M8 considered a professional camera?

Define pro...

Define pro...

Al Kaplan said:
Define "professionsl camera". It's not possible.
Click to expand...

A Time/Life PJ I once knew defined professional photographer as "someone who owns a camera."
Seriously, though, I think most full-time working pros would find the M8 to be a budget buster. They have to make it pay year by year.
Vic
 
you'll have to beat the bushes I think. not very many out there would be my guess. I've seen photos of something similar but using lf lenses instead, downside to that is no helicoid and no focus scale unless you made one. be easier to find and xpan which is a much more user friendly camera to be honest. the nikon gets it's fair share of gawks.

<apologies for the threadjack>
 
Last edited:
Horses for courses again, but from a technical point of view M8 is seriously professional, high optical quality, precise color rendition and great results compared to its 10mp nominal resolution. I made a lot with m8 not as much as linhof and hassy but compared for what i invested in it, it did pretty well. one thing is great from m8 for me was changing my M lens collection from hobby to professional tools.
 
I don't recall seeing ads for 'professional' cameras from (for example) Linhof, Gandolfi, or Alpa. They just make good cameras. It's only the makers who also make snapshot cameras who feel the need to emphasize that some of their cameras are 'professional'.

Taken to its cynical limit, 'Professional' means 'not as bad as some of the junk we make'. Fred has it: professional choices, not professional cameras.

Tashi delek,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
I don't recall seeing ads for 'professional' cameras from (for example) Linhof, Gandolfi, or Alpa. They just make good cameras. It's only the makers who also make snapshot cameras who feel the need to emphasize that some of their cameras are 'professional'.

Taken to its cynical limit, 'Professional' means 'not as bad as some of the junk we make'. Fred has it: professional choices, not professional cameras.

Tashi delek,

R.
Click to expand...

whats wrong with ads????? hasselblad, Leaf and sinar are the least professional and the most professional is Arca Swiss because they dont even have a WEBSITE :D
 
"Taken to its cynical limit, 'Professional' means 'not as bad as some of the junk we make"

or on a slightly less cynical line "professional" could possibly mean "this camera is built to withstand the demands of daily, hard use by a working photographer. regardless of the conditions".
 
emraphoto said:
"Taken to its cynical limit, 'Professional' means 'not as bad as some of the junk we make"

or on a slightly less cynical line "professional" could possibly mean "this camera is built to withstand the demands of daily, hard use by a working photographer. regardless of the conditions".
Click to expand...

Absolutely. It's up to you to decide which sense is used at the time -- and how far you believe it.

Tashi delek,

R.
 
No matter what definition one chooses for "professional", or even if you don't believe in it at all, I think most people could at least agree that no professional who wants to keep getting a paycheck would make a habit of using a non-weathersealed camera for outdoor work. Unless, of course, they only shoot models outside on sunny calm days. Which, is true of some I'm sure. ;)

(There's that sticky context thing again.)
 
climbing_vine said:
No matter what definition one chooses for "professional", or even if you don't believe in it at all, I think most people could at least agree that no professional who wants to keep getting a paycheck would make a habit of using a non-weathersealed camera for outdoor work. Unless, of course, they only shoot models outside on sunny calm days. Which, is true of some I'm sure. ;)

(There's that sticky context thing again.)
Click to expand...

As Fred says, non-weathersealed cameras are exactly what most professionals have used for most of history -- so no, I don't think most people would agree. At least, not professionals.

EDIT: Sorry. Like Fred, I failed to see the irony.

Tashi delek,

R.
 
Last edited:
Roger Hicks said:
As Fred says, non-weathersealed cameras are exactly what most professionals have used for most of history -- so no, I don't think most people would agree. At least, not professionals.

EDIT: Sorry. Like Fred, I failed to see the irony.
Click to expand...

Obviously, an irony fail on my part.
 
My M8 had no problem with the rain and drizzle at the opening of Montreal's Jazz Fest yesterday night (with Stevie Wonder headlining with a free outdoor show), but unfortunately 95% of the shots I took with it revealed one of the major weaknesses of the camera, which is apparently not being able to shoot directly into strong lighting. Most of my images have some form of "reflections" as can be seen from the attached photo (not great, but it's one of the most obvious examples of it that I have). I suppose I know for next time that I'd use my MP instead and only use the M8 if I were OK with chimping to check my shots immediately afterward.
 

Attachments

  • L1010017.jpg
    L1010017.jpg
    50 KB · Views: 0
I think weather sealing is a relatively recent thing, at least since the advent of computer circuitry in cameras. With cameras like the F2, M's etc, there wasn't much need as such to keep water out and a good drying period usually cleared away any residual moisture that seeped in.

Today, weather sealing IS important in professional level cameras such as the D3 etc.. If the opportunity to bag or cover the cameras and lenses is available , most will do so. If not, they do the best they can but the cameras will get wet and any bit of gasketing around the lens mount , shutter and controls will go along way to mitigating this.

I recall hearing that the D3 top plate was designed such that any water is channeled away from entry points (barring a deluge perhaps) like the bracketing , mode, af-on buttons etc..Can't state this for fact but something I remember hearing or was told.
 
well I spent about 6 hours in a pirogue (dugout) in a torrential downpour that sounded a lot like a freight train with a d2xs and a d3 and both cameras continued to churn out the photos with nary a hiccup! no covers, no rubber bands. nothing.

my only point is that both of those particular models help up very, very well should one be considering such things.
 
Al Kaplan said:
Define "professionsl camera". It's not possible.
Click to expand...

Correct. The only "professional camera" is a camera used to engage in your profession. A brand-name has nothing to do with it.

If, however, "Professional Photographer" were a regulated government title, which defines exactly which cameras can be used for the sole purpose of carrying out the "profession" of "photography", then I can see the point in the question. Like asking whether a Volkswagen Beetle is considered a NASCAR vehicle. Which, of course, only people who know nothing about NASCAR would ask :cool:
 
fred, i am not sure what the pirogues in NY look like but this particular African version was the model without the umbrella. i was standing in the rain, more of a squat/sit and swat at mosquitos kind of affair.

those 1959 F's are hard to hook up to my laptop to boot.
 
perhaps they could rebadge them as "cameras built with the necessary attributes to perform in the field regardless of conditions "? c-b-w-t-n-a-t-p-i-t-f-r-o-c maybe?

i am not sure how catchy it is but it would certainly avoid any confusion. it might not fit on the box though?
 
This is such a strange question. Anyone who's concerned about this should consider how long (and I mean how very long) it took for the film Leicas to be considered "professional." In fact, I could argue that they never were, at least not on any exclusive basis. Shots of press photogs in the first half of the '60s usually show roughly equal distribution of Speedies, Nikons and Ms. Later in the 60s the Speedies disappear and so do the Leicas. Let's face it - Leica has always been a niche product, the unbelievable work of the Wetzlar nomes notwithstanding. Enjoy it and don't fret.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom