Leica M8: Poor mans M Monochrome?

[Monochrom]

Hi, besides the struggle i must say the m8 is a superb camera, not by chance the m9 have the same density of pixels of the m8.

The monochrom has the same sensor as the m9 (beside the specific monchrom arrangements)

So it´s not surprise you´ll get astonishing files from the venerable M8...

But consider youre shooting in a well controlled light,a great deal at an exhibition is to get the best light in order to maximize the punch of the products showed.
Then it´s been told the files from the monochom need PP and many say it crucial for the final result...since ou of the camera files are flat...
Another issue with light is the fact the monochrom handles better broad daylight and the shadows produced out on a sunny day...
The m8 will eventually perform not a good as the monochrom on such scenes...
Not to mention the lack of field or sensor crop on the m8.

But anyway, the m8 is fantastic....but using a FF camera squeezes the best of glasses, since on the m8 you must use expensive glass to get shallow dof or faster speeds....
In that respect the FF leicas can use fine glasses but cheaper ones like the sonnar and the vast offer of great 50 mm lenses, at full field...this final thought is out of the post but think it may be helpful...

cheers!

 

[CameraQuest]

I had a chance to test the M Monochrome at Photo Plus yesterday and what astounded me is the tonal qualities of my M8 were clearly better than what I could see from the monochrome. Yes, I know the mono does better high ISO, but could it be the M8 generates better looking files at ISO 640 and below? One thing is certain, what crippled the M8 in the beginning with the IR issue could be the long term blessing of what still is a wonderful tool for black and white photography. I believe the M8 could well be a black and white classic digital Leica that may be sought after in the years to come. I print on 17" x 27" custom cut Exhibition Fiber on my Epson 3800 and the prints are remarkable. Does this mean the monochrome is not great? Hardly, as we can see from the monochrome threads on this forum. I just feel as I tested the monochome with the lighting conditions at the Photo Plus Expo, the M8 generated better files, especially with a Zeiss 50mm f1.5 that I tried out (FANTASTIC LENS WOW!! Better than my not so old Summicron!). I also looked at the new M and I hate to say it but I was disappointed to some degree. I was more impressed with the Fuji X PRO 1 and the X-E1. The EVF on the X-E1 blew away the M for live view. The LCD on the X Pro-1 blew away the M LCD, especially with my Noctilux in live view. For me, I will stick with my M8's for the rangefinder experience, and I will get the Fuji X Pro-1 if I want live view with M lenses. I may indulge i that wonderful 35mm f1.4 Fujinon as well! If Fuji decides to go full frame, that will be really something!

Also, what is it with those black and white prints at the Leica stand at the Photo Plus Expo? They were just ok. All of them way to contrasty with limited tonal range. Not that great to show off the monochrome in my opinion!

So eleskin has compared Monochrome results to M8 results and gets criticized for sharing his results by people who have not done the same comparison?

By people who don't own either camera?
Really? Seriously?

There has to be other RFF members who own both cameras willing to share their results on this interesting comparison.

Stephen

 

[FrankS]

You've got to admit that it flies in the face of logic though. A company like Leica, as driven as they are by image quality (its sort of their schtik) to design and build a new camera based on digital technology that is still improving, that is outperformed by their previous generation discontinued camera? That is just crazy man.

Would it not be more logical to presume that a difference in output is influenced by inadequate post processing on the part of the user?

And I am not criticizing the OP for sharing his experience, I'm simply suggesting, based on pure logic, that his assertion is in all probability, not the correct.

 

[mani]

There's an old LFI article about the M8's b&w files being better than those from the M9 (because of the weaker IR filter). The thinner filter also gives slightly sharper files - so a controlled comparison with the Monochrom would be very interesting in my view, and didn't deserve the knee-jerk dismissal it received.

 

[leicashot]

Guys, does it 'really' matter? File quality aside, the quality of the picture is what counts most. Cameras don't take pictures, people do.

 

[noimmunity]

There's an old LFI article about the M8's b&w files being better than those from the M9 (because of the weaker IR filter). The thinner filter also gives slightly sharper files - so a controlled comparison with the Monochrom would be very interesting in my view, and didn't deserve the knee-jerk dismissal it received.

If I were into conspiracy theories, I'd be looking into why the sudden lack of parts for used M8s coincides with the release of the M Monochrom ? 😀

A company like Leica, as driven as they are by image quality (its sort of their schtik) ...

Is that what Leica is driven by? :angel:

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

I am now throwing a hot potato in: I think leica made a mistake by discontinuing M8.
When you look at the smaller sensor size scene now, I think M8, maybe with an improved sensor and processor alghoritms, would have a place in today`s marketplace. reasons?
there is a huge market for economical lenses that can be used with M bayonet, some of them could be offered by leica. keep in mind that within two or three years lens production in Wetzlar will be on a completely different level. Also third party lenses, notably Voigtländer, are performing remarkably well in M8...

 

[mani]

Guys, does it 'really' matter?

Not really - but when the MM was announced and everyone had those comparison shots between the M9 and the MM showing how the monochrome files were sharper and had 'better' tonality, I was kinda curious why no-one tested it against the M8. So that's all really - just plain old curiosity. We can't be out shooting masterpieces all the time.

