You can buy a Mack warranty. It is more of an insurance policy, in reality. Leica will do the actual work.
Jeff S
Well-known
I'll be as kind as I can and just say that you have no idea what you're talking about. Really.
Jeff
Jeff S
Well-known
I owned an M8.2 and wanted a second camera. I could have afforded 2 M9s, but decided instead to buy another M8.2, and not primarily for cost reasons. I explained my rationale here.
Others may certainly have a different view. But this solution works fine for me. And for me, it's all about the print. Toward this end, there are many more important considerations in the entire digital workflow than worrying about the already fine M8.2. If one understands how to get the best out of the whole chain from camera to processing software to printer to papers to profiles to calibrations and settings, etc., then the M8.2 is more than sufficient for less than humongous sized prints.
Jeff
DamenS
Well-known
Personally I'd wait - but thats just because the Sony Nex 7 should be released soon and I would also like to see a bit more of the Ricoh GXR-M module first (both of which will be a lot less expensive if you do decide they are suitable).
If you don't use your Canon because it is too big then you do need to get a different camera.
Don't know why you said fast glass always beats High ISO - seems silly to me. If a camera can do 6,400 iso with the same quality as one does 1,600 iso then you can use a smaller, lighter, less-expensive (and most likely better quality) lens and not have to worry so much about focus errors due to a razor thin DOF of the fast lens. You may prefer a Leica 50mm f0.95 to a Canon 50mm f1.4, but the costs will be great (and it is only a one stop difference). Give me a really good high ISO and a small, cheap, light f1.4 or f2 lens any day !!
If you don't use your Canon because it is too big then you do need to get a different camera.
Don't know why you said fast glass always beats High ISO - seems silly to me. If a camera can do 6,400 iso with the same quality as one does 1,600 iso then you can use a smaller, lighter, less-expensive (and most likely better quality) lens and not have to worry so much about focus errors due to a razor thin DOF of the fast lens. You may prefer a Leica 50mm f0.95 to a Canon 50mm f1.4, but the costs will be great (and it is only a one stop difference). Give me a really good high ISO and a small, cheap, light f1.4 or f2 lens any day !!
davidtth
Established
i just owned a M8 around 2 month, reason why i bought M8
1. i'm ok with ISO, as far i concern is to keep low ISO for color (320 max) and 1600 for B&W use. image are still very good, i would take the noise as grain in film rather than bad looking digital noise
2. Its cheapest and bigger sensor so far (1.3x compare to NEX or Epson 1.5x), advantage on wide focal length
3. battery weak? while after i did some research i found there is way to tackle the life spend in each battery, and it works well (at least 400 shot)
4. frameline, as far my experience, i dont really bother in composition anymore when doing street or portrait, most importantly is to keep the object in the frame line.
5. shutter sounds. I dun really bother on this, i took a snap and i walk away. having say its still loud compare to film camera (cloth shutter vs metal)
6. UV/IR filter. I dun use any, I shot in DNG file and tweak the dark color, i find it acceptable.
7. M9 is more than double of the M8 price, and i've heard M8 issue is lesser compare to M9 (correct me if i'm wrong). with that amount you may spend on few good lenses.
1. i'm ok with ISO, as far i concern is to keep low ISO for color (320 max) and 1600 for B&W use. image are still very good, i would take the noise as grain in film rather than bad looking digital noise
2. Its cheapest and bigger sensor so far (1.3x compare to NEX or Epson 1.5x), advantage on wide focal length
3. battery weak? while after i did some research i found there is way to tackle the life spend in each battery, and it works well (at least 400 shot)
4. frameline, as far my experience, i dont really bother in composition anymore when doing street or portrait, most importantly is to keep the object in the frame line.
5. shutter sounds. I dun really bother on this, i took a snap and i walk away. having say its still loud compare to film camera (cloth shutter vs metal)
6. UV/IR filter. I dun use any, I shot in DNG file and tweak the dark color, i find it acceptable.
7. M9 is more than double of the M8 price, and i've heard M8 issue is lesser compare to M9 (correct me if i'm wrong). with that amount you may spend on few good lenses.
Lss
Well-known
I usually remove the IR cut filters for low light for exactly this reason, but to be honest the reflections are seldom that bad. I have a bunch of bad pictures from a number of cameras that are even worse due to the reflections. Can't say I mind the reflections that much on any good ones.
Ben Z
Veteran
How about getting the latest Rebel/Kiss? Those are much smaller and lighter and have the same crop factor as the 7D.
I can only compare to the 20D and 5D. The Canon's are a low-pitched but slightly louder "clack" than the M8's softer, higher-pitched "click". However the real noise of the M8 (and M9) is the higher-pitched "whirr" of the shutter recocking after each shot. There is no comparable sound with the Canons, just the clack of the shutter/mirror.
The question I'd be asking is if there's a warranty and for how long. If not, or if it's only 30 days, me personally I would not spend $2K on it. A new shutter costs around $750, a new sensor probably double that.
All M framelines are accurate at only one distance, because they are fixed whereas the angle of coverage changes as lenses are extended with focusing. With the film cameras, Leica also accomodated for the amount a negative or slide was masked by the enlarger or a slide mount. What I will always maintain happened is that they forgot about that when they designed the M8, and merely accounted for the sensor crop factor. Bottomline, if you make an effort to understand and commit to memory how the framelines relate to actual capture at various distances, you can get on with the original M8 framelines. If not, the upgraded aka M8.2 framelines are a better compromise for normal-distance and far-distance composition.
BMacW
Established
A better way to look at this.
Do you love shooting RF cameras and need a digital version?
if YES, Can you afford an M9?
if NO => Get the M8 and enjoy it (You will)
P.S. No offense to RD1 owners, but the current going price for RD-1 ain't much cheaper than M8.
Do you love shooting RF cameras and need a digital version?
if YES, Can you afford an M9?
if NO => Get the M8 and enjoy it (You will)
P.S. No offense to RD1 owners, but the current going price for RD-1 ain't much cheaper than M8.
Jeff S
Well-known
lonemantis
Well-known
Well, this certainly is a lot to think about! Anyway, I've decided to hold off on buying an M8, at least for now. I'd agree with several of you that it still takes great pictures, but I think I might wait and see if Leica announces anything new next year that shakes up the prices a bit. If used M8s came down below $2k, I'd definitely give it some more serious consideration. For now, I'll just enjoy the wonderful experience of shooting a film M!
Tom Niblick
Well-known
I sold my M8 for $2200 to help finance a M9. While I love my M9, looking back my M8 was one hell of a camera. Combined with a 35 Summicron type 4, the M8 produced some astounding images.
Is the M8 worth twice the price of a good M3? Absolutely! Especially if you shoot transparency film and compare good scans with captures from the M8. Same goes for scanned B&W film. However, enlarged B&W film has a unique look that can not be matched with any digital camera.
M8 vs M9? I like the M9 because it is a rock solid camera. My M8 was a little quirky - mostly buffer issues. But as long as I didn't machine gun shoot, my M8 was perfectly fine. In fact, I wish I had kept it. The M8 captures have a unique look that I find myself missing.
6 year old reliability? I would not be afraid of a low milage M8. There is lots of life left in a good M8. It would be $2100 well spent.
Tom
Is the M8 worth twice the price of a good M3? Absolutely! Especially if you shoot transparency film and compare good scans with captures from the M8. Same goes for scanned B&W film. However, enlarged B&W film has a unique look that can not be matched with any digital camera.
M8 vs M9? I like the M9 because it is a rock solid camera. My M8 was a little quirky - mostly buffer issues. But as long as I didn't machine gun shoot, my M8 was perfectly fine. In fact, I wish I had kept it. The M8 captures have a unique look that I find myself missing.
6 year old reliability? I would not be afraid of a low milage M8. There is lots of life left in a good M8. It would be $2100 well spent.
Tom
Michael Tyler
Member
I shot (professionally and for pleasure) an M8 for almost a year. Sold it and have missed it, yearned for it, every day since. I bought a 7D and returned it two weeks later, and couldn't care less.
The 7D is unequivocally better at high-ISO. It doesn't band at 6400, which in that respect makes it better than even the 5DMKII (which are my main cameras).
However, at normal isos the 10mp M8 will match or beat that crumby soft 7D sensor any day. "10 megapixels" does not describe the loveliness of what that sensor can do with good glass and a good eye.
The shutter sound IMHO is a wash. I shoot weddings and documentary work, so I'm sensitive to whether a camera clacks. The 7D is actually quite soft for an slr, and the M8 is rather obnoxious for a rangefinder. So it's a wash. (Contrary to opinions above, I do think the M8.2/M9 are notably less obtrusive when clicking the shutter.)
The M8 is a frustrating camera in a lot of ways. But then why do I miss it so much? So much.
The 7D is unequivocally better at high-ISO. It doesn't band at 6400, which in that respect makes it better than even the 5DMKII (which are my main cameras).
However, at normal isos the 10mp M8 will match or beat that crumby soft 7D sensor any day. "10 megapixels" does not describe the loveliness of what that sensor can do with good glass and a good eye.
The shutter sound IMHO is a wash. I shoot weddings and documentary work, so I'm sensitive to whether a camera clacks. The 7D is actually quite soft for an slr, and the M8 is rather obnoxious for a rangefinder. So it's a wash. (Contrary to opinions above, I do think the M8.2/M9 are notably less obtrusive when clicking the shutter.)
The M8 is a frustrating camera in a lot of ways. But then why do I miss it so much? So much.
TR3B
Established
Mike,
Would love to hear some of your frustrations with the camera. I am using one that has a nice stripe at high iso, sticky framelines, and, powers off on occassion without warning.... other than that, its been great. Oh, right around 4000 actuations.
Would love to hear some of your frustrations with the camera. I am using one that has a nice stripe at high iso, sticky framelines, and, powers off on occassion without warning.... other than that, its been great. Oh, right around 4000 actuations.
Last edited:
rodl
Established
I wish I had a dollar for every thread like this that I've seen in the last few months. No offense to the OP, but just do a search on your question on here, GetDPI and LUF and you'll get more answers than you can process. The only way you're really going to know is to try it. Rent one, borrow one or buy one knowing you can resell if you don't like it and find out for yourself. You only need one decent lens. My first was an Ultron 35 but a Cron 40, Cron 50, or many others will tell you what you need to know. Good luck.
Michael Tyler
Member
The framelines were off for me. I shot the 40 Nokton a lot and it's not that it was "inside" the 35mm framelines so much that it was aligned with the bottom-right corner of that frameline. Annoying but workable. I use the same lens with my M2 and have no problem, but I chalk that up to the delay in image review from capture to scan.
I don't know if mine was early or midway through the production run, but the chip had horrible banding at high-iso. 1250 was useable only if exposure was nailed and nailed hard. And I speak as someone who is a fan of grainy images.
Probably the worst problem was the buffer freeze. Nothing like a quick moment during your clients' wedding to make for the camera completely locking up and dumping the images of the first kiss (or whatever situation) that hadn't yet cleared the buffer. It was fixable by a quick battery reseating, but you would still lose images.
I had a hard time shooting slow shutter speeds, worse than any slr I've used. I chalk that up to my initial inexperience, because now I can get useable work at 1/4 and 1/8 with my M2.
Also, at the time there were few options for flash. If I'm in low-light situations for paying clients, using a camera with poor high-iso, I need flash. It all kind of snowballed and I sold the camera. I really, really regret it, because despite the hardships it was the favorite camera I've ever owned. 20/20 hindsight being what it is, I should have held out.
The M8 + 35mm is a match made in heaven. In my case it was the f/1.2 Nokton. It crops the extremities of the lens, removing any latent distortion, giving a ~50mm FOV, but keeping the more expansive atmosphere of a wide lens. Magic.
But going back to that 20/20 hindsight, if/when I buy another M8, it will be the 8.2. I want the better framelines, the smoother shutter, and the sapphire screen. If I found an M8 I would budget in the upgrades for it.