HAnkg
Well-known
Actually in the period in which Leica made it's rep as the iconic reportage camera it was not the choice for quality. If you wanted quality you shot a 4x5 press camera like Linhof or Graflex or at least a Rollei TLR. The Leica was about a compact discreet available light camera that could capture life in a way not possible before. It was emotional content over technical perfection.sitemistic said:
Even in the 35mm format Leica before the WWII Leica was not the quality choice. Zeiss made the highest performance and fastest lenses. It was only when Leica started to fade from it's central role as the documentary, photojournalists tool that it started to get the reputation as the super expensive ultimate quality lux boutique company.
The fact is for what the M was designed to do the IQ of the M8 is more then good enough. Where it has not quite made the grade is in matching the film M's shutter feel, quiet operation and excellent grip (the lack of purchase for the thumb without a winder was not compensated for). Burying the ISO and EV in LCD menus was not very M like either. All of these things could be remedied in the next model which will inevatably have better IQ, more pixels and better high ISO performance. However even with these drawbacks there is no camera now on the market I'd rather use.
I'll be picking up a DSLR so I can again use the excellent Canon 90 TS-E and for some work where the RF is a stretch. I considered the 1Ds MKIII (I had a 1Ds) but I really don't see a big advantage in the extra pixels unless you are comparing dick size on internet forums. The Nikon D3 looks really impressive with it's high ISO but given the camera's size I'd never lug it anywhere where I could use the ISO boost. I'll probably pick up a used 5D as everyone dumps them to get the new 5D II or whatever it will be called.
I'll leave the pixel by pixel comparisons and feature list comparisons to others. In the end there is not a whole lot of difference IQ wise between 35mm digital cameras in the $900 - $8000 price range. Other factors become the determining factor like handling, what the crop might do to lenses you want to use and frame rate, auto focus performance or weather-sealing if any of those are important to your type of work.
I'm more interested in how the whole package performs in the sorts of photography I need to do with the lenses I want to use. You can only judge in real world use what serves your purposes best.
kevin m
Veteran
Shazam!
It's starting already. The wedding photogs on the DWF are selling them very near the $1,500 mark before its replacement has even been announced.
Prosaic
Well-known
HAnkg said:
LOL... Thanks
rsl
Russell
Hank, that's the best summary of the situation I've seen yet. In the 60s, when I was shooting with a IIIf, M2 and M4 I also was shooting with a 4 x 5 view and a Rollei. I never tried to use the Leicas for high quality stuff. That came from the bigger negatives. But the Leica was a wonderful thing to use, and really indispensable on the street. Thanks for the penetrating summary.
emraphoto
Veteran
and
and
an amen 2 that
and
an amen 2 that
HAnkg
Well-known
I was wondering around Photo Miami and the AIPAD photo show today. Looking at the prints of some of the iconic photos of the 20th century, many made with Leica's. Most of them would never have passed muster with the pixel police -not high enough resolution, too much noise, not sharp out to the corners -my Canon Rebel could do better then that with a kit zoom lens!
In looking at some of the contemporary stuff, some of it was great or at least interesting but there where a lot of pieces that reminded me of the old artist's axiom "if you can't make it good -make it big" and it was very big and very high resolution.
In looking at some of the contemporary stuff, some of it was great or at least interesting but there where a lot of pieces that reminded me of the old artist's axiom "if you can't make it good -make it big" and it was very big and very high resolution.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
As long as the DSLRs are behemoths and the Leicas are Leicas. As NB (and you) have pointed out, 4 or even 6MP are quite sufficient for many, many applications. If a Leica photographer can get "the look" and results they want for their work, they will prefer the Leica over a big, heavy misshapen blob of plastic. Majoli uses/used a C-5050 for lots of his work because the image quality was good and it got the job done and it fit his way of working. He (and others) use other cameras, too, but they don't obsess about "value for money" (or ultimate "IQ") like a lot of folks do here.sitemistic said:
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
No disrespect to anyone, but I shoot a lot of architecture and interiors. When blown up to a small billboard, quality matter a LOT to me. Also I see absolutely no reason, if interested in photography, to accept something which gives worse results than something else. Why use a camera that has low resolution or "just enough" or one that has intermittent problems for work when you could use one that is better in nearly every way?
A 5d and a 50 1.2 is not much bigger than an m8 and a noctilux, and probably weighs less. An m8 and noctilux would cost over 10k. A 5d and 50 1.2L would cost under 5k. The m8 has had serious reliability issues and still has image quality glitches that plague it. The 5d has proven to be brutally reliable. The noctilux is a beautiful lens in jsut about every way, but so is the 50 1.2L.
When you're taking photos for a living, this sort of stuff REALLY matters. For someone that does it as strictly a hobby, sure it doesn't matter to compare digital cameras to the last point and doesn't make sense to be on top of technology. If Pros had this attitude, they wouldn't last very long - the world would pass them by. There are a few exceptions of course, but generally, most (for instance) wedding photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8, most architecture photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8, all sport photographers - a 5d over an m8, most studio photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8 (MOST!), most press photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8. It's not that the m8 is a bad camera, it's more that they can rely on the versatility and reliability of the SLR, and that sort of stability is needed to output quality work consistently.
A 5d and a 50 1.2 is not much bigger than an m8 and a noctilux, and probably weighs less. An m8 and noctilux would cost over 10k. A 5d and 50 1.2L would cost under 5k. The m8 has had serious reliability issues and still has image quality glitches that plague it. The 5d has proven to be brutally reliable. The noctilux is a beautiful lens in jsut about every way, but so is the 50 1.2L.
When you're taking photos for a living, this sort of stuff REALLY matters. For someone that does it as strictly a hobby, sure it doesn't matter to compare digital cameras to the last point and doesn't make sense to be on top of technology. If Pros had this attitude, they wouldn't last very long - the world would pass them by. There are a few exceptions of course, but generally, most (for instance) wedding photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8, most architecture photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8, all sport photographers - a 5d over an m8, most studio photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8 (MOST!), most press photographers are likely to choose a 5d over an m8. It's not that the m8 is a bad camera, it's more that they can rely on the versatility and reliability of the SLR, and that sort of stability is needed to output quality work consistently.
HAnkg
Well-known
fdigital said:
Most photographers will choose an SLR over an RF. That competition in the marketplace was won by the Nikon F long ago. But if you prefer An RF finder and the M's ergonomics and manual focus the 5D is not going to be an adequate substitute. Not by a long shot -it's a whole different way of working and seeing -it's not just size and weight. The M8 by the way is not a compromise in quality I prefer the M8 files in post to the 5D's. For architecture I'd want tilt shift lenses so an RF camera would not even be a consideration.
As far as my comment of good enough. For most applications there is no gain in quality on the printed sheet by going from a 5D or Nikon D3 to a Canon 1Ds MKIII despite the added MP. More MP is an easy thing to understand and its easy to compare test targets but it's just one small bit of what makes possible a quality image (both technical and artistic quality). It may be one or two must have lenses which will determine which camera you will use and what crop factor is acceptable. For a sports guy frame rate and autofocus speed is all important, for me those two features are not important at all. So the camera that would be 'best' for me would be crap for the sports shooter and visa versa.
I've been using the M8 for paying work since February without a hiccup. After years of using nothing but Canon 1Ds DSLR's I'm in heaven. Does that make it better then camera X Y or Z ? for my purposes yes, but everyones requirements and preferences are different.
All of this was shot with the M8. I'll put the quality up against anything shot with any 35mm DSLR:
Last edited:
gavinlg
Veteran
No doubt you do great work, It's awesome seeing the m8 in real working action, we're both more or less making the same point. I'd love to have an m8, but for me at this point in time the 5d is a do it all wit exceptional image quality in all circumstances.
HAnkg
Well-known
sitemistic said:
And how is that different from any digicam? When the 5D II comes out eBay will be flooded with 5D's and the price will drop like a rock. Welcome to the world of digital.
I expect Leica's niche will continue to expand if they don't fumble the ball and that can happen to any company, even a powerhouse like Canon. Canon can't be happy about the last few months - the Canon 1D MKIII a disaster just as Nikon finally get's its act together. But I'm sure they will be back with the 5D replacement. With expanding new wealth from Dubai to Shanghai there are more then enough new buyers to keep little Leica busy even at double or triple it's current size.
HAnkg
Well-known
fdigital said:
Truthfully from a strictly business point of view I could have squeezed one more year out of the 1Ds. No one was complaining about the work. But I'm really an RF guy so the opportunity to be able to work that way again was worth something to me. I waited a while because of the problems and maybe I've been lucky but so far it's been flawless.
I think Nikon, Canon, Olymous, Pentax -they all make great products and have there strengths. I think the amount of choice today is a great thing and while it may be a competition for the manufacturers I don't feel the need to pick a winner or a 'team' to root for. I need more then one type of system and hope they all thrive better for photographers everywhere.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
sitemistic said:
It's impossible to speculate like this as long as there is absolutely no indication what a hypothetical M9 will look like. So far the sparse hints emanating from Leica have indicated a camera slotted UNDER the M8 - think a digital CL-, which will remain the flagship camera. And as such - yes, a considerable number of M8 owners will go for a second body, priced, say, 1500$ under the M8. It would fit in with the strategy implemented with the Summarit lenses, i.e. simpler products with Leica quality at a competitive price. Such a camera would induce a fair number of newcomers into the system too. As far as I'm concerned, a 24x36 Mdigital, be it M9 or M10 is far in the future. When or even if that technology gets available, Zeiss Ikon will get their digital rangefinder out as well, as they have stated, so it will be interesting to see what happens then. I think that would create a small revival of the rangefinder market, much as the M8 seems to be doing right now, which would be benificial for both companies.
The most likely we will see in the forseeable future on the M8 front, imo, will be a M8-2, still a 1.3 crop camera, but with a bit better high-ISO performance and maybe 12 Mp, a redesigned shutter and tighter framelines. I don't think many owners will swap a current M8 for that, but some might buy it as a second body and it would keep the camera competitive.
Last edited:
HAnkg
Well-known
Any one using a manual focus rangefinder is an oddity today. If I had a trust fund I probably would not own a case full of strobes. The M8 sans strobes:sitemistic said:
Same holds true for Canon and Nikon. If the 1D or D3 were dependent on pro sales they wouldn't survive.sitemistic said:
The 5D is not weather sealed and I would not hesitate to use an M8 anywhere I used a 5D. If you get an M8 with a problem, coddling it won't make a difference. If you have one without glitches and faults its quite a solid rig. However if you are going to be shooting in a driving rain you'd be nuts to take a 5D or any camera not sealed.sitemistic said:
That didn't keep users loyal to the brand once SLR's and autofocus came out. It got tossed for a tool that most found easier and more productive to use.sitemistic said:
Nikon was an icon in the SLR world but that didn't help when Canon started to pull ahead in digital. Users abandoned the brand in droves.
The icon stuff only gets you so far in a very competitive marketplace. In the last few years Leica had become dependent on a group of brand cultists and collectors who see the camera like a Rolex watch, something exclusive that you pass down to your grandchildren. Even that group has no illusions about the longevity of a digicam even one with a red dot. The M8 has brought a lot of photographers back to Leica and has gotten it some new blood as well. These are photographers who actually take picture with their cameras and care more about functionality then black paint and brass.
The M8 is an alpha model and will probably be quickly forgotten if the M9 proves a less problematic and all round better M. The M8 is no M3, not a daring leap forward but it turned Leica into a digital company and put it back in the game. We shall see what the company does with the opportunity.
Gid
Well-known
sitemistic said:"The M8 is an alpha model and will probably be quickly forgotten if the M9 proves a less problematic and all round better M."
Exactly the right approach to a camera. You are aware, though, that many owners don't feel that way about the M8?
QUOTE]
I'm interested to know where you get the data to substantiate your claim that " ...many owners don't feel that way about the M8"
I'm an M8 owner, amongst other digital cameras, and I am under no illusion as to the future value of all / any of them. They are not an investment vehicle, unfortunately, regardless of the label.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I don't think he was referring to monetary value. Speaking for myself, as long as the capacity for quality photography of these cameras remains magnitudes beyond my capabilities as a photographer, I don't see any need to "upgrade" . To own "the newest and bestest" just because it is new and allegedly better has never been my style.
HAnkg
Well-known
I have no idea what other users think.sitemistic said:
I have heard some Leica users ascribing mystical powers to Leica optics but I don't think I have ever heard even those Kool-Aid drinkers claim the M8 would hold it's value.
Going digital is probably the best thing that ever happened to Leica as it strips away all the exclusive hierloom nonsense. It just doesn't work in digital where in a few years your camera is going to be a paper weight - resale value wise - whether it's made out of plastic or handcrafted from brass and baby seal skins.
palker
Established
Hmmm .. wanna admit to your level of photog according to Ken's 7 to 1 (and new level 0)
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm
http://kenrockwell.com/tech/7.htm
kevin m
Veteran
Very nicely put.
HAnkg
Well-known
Jaap I'm going to save this quote and post it again after you post your first M9 picsjaapv said:
emraphoto
Veteran
i used my r-d1s DAILY for a year and a half... i shoot a lot of frames and essentially put it into an old army bag... beside an m6 i have used daily for many, many years. not a single hiccup. both the r-d1s and the m6ttl have more than payed for themselves in print sales and the occasional "right place/right time" affair. i travel with a meter, a couple of lenses, a small tool kit, a few rolls of film, a palm, battery's, sd cards and a few other odds and sodds in that bag. basically i'm not handling any of my gear with kid gloves... not a single problem. -35? no problems. POURING rain and an m6? no problems.
i have now added an m8 to the mix and so far??? yup, no issues. every single day it's been out and not a hiccup.
i have shot paid work on an m or m-mount rangefinder for a LLLOOOONNNGGG time and in a LLLOOOTTT of different countries and haven't had a single problem (well the 50mm 'cron focusing ring freezes up pretty stiff in minus 35 to be honest).
does the xti take a better picture of the neighbours cat? couldn't care less.
does the 5d show up around the neck of 99.99.9.999.9 percent of pro's? see above.
will the d3 perform better at iso 64000? meh...
i see a lot, and i mean a lot of pictures of coffee cups on desks, cats, dogs and lamp posts at the end of the driveway comparing this camera to that... if that floats your boat then have at her but i'll tell you right now the m's (and epson) i have used remain fully functional and intact.
i have now added an m8 to the mix and so far??? yup, no issues. every single day it's been out and not a hiccup.
i have shot paid work on an m or m-mount rangefinder for a LLLOOOONNNGGG time and in a LLLOOOTTT of different countries and haven't had a single problem (well the 50mm 'cron focusing ring freezes up pretty stiff in minus 35 to be honest).
does the xti take a better picture of the neighbours cat? couldn't care less.
does the 5d show up around the neck of 99.99.9.999.9 percent of pro's? see above.
will the d3 perform better at iso 64000? meh...
i see a lot, and i mean a lot of pictures of coffee cups on desks, cats, dogs and lamp posts at the end of the driveway comparing this camera to that... if that floats your boat then have at her but i'll tell you right now the m's (and epson) i have used remain fully functional and intact.