 

[CameraQuest]

Guys, does it 'really' matter? File quality aside, the quality of the picture is what counts most. Cameras don't take pictures, people do.

well, it matters to me.

Considering what the Monochrom sells for compared to a used M8 or 8.2

If B/W from the older cameras are even remotely close to the much more expensive Monochrome at slower ISO's that is GREAT news to me - I own a 8.2!

Stephen

 

[FrankS]

Ahhh .

 

[twopointeight]

I shoot an M8.2 with mainly a 35mm Summilux Aspherical. I use it for B&W jobs, editorial and corporate in nature, and make 13X19 and 17X22 prints. That's at 640 iso, and LR4 processing. No M9 or MM to compare, but for me, and a few discerning clients, it works. I plan to use this combo for a couple of more years, maybe more?

 

[raid]

well, it matters to me.

Considering what the Monochrom sells for compared to a used M8 or 8.2

If B/W from the older cameras are even remotely close to the much more expensive Monochrome at slower ISO's that is GREAT news to me - I own a 8.2!

Stephen

I agree with Stephen, in addition to my dismay of having some people here say things that pretty much amounts to putting other people's opinions down.


I think that all cameras do well if you know how to best use each camera.
I have used the M8 in B@W, and I find th results beautiful directly from the camera.

 

[rbelyell]

So eleskin has compared Monochrome results to M8 results and gets criticized for sharing his results by people who have not done the same comparison?

By people who don't own either camera?
Really? Seriously?

There has to be other RFF members who own both cameras willing to share their results on this interesting comparison.

Stephen

yup, that was my point above. i just dont get it. i have neither, but found the OP very interesting, and in some ways eminently sensible. why some need to slam OP is beyond me...

 

[back alley]

ok, from now...disagreements will no longer be allowed on rff...is that what people want?

 

[doolittle]

You've got to admit that it flies in the face of logic though. A company like Leica, as driven as they are by image quality (its sort of their schtik) to design and build a new camera based on digital technology that is still improving, that is outperformed by their previous generation discontinued camera? That is just crazy man.

Do I detect a touch of irony or sarcasm here?
The underlying sensor is the same on the M8,M8.2,M9 and MM. Yes there some differences on the size of the sensor and the toppings on top, but there isn't really much of a generational difference between them, more nuisances. Biggest difference is the difference in processing between the M8s and the later models, the strengthening of the IR filter and the removal of the bayer filter on the MM. Thus I think the OP makes a valid aesthetic argument, which is of course a matter of taste.

It's not heresy to compare the pictures produced by each of the cameras. In film terms it's comparing Tri-X with Acros or the results achieved by different developers. It's the look and not mathematics.

Offering an opinion that newer doesn't have to mean better isn't ridiculous or illogical.

 

[jarski]

some comparison photos would be nice. personally dont believe M8 sensor would be better than later models, anymore than RD1 often having such comments here.

 

[bonatto]

Sometimes we seem to forget that our masterclass heroes used to shoot slow lenses, slow cameras, and slow film. What we have today is a huge spectrum of comforts and technological privileges. Today you can get a good M8 for £1000, so from a practical sense it's still much more accessible than an MM.

Are they different? Yes.

Vastly so? Maybe.

Does it really matter if you're taking pictures of a cat? Not really.

Bottom line, Canon, Leica, or iPhone, what really counts is what's placed within those four edges.

I must say though, it would be awesome to pixel peep 100%'s side by side from both cameras, especially with some fresh ASPH glass in front. May just remind us what a good value the M8 really is!

 

[leicashot]

well, it matters to me.

Considering what the Monochrom sells for compared to a used M8 or 8.2

If B/W from the older cameras are even remotely close to the much more expensive Monochrome at slower ISO's that is GREAT news to me - I own a 8.2!

Stephen

My point is that none of it matters when people are getting emotional over a disagreement. We're all here to enjoy the forum, yet people become so upset when others disagree over pointless speculation. Unless people can provide side by side examples, no one is correct.....and I have a Monochrom.

 

[leicapixie]

The M8 is a good camera even if Leica is busy burying it. It is not perfect. My M3 is not perfect. The OP made a valid observation. I have noticed on two of my digital cameras similar great B/W but sometimes awful color, the magenta problem. One of the boxes has a Kodak sensor.. Heavy magenta influence.
Cloudy days a special no-no. Yet both deliver superb B/W. No programs needed, no green channel adjustments. Leica's use of certain photographers photos, to publicize their camera, are very contrasty and sooty.
I am pleased with his observation. I have made similar observations about so called APO lenses. A few lenses sold as such, are not.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Like most people, I've not tried it. But:

(1) It is counterintuitive that the M8 should be better. This is not the same as 'untrue'.

(2) Without a thorough, long-term test it is impossible to say, "This camera, with which I am familiar, is superior to a camera I have tried briefly." Or, of course, vice versa.

(3) For B+W prints, wet-printed film still wipes the floor with digital as far as I am concerned.

Cheers,

R.