M8 article

[Ade-oh]

Three of the five digitals that I've owned have died a premature death and certainly not from hard use. Is today's technology, and I don't especially mean only Leica's up to the job that the M. Kambers will require from equipment? If today's war was being fought in the humid jungles of southeast Asia, would journalists be using M8s in the field?

My experience in Iraq was that my Leica M6 worked perfectly well but that my Nikon D100 intermittently failed to operate - which I associated with the extreme summer heat because it was fine after I got home. Obviously, the D100 isn't a 'pro-spec' camera but it is moderately rugged. Unfortunately, as a large matt black object it did tend to soak up heat. I didn't have a single problem with the M6 or the film I took with me (Provia 100) which showed no signs of heat-related deterioration.

 

[Bill Pierce]

I read your companion piece on the Digital Journalist site so, from someone who has not seen an M8, a question - when you pick one up, does it give you the feeling that you could sling it under your trench coat, board the Pan Am Clipper flying boat at La Guardia and spend three months on the road with it in Tibet?

Three of the five digitals that I've owned have died a premature death and certainly not from hard use. Is today's technology, and I don't especially mean only Leica's up to the job that the M. Kambers will require from equipment? If today's war was being fought in the humid jungles of southeast Asia, would journalists be using M8s in the field?

This is not intended to be a knock on digital, just an honest question to someone who's been there.

There are a lot of factors that effect camera failure. Complexity is just one of them. But, for sure, there is more to go wrong with a super automated digital than an 8x10 view camera. When I was traveling almost constantly (literally in the previous century), I would use 3 Leica bodies with different lenses (or 2 Leica bodies and an SLR). There would be a set of extra bodies and assorted gear in the hotel room in case of theft, breakdown - you name it. And there would be a third set of gear getting a Clean, Lubricate and Adjust at some repair shop. This was absolutely standard for a large number of photographers.

There are so many things that can take your gear out of action that I can't imagine working, and most of all, traveling, with only one camera. It doesn't matter whether it's the launching of a space shuttle or your kid's birthday or your vacation travel. One of my objections to high end digitals is the expense of multiple bodies. For sure, many people will think I'm an idiot, but the thought of "When you pick one up, does it give you the feeling that you could sling it under your trench coat, board the Pan Am Clipper flying boat at La Guardia and spend three months on the road with it in Tibet?" scares me. I prefer "When you pick TWO up..."

Bill

Bill

 

[Chuck Albertson]

Kamber's remarks about the M8 buttons getting bumped by his flak jacket reminded me of that GI in Afghanistan a couple of months ago--he bumped the redial button on his cell phone against a hatch in the middle of a firefight, and left a 3-minute audio sample of the battle on his parents' voicemail at home in Oregon.

 

[sirius]

There seems to be such a lack in the current market for a certain type of camera. Would Robert Frank have shot The Americans today with a Canon 5D and 35mm f1.4 USM L lens? Photojournalists like the 35mm focal length because it is versatile. Where is the digital camera that can produce high quality files and optics, give simple and full manual control, be well-made and sturdy, and be small and unobtrusive? This is what Leica did, but they can't reproduce it as digital yet even with the M8. Well, I know there is a lot of great work being done with the current tools out there, so there comes a point where it's not really about the camera anymore.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

An M8 is just as inappropriate in a war zone as a DSLR is in polite company.

Excellent.


Next review: is Macallan Scotch really smooth? Let's serve it at school to find out...


Next study: If water is so wet, why doesn't it put out grease fires?

 

[Harry Lime]

An M8 is just as inappropriate in a war zone as a DSLR is in polite company.

I've only been to a disaster zone, not a warzone, with Leica M bodies and I don't see how this theory holds water.

If the M8 worked as reliable and good as a pro Nikon/Canon body, it would be as appropriate for work in that sort of environment, as the analog variant has been for decades. If anything the small size and unobtrusive nature of the M may work to your advantage, if you had to keep a low profile in a crisis zone.

 

[Dante_Stella]

But we are talking about the M8 as built, not the hypothetical "perfect" M8 (don't hold your breath).

You wouldn't take an M8 to a war zone because it's slow, and it's not designed for rough treatment. No Leica M ever was designed for rough treatment; the film bodies were just too simple to fail.

You wouldn't take a D3 to an social event because you'd be mistaken for the help.

 

[Harry Lime]

But we are talking about the M8 as built, not the hypothetical "perfect" M8 (don't hold your breath).

You wouldn't take an M8 to a war zone because it's slow, and it's not designed for rough treatment.

The way things are I wouldn't take an M8 on vacation.

Speed wouldn't be the deciding factor. The M is only slow, if you try to shoot it like an AF SLR. Reliability wouldn't be a problem, if Leica got their act together, added some sealing and started to listen to the needs of professionals, again.

No Leica M ever was designed for rough treatment; the film bodies were just too simple to fail.

The M series always was intended for heavy duty, professional use. The analog M series is known to be among the most reliable and durable cameras ever built. The shutter alone is rated at 200,000-250,000 exposures. They are plenty tough and have a decades long record of professional use to prove it. They also aren't simple cameras. There are over 1200 parts in an M body, crammed in to a very small space.

With the exception of one military model no M body has ever been weather sealed, but then again neither was the Nikon F. Obviously this is less of an issue with an analog camera.

You wouldn't take a D3 to an social event because you'd be mistaken for the help.

Unless I was working, I wouldn't take a D3 to a social event for the same reasons that I wouldn't wear a tuxedo, with a pair of brown shoes.

 

[furcafe]

I suppose much depends on where you vacation. For me, the M8 is a perfect travel camera, just like any other RF, but I'm not the outdoors type & my cameras are more likely to encounter spilled beverages & beach sand than blood & desert sandstorms.

FWIW, so far, my (early production) M8 has only required 2 repairs: (1) a major defect w/the AE & metering that was evident right out of the box; & (2) a recent failure of the "up" button. The 1st repair took several months as the camera had to go all the way back to Solms, but the 2nd could be done in NJ & took 10 days door-to-door.

The way things are I wouldn't take an M8 on vacation.

 

[Harry Lime]

The problem I had with the Leica M's during a period when I used a couple along with the Nikon SLR's in the 1970's were never with the shutters, but with the rangefinders. A Nikon F or F2 with a prism finder is pretty much impervious to the focusing being knocked out of alignment, despite the roughest treatment. Leica M's, at least in my experience, focusing mechanisms are fragile.

.

I agree that the RF is the Achilles heel of the M cameras.

I shoot a mixture of 5 M bodies (2 x M4, M2, M6ttl,M7). The modern bodies are a lot more suceptable to getting the VF knocked out of the alignment, than the pre-M6 bodies. The vertical alignment on my M6 and M7 tends to go out of wack, if the camera takes a real serious blow from certain angles. (dropped). Luckily focus will still be ok, as long as everything aligns horizontally at infinity.