JohnL
Very confused
I'm in a bit of a quandary about the M8. I have two issues - the investment and the crop factor. While I'd dearly like to have a good digital RF camera, I already have a good digital SLR, so I'm far from sure I can justify getting an M8.
As to the crop factor, the framelines are 24mm (equiv FOV 32mm), 28mm (37), 35mm (47), 50mm (67), 75mm (100) and 90mm (120). For my film RF, I have 28mm, 50mm and 90mm slowish lenses for outdoor daytime use and a fast 35 Nokton for indoors and other low-light use. I find this a very comprehensive set for only 4 lenses. The only lens I have considered adding to this is a small (and slow) 35mm for daytime outdoors.
To achieve this coverage for the M8, I'd have to buy a number of new lenses (in addition to the megabucks for the body), and I'm not at all sure that what I would want even exists in all cases:
The 24mm frameline (equiv 32mm) doesn't strike me as quite wide enough for the widest lens. Maybe I could get a 21mm (equiv 28mm) and use the entire field of the viewfinder? Does anyone yet know if this would work, even roughly?
The 28mm frameline (37mm equiv) would be a reasonable if not ideal substitute for 35mm, but the fastest 28mm I know of is the CV Ultron which is f/1.9 - almost 1-1/2 stops slower than the 35mm Nokton.
The 35mm frameline gives a very reasonable "normal" 47mm equivalent, and I alreaqdy have this covered - at least partially. I'd probably be even more anxious to get a slow and small 35mm for the M8.
The 50mm frameline (67) seems to me to be a length I would not be likely to use at all, although I already have it covered.
The 75mm frameline (100) would be very useful and can easily be found, but it's yet another lens to buy.
I already have the 90mm frameline covered but I'm not sure how much I'd use it at the 120mm equivalent FOV.
Do others think the same way as me, or am I missing something? Do set me straight!
As to the crop factor, the framelines are 24mm (equiv FOV 32mm), 28mm (37), 35mm (47), 50mm (67), 75mm (100) and 90mm (120). For my film RF, I have 28mm, 50mm and 90mm slowish lenses for outdoor daytime use and a fast 35 Nokton for indoors and other low-light use. I find this a very comprehensive set for only 4 lenses. The only lens I have considered adding to this is a small (and slow) 35mm for daytime outdoors.
To achieve this coverage for the M8, I'd have to buy a number of new lenses (in addition to the megabucks for the body), and I'm not at all sure that what I would want even exists in all cases:
The 24mm frameline (equiv 32mm) doesn't strike me as quite wide enough for the widest lens. Maybe I could get a 21mm (equiv 28mm) and use the entire field of the viewfinder? Does anyone yet know if this would work, even roughly?
The 28mm frameline (37mm equiv) would be a reasonable if not ideal substitute for 35mm, but the fastest 28mm I know of is the CV Ultron which is f/1.9 - almost 1-1/2 stops slower than the 35mm Nokton.
The 35mm frameline gives a very reasonable "normal" 47mm equivalent, and I alreaqdy have this covered - at least partially. I'd probably be even more anxious to get a slow and small 35mm for the M8.
The 50mm frameline (67) seems to me to be a length I would not be likely to use at all, although I already have it covered.
The 75mm frameline (100) would be very useful and can easily be found, but it's yet another lens to buy.
I already have the 90mm frameline covered but I'm not sure how much I'd use it at the 120mm equivalent FOV.
Do others think the same way as me, or am I missing something? Do set me straight!
Last edited:
Mark Norton
Well-known
The body is hardly megabucks, just €850 more than a film body. There is the crop factor to take care of but it's less than on many cameras and all you really need to do is buy one wider lens than you have now - a 21 or a 24 and you're pretty much set. Sure, the mix of focal lengths and speeds change and you'll have to adjust but for me it's a no-brainer.
JohnL
Very confused
Maybe, but I regard nearly $5K as a pretty expensive body, and as I said, I already have a pretty decent DSLR, and on top of the body I'd have to spend some more on glass, so it begins to get pretty expensive.Mark Norton said:
I agree that I'd have to buy one wider lens than I have now. The point of the question was which? And could I use a 21 without a separate viewfinder? Frankly, if I need to carry a separate viewfinder, I might as well stay with my SLR.
I respectfully do not agree that buying one wider lens is *all* I'd need to do. My existing 28mm lens would not be fast enough much of the time for when I need the FOV of the 35 (and the fastest lens available in this length appears to be f/1.9). My fast 35 would be too large most of the time for the "normal" 50mm FOV. I'd *want* a 75mm to cover the things I currently do with the 90, and my 90 would probably not see much use (although I'm not 100% sure of this last point).
It begins to look as though I'd *want* four new lenses - a slow 21, a fast 28, a slow 35 and a slow 75. That all begins to add up.
AusDLK
Famous Photographer
I searched for and bought a Hexanon 21-35mm lens to use with my potential M8. I love the Tri-Elmar so this "Bi-Elmar" will give essentially two of the focal lengths I use in a lens that I use for 90% of my photography.
I'll have an effective 28mm and ~47mm "Bi-Elmar" for use with the M8. I'll just have to learn to live without the middle 35mm focal length.
I'll already got first dibs on one of the new 16-18-21 lenses with a major US dealer (and a sponser of RFf) so assuming the M8 delivers the goods, I'll be set.
I'll have an effective 28mm and ~47mm "Bi-Elmar" for use with the M8. I'll just have to learn to live without the middle 35mm focal length.
I'll already got first dibs on one of the new 16-18-21 lenses with a major US dealer (and a sponser of RFf) so assuming the M8 delivers the goods, I'll be set.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Reading your post I feel that if you were to trade in your 90 on a 75 and add a 24 you might be very happy. I can vouch for the superior quality of that 24 and its character is very close to a 21. The 'Lux 75 is not bad either
On the other hand the 21/4.0 CV is a lovely little lens and if you slip on the 28 mm viewfinder you'd be fine.At this focal length scale focussing is no problem. And as you say, using the space around the framelines of the 24 would enable you to guesstimate the fov.
On the other hand the 21/4.0 CV is a lovely little lens and if you slip on the 28 mm viewfinder you'd be fine.At this focal length scale focussing is no problem. And as you say, using the space around the framelines of the 24 would enable you to guesstimate the fov.
Last edited:
JohnL
Very confused
Thanks, Jaap, that answers at least one question. I think I'd want to keep the 90 at least until I decide to get rid of the M7 (?) *and* that I don't need it for the M8 (decision on buying this also a big ?). I think I'd get more use out of a 21 than a 24 at 1.33x, so being able to use the entire area of the VF is a big issue for me. That still leaves the issue of a fast 28 (equiv 37). Does anyone make anything faster than the CV 1.9 in this length?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Whatever you decide: Happy shooting!
Olsen
Well-known
John,
Sell your Canon G5 when you still ca get some money for it. You should sell your EOS3 too (I have kept mine, though. It brings good memories..) - and don't buy any 40D. It is a waist when you have 'one of the best cameras on the market today'; the 5D. Keep things simple and sell as soon as you want to pick up a new model. And don't look back. In this perspective; sell the M7 too and go all out digital which is cheaper. They will soon be paperweights.
I have a 1Ds II, but I am going to buy the M8 all the same. The M8 is more compact, descreet and more for street photography (Some small children starts to cry when I pull up the 1Ds II). I don't have any Leica glas, but will use my ZM 50 mm 2,8, ZM 25 mm 2,8 and a Voigtländer Color Scopar 50 mm 2,5. I just might buy the M8 with the new zoom lense; the 16 - 18 - 21 mm which will give the widest field of view with the 1,33 crop factor. Something like the 21 mm on the M7. I hope for a good package deal for the camera and body.
Sell your Canon G5 when you still ca get some money for it. You should sell your EOS3 too (I have kept mine, though. It brings good memories..) - and don't buy any 40D. It is a waist when you have 'one of the best cameras on the market today'; the 5D. Keep things simple and sell as soon as you want to pick up a new model. And don't look back. In this perspective; sell the M7 too and go all out digital which is cheaper. They will soon be paperweights.
I have a 1Ds II, but I am going to buy the M8 all the same. The M8 is more compact, descreet and more for street photography (Some small children starts to cry when I pull up the 1Ds II). I don't have any Leica glas, but will use my ZM 50 mm 2,8, ZM 25 mm 2,8 and a Voigtländer Color Scopar 50 mm 2,5. I just might buy the M8 with the new zoom lense; the 16 - 18 - 21 mm which will give the widest field of view with the 1,33 crop factor. Something like the 21 mm on the M7. I hope for a good package deal for the camera and body.
Ben Z
Veteran
Mark Norton said:
Absolutely agreed. Knowing the M8 was a possibility, I bought a Voitlander 12mm a ways back when I found a mintish one for cheap. I've never shot a single frame of film with it nor cared to, but the 15mm is a favorite lens of mine and by getting the 12, I'd have the same (roughly) set of focal lengths I'm used to. 12->15, 15->21, 21->28, 28->35, 35->50., 50->75 (a bit less) and 90->120. The only thing missing is a 75->90 but honestly I always thought a 90 to be a little on the short side so I'd be glad for the extra reach. The thing that really excites me is using a 135. I've always lamented not having a 180 when I use the Leicas. I've got a Japanese zoom finder that has a 180mm position, and I'll use some kind of eyepiece magnifier for focusing if I find it needs it.
sgy1962
Well-known
Mark Norton said:
Your reply begs the hidden question whether Leica film bodies are too expensive in today's market. Further, it ignores the strong possibility that digital bodies will depreciate more then film bodies. Having made these points, however, I do beleive that the M8 will sell very well. It's priced at the upper end of what is within the realm of "reason." Leica owners are used to spending a lot for their equipment and many of them have significant disposable income. If I went to the M8 I would have to sell some of my film stuff to fund and justify the expense, but I'll stick with film for now.
JohnL
Very confused
Actually, I still use the G5 quite a bit. I didn't think it was worth moving to the G6. The new G7 would have been worth it if it had RAW, but it doesn't.Olsen said:
True, I don't use this much, but I bought it used and would like to keep one film SLR. I already sold the OM stuff I used to have before.
The 40D would not be to replace the 5D. It would essentially be for the 1.6x factor with long lenses. I agree the 5D is an outstanding camera.
I think I'll keep the M7 for the same reason I expect to keep the EOS 3. I also bought it used. My doubts about the M8 are related to the lenses I would want for it and their availability, or lack of same, particularly something to take the place of my fast 35. And also the rather significant investment, of course, but if I were to resolve the first issue, I guess that someday I'd find a way to resolve the second.
I don't have any Leica glass either. So far I'm 100% CV, and quite happy with that. I think your choice of lenses is great for outdoors. Maybe the ZM 25/2.8 or the CV 28/1.9 would solve my hang-up, using the 2500 high ISO of the M8. I'll be looking out for test shots when they appear. With the 5D at 1600 or even 3200 and an f/1.4 lens you can do just about anything in low light.
Thanks for your input!
Last edited: