M8 and Eos 1Ds Mk II

Jeff Ascough says his M8 delivers images that look like high quality film scans
Click to expand...

That's why I've decided to keep my Coolscan 5000 as my digital rangefinder for the time being. I get full frame capture and the digital depreciation stays on my desk. :D
 
sitemistic said:
Hey! Can I play. Canon Xti, at 1600 tricked into thinking it was 2400. Canon 24-85 USM zoom at 5.6.

iso2400.jpg
Click to expand...

WOW.. very impressive for a $600 camera.
 
i used to own a 1dsmkII and switched to a P20 and now a P30....and i just got a m8....
first: lenses play a HUGE part in digital imaging.....HUGE....the only canon lens that really makes the dsII sing is the 100macro....everyhting else needs software sharpen and that is where the trouble starts IMO....i shot the P20 with the rollei 6008 and schneider lenses and that was just amazing...the 180...hmmm......to me the m8 is far superior to the canons....i only shoot base iso (so noise is not an issue for me) and i have yet to find an AF system that works for me (fashion in studio, mostly)....
the m8 files have a depth that compares to the P20 and when i cropped those files (the p20 is square) i ended up with a 10-12mpix file....which is plenty for any commercial application..plenty....if you shoot FA landscapes, get a P45 and print big...if your work mostly ends up on a magazine page or printed (including billboards) 10mpix is plenty big enough...even if you crop.....
the P30 is in a different class...why? DR and resolution...but does anyone notice on an 8x10? an 11x14? 16x20 definitely....uprzed a m8 file in GF to 16x20 (with crop) the other day....yes the detail starts to look fuzzy...kinda like the canon detail almost always looks.....i gave up on the canons when i looked at my full lenght files at 60% and the hair is just a mess....not so with the m8....
i find the canons amazing cameras and most people just don't want RF! so the 5D remains probably the best dslr ever built....quality, price, speed, handling...unbeatable (especially when compared to dsII and now dsIII) but everybod is different and loks for something different in thier files.....
 
jaapv said:
I agree. All those pros on LUF and GetDPI.com are blathering idiots that will be brought to bankruptcy soon by this camera......
Click to expand...

Jaap, I don't mean to sound insulting. As you know, I have a very high regard for your work. But, if you were setting off on, say, a two day hike into the mountains, would you actually depend entirely on an M8 or would you carry something else for backup? I've never had a single failure with my Nikons -- ever -- and I've been using Nikon digitals since they first came out, so I'm not concerned about going far afield with my D2X, which is heavy, but isn't as heavy and inconvenient as carrying a couple of rangefinder bodies and several prime lenses. Last summer I fell down some sidewalk steps with that camera and it hit hard enough to total the lens that was on it, but I was able to mount a different lens and go on shooting. I know you've had very good luck with your M8, but I also keep reading about M8s dying, locking up for no known reason, etc., and requiring several months' turnaround for repair. I might expect that from consumer point-and-shoots, but not from "professional" equipment priced the way the M8 is priced. As I said in a thread early this year, that's a heartbreaker. I really wanted an M8 for street work, but I'm not about to pay six grand for a camera that might have to spend half its life in Wetzlar. I still hope and pray that Leica will come on with an M9 that lives up to the reputation Leica had back when I was working with my IIIf, M2 and M4.

As far as pros on LUF or anywhere else shooting with M8s is concerned, anyone can call himself a pro, and I'm sure there are photojournalists doing street photography with M8s. But I have a credulity problem with someone who calls himself a pro and then claims he does unrepeatable shoots such as weddings with an M8. Maybe they do, but then there are people in the circus who perform on high wires without a net. They're pros too, and their attrition rate is very high.

Best regards,
 
Last edited:
rsl said:
As far as pros on LUF or anywhere else shooting with M8s is concerned, anyone can call himself a pro, and I'm sure there are photojournalists doing street photography with M8s. But I have a credulity problem with someone who calls himself a pro and then claims he does unrepeatable shoots such as weddings with an M8. Maybe they do, but then there are people in the circus who perform on high wires without a net. They're pros too, and their attrition rate is very high.

Best regards,
Click to expand...

Well, I guess that I am a hack... :D

Cheers,

Riccis
 
rsl said:
Jaap, I don't mean to sound insulting. As you know, I have a very high regard for your work. But, if you were setting off on, say, a two day hike into the mountains, would you actually depend entirely on an M8 or would you carry something else for backup? I've never had a single failure with my Nikons -- ever -- and I've been using Nikon digitals since they first came out, so I'm not concerned about going far afield with my D2X, which is heavy, but isn't as heavy and inconvenient as carrying a couple of rangefinder bodies and several prime lenses. Last summer I fell down some sidewalk steps with that camera and it hit hard enough to total the lens that was on it, but I was able to mount a different lens and go on shooting. I know you've had very good luck with your M8, but I also keep reading about M8s dying, locking up for no known reason, etc., and requiring several months' turnaround for repair. I might expect that from consumer point-and-shoots, but not from "professional" equipment priced the way the M8 is priced. As I said in a thread early this year, that's a heartbreaker. I really wanted an M8 for street work, but I'm not about to pay six grand for a camera that might have to spend half its life in Wetzlar. I still hope and pray that Leica will come on with an M9 that lives up to the reputation Leica had back when I was working with my IIIf, M2 and M4.

As far as pros on LUF or anywhere else shooting with M8s is concerned, anyone can call himself a pro, and I'm sure there are photojournalists doing street photography with M8s. But I have a credulity problem with someone who calls himself a pro and then claims he does unrepeatable shoots such as weddings with an M8. Maybe they do, but then there are people in the circus who perform on high wires without a net. They're pros too, and their attrition rate is very high.

Best regards,
Click to expand...

any equipment will fail at one point....especially if it never has before and you are counting on it....so you always have to have a back-up (body/lens/....)...
leica actually has a pro program which guarantees 2day turnaround and/or loaner...and it makes repair a bit cheaper and provides free service/checkup twice a year...all you have to do is sign up with them and it does not cost a penny....never had that with my canons and my phase does not have that kind of service....
 
XTi - great little camera, shame about the lenses

XTi - great little camera, shame about the lenses

sitemistic said:
The Xti is an amazing camera for the price. This one belongs to our graphic designer. I snatched it off her desk and took the shot of a corner of my desk. Even with that old zoom, it looks pretty good. Probably my sunflower seeds, though :)
Click to expand...

I have a 5D and an M8 and both are very capable cameras. I was very interested in the XTi for family snaps but their APS lenses, paticularly their zooms, are all shameful.
 
Were it but so simple. Firstly, a doubling of the pixel count results in a 33% in resolution (linear vs surface) And then it could be argued that the higher pixel count makes the sensor outresolve the lens, making the increase meaningless. Thirdly, one must ask at which print size and viewing distance will one actually see the increased pixel count. So, whilst this is a superior camera, it is competing against digital backs and as such may not add much to the use we put our 135 class cameras to ( and that is normally not wall-sized prints). The number of megapixels as such does not tell us much about the quality of the image.
 
Last edited:
sitemistic said:
The M8 is history. I think the real question moving forward is what does Leica do as a follow up. Canon was developing the 5D when Leica was developing the M8. Canon chose to put a full frame sensor in their camera, Leica a crop sensor with fewer pixels. Did they do it as a cost saving measure or because they couldn't do it technically?

They are (hopefully) developing an M9 now. And there are cameras with 16 and 20 megapixel full frame sensors with incredible high ISO performance on the market. Should the potential purchaser of an M9 expect anything less than that admittedly high bar, or will Leica sell a bunch of M9s with lower specs just because they are the only digital rangefinder in town?
Click to expand...

I have always been critical towards the egineering choice of putting a too weak hot mirror in front of the M8 sensor, this because it leaves the need of an external filter, and once you have an IR block filter in front of your lens, the hot mirror only function is to degrade image quality, essentially if for some technical reason you can't have an adequate hot mirror in front of the sensor (odd since the much older R-D1, albeit not perfect, has an adequate IR filtering), the correct engineering choice is to eliminate it completely.

That said I really hope Leica does not get dragged inside the stupid MPixel race 10 MPixels are more than good enough, and that the M9 has either a good hot mirror or none at all.

To me, much more important that the number of pixels, is the ability of having a full frame sensor, mainly because I like my wides wide.

And of course being able to change paramaters like ISO setting and white balance without having to swith on the LCD is very important if you value the "rangefinder experience" when out shooting.

At the moment I would consider an M8 only when my R-D1 packs up, but I hope the M9 will be better enough to justify upgrading, if not I'll have to keep hoping that my R-D1 won't break down, having to deal with Epson support is not an experience I want to repeat.
 
sitemistic said:
Jaap, I agree with you. 10mp in a crop or FF sensor might be the sweet spot for most photographers making real world size prints. The performance of the 10mp Xti being an example. Wedding and advertising will likely be the real target for the 1Ds MkIII and Nikon's future high end offerings. Camera makers should take note of that and produce a 10mp sensor with the low noise of the new Nikon.

I just wonder how M8 owners are going to defend their cameras as MkIII beaters when the M9 comes out? It's easy enough to trash talk Canon among M8 users. But what happens when they are faced with a FF M9? It will be much harder to defend the superiority of their M8 against another Leica. Will the M8 suddenly become junk to them, as well? Or will the M9 become the 4x5 beater?

Time will tell.
Click to expand...

Actually I am not a wide shooter by nature and in general prefer smaller sensors.
 
pss said:
any equipment will fail at one point....especially if it never has before and you are counting on it....so you always have to have a back-up (body/lens/....)...
leica actually has a pro program which guarantees 2day turnaround and/or loaner...and it makes repair a bit cheaper and provides free service/checkup twice a year...all you have to do is sign up with them and it does not cost a penny....never had that with my canons and my phase does not have that kind of service....
Click to expand...


Canon has CPS (canon professional service). Same service as leica, if not better because it's so freakin big! Theres a CPS place in every state in Australia, I've heard it's huge in the UK as well. Surely the US has it too.

http://www.canon.com.au/CPS/home.aspx
 
jaapv said:
Strangely enough, the M8 seems to be holding its own against the 1DsIII, according to this thread:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=188

and here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/40120-m8-file-against-1ds3-file.html
Click to expand...


1dsmk3
1Ds3Crop.jpg


5d
5DCrop.jpg


M8
M8Crop.jpg



I don't know what you see, but to me it looks like the 1dsmk3 is beating both the m8 and the 5d by quite a large step in fine detail and resolution, the m8 looks to me about the same as the 5d in fine detail and resolution, if one or the other is better I HIGHLY doubt it would make a difference in print.
The one thing I will say though, is what the hell is going on in the shadow area under the roof on the m8 crop pic??? looks like it's barely holding detail in there, and the graduations look shoddy as.
 
Lets not do a third run of this thread here. Jack Flesher adressed your remarks in the other threads.
 
Here we go again, trying to make comparisons between captures on a computer monitor. No two computers are going to give the same result, and none of the results are going to tell us much. In order to be able to draw conclusions you need at least well-printed 11 x 14s.
 
Everyone seems to preach one need to compare printed examples. Can someone please explain why comparisons can't be made on the monitor? If we're talking about differences in resolution, then surely the monitor can present each image accurately enough for one to make a judgment on the image with superior resolution...

Yes, monitors vary in quality, but that change in quality is applied to all 3 images.
 
The fact is that just about any of the current crop of pro and prosumer cameras delivers enough quality (in the right hands) to make a double truck CMYK ad that any client will be pleased with. So if the M floats your boat and you know what you are doing it makes a fine pro camera, so does any of a truck load of other cameras, some more expensive and some cheaper. Of course there is one caveat if you work in weather then only the weather sealed cameras might be OK -leaving out the M8 and 5D but there are plenty of pro's who don't shoot in foul weather (your power packs will blow up long before your non-sealed camera).

If you are making 30 x 40 prints of all your work or are comparing files 1:1 on computer monitors to decide which is 'better' or make your living shooting resolution tragets and rulers then the above statement doesn't apply to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom