M8 good enough?

I'm still getting an M8, just waiting for the go-ahead on a couple of coding jobs. If I get them both, I'll be able to go for the M9 and forget about GAS.
 
Double Negative said:
Just finished an article, "Is the M8 Still a Good Choice?" actually.
Click to expand...
Interesting thanks, but...
"The M9 also offers improvements in the ergonomics of the camera; an INFO screen for battery/remaining shots..."
... mandatory chimping is hardly an ergonomics improvement. The M8 is not as good as the R-D1 from this standpoint but, at least, we don't need chimping to check battery level and remaining shots with the former.
 
bought an m8... major problems. it was ugly.

leica replaced. ran like a charm for 2 years. sold it and bought a black body. buggy, freaked me out, sold it.
 
I bought an M8 new, about 9 months after release. By that time I was aware of its problems (IR filters, sudden deaths, et al) and went into it with eyes open. Never had a glitch. I would've preferred a 24x36 sensor, but had no problem accepting the crop.

I now have an M9. In terms of the crop factor and lower (not completely nonexistant) need for IR filters, it's a convenience for me, but hardly earth-shattering. Image quality is so close after the M8 as to strike me as insignificant. YMMV.

I bought the M9 because I'm not getting younger or healthier, and I wanted it. Plain and simple. No elaborate rationalizations or explanations will be offered. And I still maintain that as a picture-making instrument, the M8 is both "good enough" and within a gnat's whisker of the M9.
 
Roger Hicks said:
.....Yes, I'm more comfortable with FF, and I really miss(ed) a FAST wide-angle on the M8, but I'm beginning to suspect that this is mere hardening of the categories. On FF it's 35+75; on M8, 50+21 ....
Click to expand...

I can agree with this. If I ever do get a M9, I would also use just 35+75mm.

I think my M8 at 1/3 the cost of a M9 is the basis for a smaller kit than a M9 kit, because the 50mm is almost effective 70mm, and the the ZM25 for a EFOV 33mm. While I could be happy with my widest lens being 35mm on an M9, it would be nice to have something wider than an effective 33mm on the M8.
 
LCT said:
Never tried the tiny Skopar 21/4? Excellent equiv 28 on the M8. A bit soft at f/4, otherwise as sharp as my Elmarit 21/2.8 asph.
Click to expand...

Yes, well I have my eye on the Skopar 21, ZM21/4.5, ZM18, heliar 15. The ZMs are more expensive for the amount of use it will get. I've heard good things about the Skopar 21.
 
I bought the M8 late last year. It is my first digital. Prevously I used Nikon SLR:s (F2-F5). The M8 has really changed my photography. I love it. It is small and light. I bring it all the time. It rally is the nicest camera I ever had. So, go for it. You can allways upgrade it when time comes. It is by far the best camera I ever worked with.
 
jim_buchanan said:
I can agree with this. If I ever do get a M9, I would also use just 35+75mm.

I think my M8 at 1/3 the cost of a M9 is the basis for a smaller kit than a M9 kit, because the 50mm is almost effective 70mm, and the the ZM25 for a EFOV 33mm. While I could be happy with my widest lens being 35mm on an M9, it would be nice to have something wider than an effective 33mm on the M8.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my thinking, except I don't see why 33mm would not be wide enough on the M8, if 35mm is OK on the M9. That said, I am frustrated by my inability to see the 24mm framelines on my M8.2. The widest I can get (equivalent-wise) is 37mm, using my 28mm lens. So I leave the 24mm to my film M bodies, and simply use the 21mm with a 28mm finder (as already discussed above). I can't complain, I knew there would be this limitation at the wide end before I bought. After all, 28-37-47-67 seems a pretty good spread for a four-lens rangefinder outfit.

When I need to go wider, I can try to have my D700 along.
 
I own a M6 with a CV 28/1.9, 50 Cron and 90 Cron. I really hate DSLRs, so I'm using a Canon G11 as my only digital camera. The truth is that the M6 is getting less and less use every day, as it's getting more and more annoying and inconvinient the develop/scan/PS process for all the negatives. The G11 superb quality doesn't help either.


I went to a shop the other day to check some compact cameras for my girfriend. There is a very big second hand section there, and they had several M8s. I asked them to show me a couple and just in the moment I picked up one (black), it was like WOW. That familiar feeling of having my M6 in my hands.. a bit different, but great feeling... Then they showed me a M8.2 in black paint and that was even better. I had a seriuos lust case just there.
NOW the problem. Those cameras were 2100 euros for the black chrome M8 and 2400 euros for the M8.2 (what a cooler). That's counting a 1-year warranty. It's a bit overpriced anyway. I could get a M8 for 1750 euros on the net. My problem is that being an amateur and not having any income from photography, I can't justify spending that kind of money. The M9 is out of the question, of course


So the only way I could get the M8 is selling my beloved M6 to finance the M8. What is setting me back apart from the money, is what the M8 offers: a way to use my glass in a digital body, but with some cons: 1.3 crop, IR problems, possible reliability problems like green lines, etc.
Being a great camera, I think 1750 euros gets you more in other brands (full drame, no IR issues), but a Leica is a Leica is a Leica, I have the glass already, and it's not a DSLR; that's the biggest plus.



So I'm really torn about selling my M6 :-(
 
javi, i hear you. the M8 often needs accommodation due to the 1.3x crop factor. your 28 shoots like a 35 on the M8, your 50 shoots like a 70, your 90 like a 120. if you can acclimate, then all you need is 2-3 filters. if you can't acclimate then you'll need to sell some or all of your present lenses and replace with something like 21, 35, 75 FLs.

there's not much to say about the physical joy of shooting an M6 with a simple 35-50-90 kit - it's as good as it gets.

i think the biggest consideration is just how much you want to change your workflow from hybrid film/digital to full digital. it sounds like you've seen enough of the benefits of full digital and felt the frustration of film/digital workflow to make the move, but who am i to say?
 
Last edited:
Before going back to film, I was using a Canon 350D DSLR, and I got tired of it. The big lenses, the bulk and everything. I bought the M6 to a RFF member and what a fantastic experience.

Last year I move to another house and I don't have as easy access to a scanner as before. The same goes for deveolping. So I bought a Canon G11 and I realized the convenient it is over film, even as I love B&W film. I think B&W film has certain look that's unsurpassed.

So I usually take my G11 instead of the M6 and that's a shame, as I don't want to sell it, but I don't want to have it at home gathering dust, like it's happening right now.

I know the M8 is not going to be my last digital Leica M if I buy it, but the M6 certainly is the ultimate film camera for me. I wouldn't need another film camera, really.
 
Yes, the reports of the M8's deficiencies are greatly exaggerated. IR is not much of a problem. You don't always have to use the IR/UV filters. Hi-ISO even at 2500 is really pretty decent for most shots. At 16 x 20, that is probably another thing, but at 8 X 12 or so, it's OK. I bought my M8.2 from the auction site. No funny lines, green or otherwise. Yes the 28mm is a 35 (37, actually); but the 21mm becomes a 28mm, though we must use our external finder. And if one can see the 24mm framelines (I have major difficulty, as an eyeglass wearer), you can have a 32mm equivalent view.

I finally realized I would know whether I liked the M8 by getting one, and not by reading stuff. So I got one.

I like it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom