M8 verses D700 ... and now the weigh in!

Roger Hicks said:
Dear Bob,

And the incentive. Smaller batteries = shorter battery life. Cooling is probably more of a problem = slower processing. And while simple, mechanical controls appeal to many, I'm not sure they'd sell well to those who are used to two LCD screens, a dozen modes, and two dozen buttons, thumb-wheels, ports, trapdoors, control wheels and rocker switches. Likewise manual focus.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

See my reply #56, seems I am in some sort of agreement with you as strange as that may seem.

Bob
 
ruslan said:
Nice camera, but, please, don't go to Iraq with this stuff. :angel:
Click to expand...

Anybody remember the 'Zenith Photosniper'. I thought about it for a few seconds and then thought I might as well paint a target on my chest and 'shoot me' on my back !
 
rxmd said:
So maybe one will come out eventually.
Click to expand...

its pretty sure one will come but why bother yet because current models still sell so well ? same reason original 5D had so long life span = lack of competition (+ people complain about constant digital upgrades, so this is just what they want ? :p).
sooner or later one of players, perhaps Sony for instance, mixes the cards and others have to follow.
 
I have to say that I absolutely love my Nikon D700. Awesome camera. I have a special problem with a back injury and can’t carry much weight at all right now. Carrying my D700 with a 2.8 28mm lens feels heavy to me not to mention fairly bulky compared to my M8.2. Now I am carrying my M8 with a 21mm Zeiss lens. The M8 with lens is 12 oz lighter than the D700. I am thinking right now of getting a F4 21mm Color Skopar lens which only weights a little over 5 oz. Using the Cosina 21mm lens, my carrying weight would be 1/3 less weight than carrying my D700 with the 28mm lens on it. That’s very significant for me right now. Plus I love the rangefinder camera and specifically the Leica.
 
Keith,

I had a similar experience. I use a D2X with a 80-200/2.8 for some jobs but my M8 is what I take with me 90% of the time. I always thought of the Nikon as a very dependable beast but not a camera I wanted to lug around. However, the other day I found my old F100 in a camera bag. I mounted a 20/2.8 on it and was surprised how light and responsive the camera was. Since the D700 and the F100 are about the same size, I can see replacing the beast with the lighter D700.
IOW: your point is well taken.

Tom
 
In hindsight I should have placed this thread in the 'evil' forum but I figured that seeing as I own and use both systems I could put it where I damned well liked. :D

There would have been little Leica angst in the 'evil' forum ... just the satisfied smirks of DSLR and SLR owners being secure in the knowledge that their cameras aren't really that big and ugly! :p

It's a pity a few more here can't tell when someone is 'taking the piss' out of the establishment ... as us Aussies tend to do! There's some way too serious folks around here at times!
 
Phil_F_NM said:
I regularly handhold my rangefinder cameras down to 1/4 second.
Click to expand...

All fine and dandy so long as you have stationary subjects.

I've never got this thing that RFs are so great for low light reportage cos of the handholding malarkey. Reportage usually involves people and unless they're asleep, dead, or you want them to be rendered as a fuzzy smudge, slower than 1/30th is pretty pointless anyway.
 
barnwulf said:
I have to say that I absolutely love my Nikon D700. Awesome camera. I have a special problem with a back injury and can’t carry much weight at all right now. Carrying my D700 with a 2.8 28mm lens feels heavy to me not to mention fairly bulky compared to my M8.2. Now I am carrying my M8 with a 21mm Zeiss lens. The M8 with lens is 12 oz lighter than the D700. I am thinking right now of getting a F4 21mm Color Skopar lens which only weights a little over 5 oz. Using the Cosina 21mm lens, my carrying weight would be 1/3 less weight than carrying my D700 with the 28mm lens on it. That’s very significant for me right now. Plus I love the rangefinder camera and specifically the Leica.
Click to expand...

Have you come accross the Thinktank carrying system
I am just recovering from spinal surgery about 5 weeks ago and can manage my d700 set up all the weight can be transfered to hips rather than back . Looks a bit much but really works brilliantly. Not too expensive either

best wishes

Richard
 
If weight and size is a problem, Nikon D5000 is one heck of a camera. I carry a D40 for a digital fun camera.

Not pro build, but you have to give up something.
 
No argument from me re: the specific weight issue (people who've never handled an M Leica are often shocked by how heavy they are), but seems to me that art gallery openings in Australia must be considerably darker than those I've attended here in the "States" if you need high ISOs & a fast prime.

Keith said:
When I decided to abandon my M8 for shooting gallery openings and switch to a D700 there were the inevitable "Oh but those DSLR's and particularly the D700 are just so heavy!" comments!

Really?

I've just weighed my D700 with the 35mm lens I'll be using it with ... and also weighed the M8 with the 35mm lens that's been mounted on it for doing these gigs!

D700 .......... 1.24 kgs (or 2lbs 13oz)

M8 .............. 1.02 kgs (or 2lbs 4oz)

That's a difference of ~ wait for it (drum roll) ... .22 kgs (or 9 oz) Thats some weight advantage ... I now understand why all those DSLR shooters have abandoned their heavy cameras in favour of the lighter digital M! :rolleyes:

My conclusion ... the M8/9 does have some advantages over a DSLR in certain areas but definitely not much in weight. :)
Click to expand...
 
Lord Fluff said:
All fine and dandy so long as you have stationary subjects.

I've never got this thing that RFs are so great for low light reportage cos of the handholding malarkey. Reportage usually involves people and unless they're asleep, dead, or you want them to be rendered as a fuzzy smudge, slower than 1/30th is pretty pointless anyway.
Click to expand...

People move slower in low light than in sunlight, for instance zombies. Generally they can be shot at 1/15th as their movements are very predictable and are usually shot head on as they come toward you.
 
popeye said:
People move slower in low light than in sunlight, for instance zombies. Generally they can be shot at 1/15th as their movements are very predictable and are usually shot head on as they come toward you.
Click to expand...

rofl

Thanks for that one :D

Expecting only dead serious gram weighting comments to follow up.
 
Originally Posted by popeye
People move slower in low light than in sunlight, for instance zombies. Generally they can be shot at 1/15th as their movements are very predictable and are usually shot head on as they come toward you.
Click to expand...

menos said:
rofl

Thanks for that one :D

Expecting only dead serious gram weighting comments to follow up.
Click to expand...

then there’s the whole Dracula not having a reflection thing … autofocus and nothing to frame, or of a view of the subject and no focus patch, neither is really satisfactory imo
 
Keith said:
For ferk's sake this thread wasn't about which camera system was better .... they are both very fine systems in their own right!

I'm fortunate in having both options and I was comparing weights mainly for interest's sake!

I give up ... anyone who's taken offence at this harmless partly tongue in cheek hypothesis, accept my apology ... I'm outa here!
Click to expand...

hahaha, if you read this thread for what it is, it's really amusing. it's analogous to keith making a thread stating, "i recently bought an SUV after selling the family sedan, and i just realized that i'm getting the same gas mileage!" and a chorus of people responding, "well if you like SUVs and truck so much, that's fine but some of us prefer to drive midsize sedans anyways." or "yea.. but that's because you're comparing a crossover SUV with a heavy luxury sedan. it wasn't a fair matchup."
 
PB130237.jpg


PB130239.jpg


PB130240.jpg



This is with some of the smallest lenses around for each format. Both are 40/2 lenses. :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom