Leica M8: Poor mans M Monochrome?

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
5:56 AM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
I have been working with black and white film, paper etc,,, since 1987, and the Leica was my first digital camera. I can say the black and white I get is on par with much of what I have used since 1987 in terms of black and white image quality. Maybe this has much to do with the M8's sensitivity to IR? At any rate, I have been reading much about the new M monochrome. The files look amazing, but at $8,000, most cannot afford such a camera. The M8 is much cheaper and a case can be made that the old M8 is the next best thing to a monochrome if one wants quality black and white. I do not own an M9 but my impression was when testing the M9 was my M8 files had a crispness the M9 lacked (i thought the M9 files looked a little mushy or soft. The M8 had more bite). So to me, the M8 seems like the next best thing to the Monochrome M. The problem is the M8 high ISO is not that great above 640, although some have used Lightroom 4 noise reduction to overcome some of this. I do not have LR 4 yet, so I would be interested in anyone here who has an M8 and uses LR4 to get the most out of high ISO. At any rate, anyone else feel the M8 is a great cheaper alternative to the M Monochrome?
 
Gee,

All I wanted was some intelligent discussion on how the M8 is a great black and white camera for those of us who cannot afford an M Monochrome. Lets get back to the issue at hand.

By the way, I shoot 80% for black and white and some have set their M8's to shoot Raw and JPEG B&W. This is a cool alternative. I can get a black and white preview and not be distracted by the color LCD output. During editing, I can trash the JPEG's and only use raw.
 
I find the M8 to be excellent for B&W, especially (as noted previously) when the IR-cut filters are not being used.

I've played around with shooting RAW + small B&W JPEG when shooting B&W, but I always come back to just RAW only for some reason.

In comparison with the M-M (which I've admittedly not used), the M8 wouldn't stand up as well at the higher ISOs, however I do quite like the noise pattern of the M8 at higher ISOs when converted to B&W, so I guess it depends on individual preference.
 
From experience, the M8 RAW files are really good enough for any type of manipulation you wish to perform on them in Lightroom or Photoshop. In fact, I would hazard a guess and say you get MORE control with a colour RAW than with the Monochrom's "shades of grey". I actually had several presets I liked to apply to my M8 files back when I still had the camera that allowed me to achieve several unique B&W look and feel.

So yes, it would be a good alternative if you don't want to lose the mechanical rangefinder/viewfinder, but can't afford the insane price of a Monochrom.
 
to eleskin's point, which i find quite interesting and clear (for that matter). i primarily shoot in b&w, with an M8 for about five years. i would really like to get to FF, but i agree that the M9's b&w rendering seems no better and perhaps worse. i am intrigued by the monochrom, but not by the idea of being locked in to b&w exclusively. it's tempting, though. on my M8, i started shooting with UV/IR filters, but no longer use them. in total, i am happy with M8's rendering of b&w, but--ahhh--i like FF (as i have been reminded from a month or so of experimenting with the M6) ...
 
I know I gave my opinion of the M8 above, but if you REALLY want to go with a poor man's option, why not consider a Mirrorless camera? Say NEX-5N or NEX-5R with the Electronic Viewfinder attachment :) You can mount your M-lenses nicely on these, and they provide quite an excellent way to manually focus as well.
 
I use my M8 primarily as a B&W camera and am always impressed with it's performance - both in tonality and sharpness, whether i use IR filters or not. It may be no MM, but it's giving me the look i've wanted from my photos, even when i was using my M6 with TriX


At The Junction by Cris Rose, on Flickr


The Sun And The Dunes by Cris Rose, on Flickr


Home In The Dunes by Cris Rose, on Flickr


The Bridge to Nothing by Cris Rose, on Flickr

I paid £1700 for a top-notch, mint example - while i'd love an MM or M9, the jump in expensive, isn't worth it for me.
 
Thank you very much Jon :)

It's true, if you want B&W, rangefinder and the excellent M mount lenses, Bessa bodies are great and cheaper than "M". But bessa don't do digital, and this is a discussion about whether the M8 is a poor(er) man's MM - digitals.

So to get back on topic, i would say that yes, you can get very good B&W out of an M8 - the files will be smaller, the ISO more limited, but photos are more about the subject than the gear. Therefore i would say you'll get no better a photo from an MM than with an M8 and that many on this forum would get better shots with an M8 than others here would with an MM/M9/S2/Jewel-encrustedSX70
 
eleskin said:
..... anyone else feel the M8 is a great cheaper alternative to the M Monochrome?
Click to expand...

Errrrr - yes, though in the Alice in Wonderland world of forums it tends to be a contrary view. I downsized to the M8 after reading David Adamson's epic thread "40inch prints from the M8" on LUF's M8 Forum. [Google him for his seriously good credentials].

I don't need exhibition prints to be 40 inches long, and I certainly don't need MM files capable of making prints larger than 40 inches, so I see several disadvantages with the MM. This is a considered view, but a minority one.

.............. Chris
 
I don't understand: I thought the Sony NEX was the "poor man's M8" (as declared many months ago elsewhere in a different thread OP), and hence, that (the Sony NEX) should be "the poor man's M Monochrome".

Assuming, of course, that the "poor man" isn't too poor to buy the NEX and the computer and the software to do the B&W post-processing...
 
Gabriel M.A. said:
I don't understand: I thought the Sony NEX was the "poor man's M8" (as declared many months ago elsewhere in a different thread OP), and hence, that (the Sony NEX) should be "the poor man's M Monochrome".

Assuming, of course, that the "poor man" isn't too poor to buy the NEX and the computer and the software to do the B&W post-processing...
Click to expand...

the M8 has very unique B&W capabilities due to its sensitive IR profile. The Nex does not have those characteristics.....the only reason a Nex could be a 'poor man's M8' is because it's easy to adapt Leica lenses for use on them. That's it, really.
 
Some picture I had put also in another thread before:
M8.2 with summicron 35mm IV:
Veere.jpg
 
Wow Cris love the Sun and Dunes pic. I have been getting back into digital B&W lately with my M9 in anticipation of the new M and my drift away from film. Printed a couple on some rag paper with my Canon 9500II and was really happy with the results.
Great to see some superb digital images here, very inspirational.
 
Thanks Hausen!

Gabriel, i have an NEX as well, and the files just aren't the same - they're no where near as sharp even tho the MP are higher - and the shooting experience is nowhere even close. I got my NEX as a cheap digital body to mount the lenses from my M2 and M6 but i disliked using it so much, i saved up for 4 months to buy an M8... and now it's my main camera!

The NEX is mainly for shots of my artworks and video now.

But everyone likes something different. I never got shots out my NEX like i do from my M8 tho.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom