Nice set of M8 photos

jaapv said:
Vladimer is right about one thing though: these photographs are rather boring. Digital or not. And bear with him - he is a bit of the devils advocate ;)
Click to expand...

I would agree that "Vladimer's" own photos are very good as someone else pointed out, but a devil's advocate offers thoughtful critique and debate. That's not what he does. He offers the same predictable comments every single time - digital sucks...the M8 sucks.

It's true that these photos aren't great and I wish there were more with people in it but what they do offer is a glimpse at the M8's image quality and that is clearly evident. If you know what to look for then you know that these images don't suck.
 
I have to agree they're pretty damn dull (in their defence they hardly ever shoot reportage or people). Can't say I'm desperately impressed with Luminous Landscapes attempts either, to be frank, he doesn't seem to be that great with people. Simon Wheatley's pictures, in the British Journal of Photography, have been the most interesting (and closest to how I'd be using it) I've seen so far, though the colour repro is a bit nasty.
 
As soon as I get my M8, I'll post some images.

It'll probably be around the year 2010.

Ian
 
I think Uwe's pictures are literally tests, and if you look at them that way, they're certainly no more boring -- and I think a lot more useful -- than shooting targets. They're not supposed to be serious street shots or photojournalism, they're supposed to give you an idea of, say, how the camera handles vibrant color.

JC
 
Sorry, these are indeed very sterile - crappy looking pictures.

Again, why won't Leica publishing some badass M8 pictures from one of their loaner cameras? I know the pics are out there.. They've actually published some good M8 pics, but it is locked in their PDF brochure..

Also, when seeing the awsome amount of detail in these M8 shots, I find it ironic that all the Leica purist - digital haters who once said digital images are too sharp don't seem to mind when the M8 provides images with very sharp details..
 
Last edited:
I agree with John, these pictures are tests and I think it gives us an idea of how the processor handles detail and noise and how sharp leica lenses can be. If the idea is to show how this camera performs, I just wish people would post images that challenges the processor, ie: night shots, high iso, moving things etc...
 
Maronati said:
The colors are soft, maybe because they are strait from the card with no processing.
Click to expand...

Were the signs faded? What did the scene actually look like?

Unless you were actually there, I'm afraid it's kind of hard to make a judgment call on how accurate the colors really are.

And what does soft colors mean? I've heard soft for sharpness but never to describe color. Do you mean unsaturated?
 
Last edited:
ywenz said:
.. Also, when seeing the awsome amount of detail in these M8 shots, I find it ironic that all the Leica purist - digital haters who once said digital images are too sharp don't seem to mind when the M8 provides images with very sharp details..
Click to expand...
Thanks for mentioning it, I thought I was the only one wondering about that :)
 
akptc said:
Thanks for mentioning it, I thought I was the only one wondering about that :)
Click to expand...

Yeah, it is a bit convinient ain't it? LOL

newyorkone said:
And what does soft colors mean? I've heard soft for sharpness but never to describe color. Do you mean unsaturated?
Click to expand...

soft colors.. doesn't that make perfect sense? soft white clouds against a blue sky isn't 100% white, it's a very light blue...
 
Last edited:
Wow! These examples, along with those on the Luminous Landscape have led me to make a deposit!







The deposit was for a new Nikon Coolscan 5000, though. ;)

That way I get to keep my 'cheap' film bodies that aren't so outrageously expensive that I'm afraid to leave the house with them; I get to keep my 'full frame' f1.4 wide-angle glass and, most importantly, I get to keep my rapidly depreciating electronic gadgetry on the desk next to my computer, where it belongs.

Final note: These linked images look like they could have been shot with any number of digital cameras. Same hyper-exagerrated resolution, weird colors and 'plastic' look. The benefit of Leica glass doesn't seem to make up for that. With any luck, future test will reveal something better than this. :(
 
newyorkone said:
Were the signs faded? What did the scene actually look like?

Unless you were actually there, I'm afraid it's kind of hard to make a judgment call on how accurate the colors really are.

And what does soft colors mean? I've heard soft for sharpness but never to describe color. Do you mean unsaturated?
Click to expand...
By soft I mean muted, not bright...pastel like. It lacks punch!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom