

With all of this said you will still see every day, DSLR people telling the rest of us the M8 is a failure. Bill

And they take such glee in it. Why, do they simply want Leica to go down the tubes?

Jeff

 

[Richard Marks]

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

1. If you are a professional, it usually shows. You do not need to state this.
2. You make some very valid criticisms of the M8 but the title of your post is unnecessarily both allarmist and histrionic. The word "garbage" quite predictably is offensive to those who do own an M8 and do not share your opinions. I take objection to you referring to my camera as "Garbage".
3. You express concern that in some way postings on your thread might affect your potential client base. I doubt it, but it is a little late for that now!
4. If your commets are aimed at Leica and not the camera then the obvious place to make this point is to Leica. I am sure that a "professional" of your standing would have a greater impact via the front door.

best wishes

Richard Marks

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I'm sure that Nikon and Canon, looking at the less than 20,000 M8's Leica has managed to sell, are not particularly interested in the R&D investment for that kind of return on a DRF, when they can sell every digital slr and P&S that comes off the line.

That's more than the S3-2000 and SP-2005 production.

I can hope.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

1/2 Right

1/2 Right

I'm sure that Nikon and Canon, looking at the less than 20,000 M8's Leica has managed to sell, are not particularly interested in the R&D investment for that kind of return on a DRF, when they can sell every digital slr and P&S that comes off the line.

Richard Marks[/quote]


My guess is you are right but there are thousands of M mount type lens in the world and more being developed every day. There are some really great M lens being manufactured , CV, Zeiss, Leica, Konica plus older models, all together the amounts are not insignificant.
By the way 90% can be used on the M8 with a adapter.
I think the problem is, Canon / Nikon don’t want to risk there reputations buy not being able to create a better camera than the M8. Ever notice how one company tries to add one more useless feature to out do the other. This how they ride on the R & D wave of each other. Every new DSLR camera has more wasted menu inputs than my Mac G4. The bottom line, they don’t have the gonads, to venture out side there safe zone of making fatter and fatter and fatter and fatter DSLR cameras. I predict the new fat cameras will have HDR and GPS turn by turn by the end of the year. Man what a great camera that will be. Bill

 

[EtoileFinder]

Ill give you $2500.00 for you garbage M8. By the way what camera did you use to take all the red pictures on your
Free Flicker account?
Id like to see your professional web site. Bill

I sold it within a month and lost a few hundred dollars in the process. professional.

He said it is sold.

I'm not sure to understand why you think there's no camera to compare with the M8. Maybe it is impossible to compare 2 cameras in all theirs properties, but I think you can made comparison on specific aspects by setting specific criteriions for specific condition of shooting. Like the noise in low light condition.

 

[POINT OF VIEW]

thanks

thanks

My guess is you are right but there are thousands of M mount type lens in the world and more being developed every day. There are some really great M lens being manufactured , CV, Zeiss, Leica, Konica plus older models, all together the amounts are not insignificant.
By the way 90% can be used on the M8 with a adapter.
I think the problem is, Canon / Nikon don’t want to risk there reputations buy not being able to create a better camera than the M8. Ever notice how one company tries to add one more useless feature to out do the other. This how they ride on the R & D wave of each other. Every new DSLR camera has more wasted menu inputs than my Mac G4. The bottom line, they don’t have the gonads, to venture out side there safe zone of making fatter and fatter and fatter and fatter DSLR cameras. I predict the new fat cameras will have HDR and GPS turn by turn by the end of the year. Man what a great camera that will be. Bill

 

[HAnkg]

That's more than the S3-2000 and SP-2005 production.

I can hope.

Those were limited runs of film cameras for which they had all the dies and components.

I have no doubt with their resources that Canon or Nikon could make a better and cheaper DRF especially if it was not hobbled by the digital unfriendly M mount. The problem is they have zero incentive to invest the resources into developing a camera based on a finder technology that was abandoned by the vast majority of photographers 50 years ago.

It's a niche market and it's very expensive to develop digital for small markets. They get more marketing cache from people seeing their AF DSLR's and lenses used at sporting events and at news conferences so there is not even a marketing incentive to do it at a loss for marketing reasons.

Unless Mr. Kobayashi at Cosina suddenly becomes a digital convert Leica is likely to be the only DRF choice for the foreseeable future. That's assuming Leica survives.

 

[FioreVelviamo]

Oh Noooooooooooooooooooooo!
Now we're back to the "Will Leica survive" kinda threads.

 

[marco0782]

On CMOS vs. CCD:

The main difference between the two is that CMOS is significantly cheaper to manufacture. Therefore it is easier to make cost-effective high-megapixel sensors. The only difference in image quality is that CMOS sensors are not succeptible to vertical smear like CCD's are.

People saying that CMOS sensors are less noisy or more sensitive than CCD are wrong. It all depends on the sensor design, the size of the pixels, etc. Neither technology seems to have an advantage in this regard.


Marco

 

[gdi]

Thanks Dan! I'm going to give that a try. I've been shooting everything at 160 and "pushing" it in ACR, then using Noise Ninja to clean up any residual noise I find objectionable, but I know I'm losing some quality in the process. I'm glad I waded through this cowpasture of a thread and found your post.

I will only get involved in this thread for one reason -- to publicly commend Dan States (again) for the tips he offers regarding processing the M8's high ISO files! Follow his instructions using C1V4. It works.

Doesn't this ISO 2500 shot look pretty clean? Downsized, yes, but hopefully large enough to judge.

Thanks for developing a great technique Dan!

 

[jaapv]

Not just Dan, but expertly applied here as well, Gary.

 

[tomasis]

looks pretty good! iso 3200 wow

 

[Keith]

At post #126 all I can say is ... "I still like my M8 and it's serving me well and I'll keep it until it no longer continues to do so!"

In the true context of life ... someone calling my favourite digital camera 'gargbage' means little ... the earth still turns and the planets still revolve around the sun.

When I think that all the elements that make up my M8 came from this particular planet's resources I'm reminded of what a clever bunch we humans are!

SOMETIMES!

 

[kittyphoto]

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

--ARA
I am not sure you read all the replies or not. A lot of people try to tell you about noise and a lot of sample too. Please read all the post again.

 

[tmfabian]

I'd never use that fuji re-branded PoS hunk of plastic that is the H3. Now pop a nice little digi back on say a 503 and you got yerself a dandy machine.
And would people stop comparing reliability to DSLR's...EVERY SINGLE DIGITAL CAMERA will fault, die, freeze up, have dead pixels, or come defective....i'm sorry but digital just simply isn't as reliable as film cameras....even though I love my m8 and have used it on $10k+ jobs, I will never ever have a bag packed with only digital equipment, there is always a film backup camera for every camera I use.

by the way i own an M8 and my personal experience is that
it is a bit overpriced , not as reliable as a Canon but

if you find your own work flow in post production you can get really good results
i printed up to 16x20 inches and the quality is great for my standards.

the way i see it if you have a big commission that the quality must be outstanding you hire an H3D .

in my opinion you can not compare H3D and phaseone with the M8.