M6 to M8? Will I be happy with the results?

It is better than low ISO film at low ISO setting. Files are very sharp. High ISO is only fair just like the M9.

IR sensitivity is explained above. I have run a few sets with photoshop, select the purples with color select, then desaturate and they go black. Not bad for a few shots, but I would not want to do a wedding that way. Can`t speak for how effective the IR filters are.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Used to be Capture One. Not impressed. Better with Lightroom but still room for improvement.

Of course I'm biased because many of my favourite shots weren't IR filtered. I may be seeing memories rather than what's actually there.
Click to expand...

I found that the color profiles used in Capture One make a huge difference. For instance the "Generic Leica M8" is lousy with files that were shot with the IR filter in place, whereas the "Generic Leica M8 UV/IR" profile is aces.

But hey, I hear the workflow in Lightroom is great and your photos look good, so here's to what works!
 
click said:
Does the dual range work as a regular lens just not in close focus mode?
Click to expand...

The DR will not mount on the M8 (nor the M9, IIRC) in normal focus mode.

Someone here has posted that they were able to mount the lens, but only after moving it first into close focus mode and keeping it in that range.
 
Having recently made the "jump" i'd have to say, i'm very pleased with the M8. I carried/shot with my M6 almost everyday for as long as i can remember and moved right into the M8. It was an easy/familiar move for me. They are both fantastic and the M8 is what it is a digital M. I love using it and haven't used my M6 since i got it. sad but true.

Like MCTuomey says, There is something to be said for workflow... I made the move because I've been shooting with digital cameras for work forever and am very use to the workflow... I came up with film, was a professional color printer in a past life, and love the process but I don't have a darkroom anymore and can no longer do it all myself. With digital i can control all aspects of an image- and although it lacks the romance and qualities of film and a wet darkroom i know and love, i can get the results i want and need with digital. If you're use to a film workflow and are happy with it - stick with it- If your not happy or "exhausted" by your workflow, make the move, hang onto your M6 as a backup and concentrate on your work. Sorry for the ramble... hope my perspective helps.
Best, ccm
 
Ronald M said:
It is better than low ISO film at low ISO setting. Files are very sharp. High ISO is only fair just like the M9.

IR sensitivity is explained above. I have run a few sets with photoshop, select the purples with color select, then desaturate and they go black. Not bad for a few shots, but I would not want to do a wedding that way. Can`t speak for how effective the IR filters are.
Click to expand...

I agree and will add IR filters work like a charm! :D
 
It is also possible that you can encounter some of your old lenses are little out of focused wide open on digital M. Did anyone mentioned that?

As film has thickness it can accommodate it to some extent and you may not have noticed before.
 
The M6 is a great classic camera. Would never part with mine
The M8 is a nice digital RF
I ended up selling mine and I am more happy with a GF1 and EP2 with M lenses when I want them
 
I spent over 20 years with M6's and M7's, processing and printing b/w in my own darkrooms.

Last year I moved residence and decided not to add another darkroom, and instead made the complete switch to digital with an M8.2. I knew that without a darkroom I would no longer be happy with my film based prints.

I'm more productive now than ever before, with more time to make photographs. To get the best prints, however, I found that the camera is not the limiting factor. Rather, just like in my darkroom days, a lot of time has been spent with workflow, paper choice, technique and other choices (inks, profiles, drivers, etc, etc.).

But, after more than a year, I'm finally getting prints that rival my silver counterparts. I'm considering buying a dedicated printer to use with Cone inks...7 shades of black versus 3 from the Epson inks, which aren't exactly shabby.

And, the added bonus of being able to print color has added greatly to the joy of seeing and making photographs of greater diversity...and, for me, that's what it's all about. I haven't looked back.

Jeff
 
Jeff S said:
I spent over 20 years with M6's and M7's, processing and printing b/w in my own darkrooms.

Last year I moved residence and decided not to add another darkroom, and instead made the complete switch to digital with an M8.2. I knew that without a darkroom I would no longer be happy with my film based prints.

I'm more productive now than ever before, with more time to make photographs. To get the best prints, however, I found that the camera is not the limiting factor. Rather, just like in my darkroom days, a lot of time has been spent with workflow, paper choice, technique and other choices (inks, profiles, drivers, etc, etc.).

But, after more than a year, I'm finally getting prints that rival my silver counterparts. I'm considering buying a dedicated printer to use with Cone inks...7 shades of black versus 3 from the Epson inks, which aren't exactly shabby.

And, the added bonus of being able to print color has added greatly to the joy of seeing and making photographs of greater diversity...and, for me, that's what it's all about. I haven't looked back.

Jeff
Click to expand...

If this is the Jeff S I am thinking of from over at photo.net, these words are worth heeding...
 
Why not just get the Panasonic or even the XI for digital and keep shooting film? It seems that the Pany G does just about everything a M8 will do with a lot less agony and leaving a lot more money in your pocket.
 
> I love my M6 .... develop, dry, scan, manipulate and print is exhausting but rewarding .... the convenience factor. Also the ability to do color and adjust film speed seems pretty cool to me.

Actually you won't save as much time as you imagine over a lab scan (essentially dust free), I have a fantastic local lab and film comes back generally how I like it and work from there. Scanning everything yourself, yes, probably save some time but not as much as you think. Download some example M8 DNG files and practice processing them to see how it feels.

You may have less calloused hands and bathroom that doesn't smell like vinegar. There is also an element of instant-ness - chimping during uncertainty is immeasurably valuable (but that said, you may miss the moment, with film you'd have just taken the second shot).

The most important thing digital brings to me (which you allude to in your last sentence there) is the ability to manipulate every frame separately, it really is the freedom of LF sheet film. I used to shoot mainly LF and MF with at most 12 frames per roll. I can't buy 24 frame films and 36 is like an eternity. I usually only shoot about 30 frames per roll. Some secondary valuables are things like post-processing to B&W, means you don't lose a stop or so (or image quality or time) putting on filters.

The biggest disappointment with digital is you can't turn the dial from Velvia 50 to Tri-X.

The most difficult thing about going digital for me was have to re-learn visualization at the cropped size. People will say a 35 is _effectively_ a 50. Actually it's not, it's still a 35 and behaves like a 35 in every way except you cut the edges off. The x1.33 on the M8 is far easier to deal with than the 1.5/1.6 crops on APSC DSLRs, which was a step too far for me.

> Given the beauty of film will I be satisfied?
Not if you want the look of film, it's different (per film actually!). The closest film to digital (IMO) is Ektar 100.

> Will the digital images still have that M6 glow that I love?
Yes, but interpreted in a different way (as do different films). M8 files cannot be compared with any other digital camera due to the lenses.

> Tell me the truth have you made the jump from an M6 to an M8 and are you truly happy with it?
No not a jump and not an M6. I shoot a Bessa R3M, an F75 SLR & M8 which replaced my MF stuff. I still shoot LF on film, I see no need for digital there actually. The R3M and M8 are complementary. Oh do I have a D700 and a single 50mm prime for it's unique properties.
 
Frank Petronio said:
Why not just get the Panasonic or even the XI for digital and keep shooting film? It seems that the Pany G does just about everything a M8 will do with a lot less agony and leaving a lot more money in your pocket.
Click to expand...
Dear Frank,

Depends on how you define 'just about everything'.

Cheers,

R.
 
Had M6-TTL, sold in favour of an M8.

The M6 sat on the shelf looking pretty, the M8 gets used heavily, and will be used (professionally) at its first wedding on Saturday. Is it as nice a device? Probably not. Do I wish I'd kept the M6? No.
 
m6 m8

m6 m8

I would not use an m8 for my main digital camera. Because of the uv ir filters you get weird reflections on the files at times. I am a leica nut but never got a second m8 . I got an m9 and suddenly I had to have 2 of them. I shoot professionally. I am not rich or even middle class.
 
I sold my M7 after I'd been using the M8 for a few months. Now I just bought an M6 again, because however much I love the images from the M8 (and I love them a lot) I do miss the look of film, and the feel of shooting it.

My advice - don't replace the M6 with an M8, but as others have said, add an M8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom