Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Frank: I understand and agree with your conclusion. I just don't think the expectations for an Oly (as much as I love Oly) p&s and a $5K Leica are the same. 
BTW, I generally like the colour out of Oly digis.
Go Leafs Go
BTW, I generally like the colour out of Oly digis.
Go Leafs Go
halabar
Member
To add my humble $.02
I think the expectations were so high, and the lust so great, that it became an issue of the "King's new suit" if you remember the fairy tale...
This should have been caught by the reviewers, but, as this problem has been under control in every other camera, I think no one thought to look for it. Everyone was too busy looking for moire. The "blooming", which is the correct term for the "banding" that is being talked about (I own a D200, I know all about banding) is another major problem of a first-gen digicam. Filters can make it worse, so be careful with those hot-pass filters.
Be prepared for a thicker filter in the fixed M8, or in the M9, which may effect that "Leica look".
I think the expectations were so high, and the lust so great, that it became an issue of the "King's new suit" if you remember the fairy tale...
This should have been caught by the reviewers, but, as this problem has been under control in every other camera, I think no one thought to look for it. Everyone was too busy looking for moire. The "blooming", which is the correct term for the "banding" that is being talked about (I own a D200, I know all about banding) is another major problem of a first-gen digicam. Filters can make it worse, so be careful with those hot-pass filters.
Be prepared for a thicker filter in the fixed M8, or in the M9, which may effect that "Leica look".
butter71
Member
halabar said:
was that the one he stole from the emperor?
Athena
Well-known
PHOTOEIL said:
Do you really think anyone will remember the M8 (or any digital camera) 20 years after being introduced! If you purchased a M8 as the "ultimate" digiRF I think you have made a very serious mistake. Even if it were flawless, this camera will be obsolete very soon.
Digital gear has a "life span" of 18 to 36 months. The M5 may have been a "disaster" but even today, 20 years on, it's a capable piece of gear. Not so the M8 simply because, like any digi-camera, it is doomed to obsolesence from Day 1.
ZeissFan
Veteran
Many shortcomings of products aren't seen with first impressions. It's only after you've used it for a while that you begin to notice little things (or big things too).
It's like watching a movie or TV show twice. Sometimes, on the second time around, you'll notice expressions or jokes that were completely missed.
Regarding reviewers, there's simply too much ass-kissing that goes on. Lord forbid that a reviewer point out an obvious problem. And it gets worse with online reviewers, who aren't trained journalists and where the writer often is the site owner and knows that a bad review is also bad for business.
Not that magazine reviewers are any better. I often detect a softening of criticism, such as the use of "little bit" or "could be better" or "slight."
Look how long the bait-and-switch advertisers continue(d) to do business in U.S. photography magazines.
I'll give the online reviewers the benefit and say that they simply were too excited to review a new product that they didn't fully flesh it out before sitting down in front of their computer and writing their review.
And I also agree that the perceived demand for a new digital device is often the cause of incomplete products. Look at Canon -- at one point, they were releasing firmware so quickly for the 10D that you couldn't keep up with it. And one firmware update disabled some user cameras, so another firmware update had to be quickly issued to undo the unintended effects of a previous release.
Well, that's the rule, not the exception, with computer devices. Get it out the door first, get the money and then fix it as problems arise.
Recently, I tried to install some utility software on my wife's PC and damaged the FAT table so severely that I had to have another hard drive mailed to me with rescue CDs.
It's like watching a movie or TV show twice. Sometimes, on the second time around, you'll notice expressions or jokes that were completely missed.
Regarding reviewers, there's simply too much ass-kissing that goes on. Lord forbid that a reviewer point out an obvious problem. And it gets worse with online reviewers, who aren't trained journalists and where the writer often is the site owner and knows that a bad review is also bad for business.
Not that magazine reviewers are any better. I often detect a softening of criticism, such as the use of "little bit" or "could be better" or "slight."
Look how long the bait-and-switch advertisers continue(d) to do business in U.S. photography magazines.
I'll give the online reviewers the benefit and say that they simply were too excited to review a new product that they didn't fully flesh it out before sitting down in front of their computer and writing their review.
And I also agree that the perceived demand for a new digital device is often the cause of incomplete products. Look at Canon -- at one point, they were releasing firmware so quickly for the 10D that you couldn't keep up with it. And one firmware update disabled some user cameras, so another firmware update had to be quickly issued to undo the unintended effects of a previous release.
Well, that's the rule, not the exception, with computer devices. Get it out the door first, get the money and then fix it as problems arise.
Recently, I tried to install some utility software on my wife's PC and damaged the FAT table so severely that I had to have another hard drive mailed to me with rescue CDs.
thurows
Established
Once again, they don't have these problems with $200 digital cameras. Leica should hve been developing and learning with their Digilux line of cameras.
Last edited:
jano
Evil Bokeh
ywenz said:
Oh my.. they look so.. 50's-70's vintage?
Perhaps it's the solution to people looking to create the old-fashioned photographs, instead of chosing the older lenses and stuff, hahaha halabar
Member
butter71 said:was that the one he stole from the emperor?
Yeah, something like that. Us yanks can't keep our royalty straight...
The more samples I see, the more horrified I would be if I was a wedding or portrait shooter
, but the more interested I am in doing B&W with the M8. But this is something that needs to be fixed in hardware. Filters and software aren't an acceptable solution.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
$200 digicams have tiny chips and don't have true WA lenses ... not to mention a bayonet mount. Just try making a 16x20 print from one. I'm not bashing $200 digicams ... I have one (actually cost me ~$130USD used) and I rather like the file quality when I use low ISO, RAW/TIFF mode, etc. But it ain't no Leica.thurows said: