Now it can be asked - Is the M8.2 worth almost 2x the M8?

[Fred Burton]

My problem with this is that the OP asked for opinons and Roger basically said opinions are pointless because everyone is different. That's a personal, well, opinion. Had the OP thought that, he would not have asked for opinions.

I guess my question is, what's the harm? Even if they turn our to not be helpful, the result is an interesting thread.

 

[Roger Hicks]

No, you and Roger may be talking about it in a couple of years but most everyone else will have moved on to something more important. And... I didn't think it was very well said at all.It was just someone trying to justify over paying for something that Canon or Nikon could produce for less than half the cost. But then it wouldn't have Leica written on it.

Dear Jack,

If they could, why don't they?

Possibly because it's a small market, not worth their entering.

Possibly because the M8 is slightly harder to make than you imagine.

Possibly because there is no divine right to buy things at the price the buyer would like.

Possibly because you completely misunderstood what I said, that comparing second-hand prices with new is pretty pointlesss, and that improved products can usually be sold for more than the previous version (not counting computers).

I'm not trying to justify anything. All I'm saying is that to many people, as long as they can afford it, a new M8.2 is worth the money over a used M8. To those who think that all Leica products are overpriced -- which appears to include yourself -- this discussion is about as relevant as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If no Leica is worth the price, then obviously a better Leica isn't worth any more

Believe it or not, I don't care what's written on the cameras I use, as long as they do what I want, reliably. When Nikon makes a better digital rangefinder for half the price, I'll buy it. Until then... Well, the M8.2 is worth the extra. If you want it. If you can afford it.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

My problem with this is that the OP asked for opinons and Roger basically said opinions are pointless because everyone is different. That's a personal, well, opinion.

Dear Fred,

(1) He was asking for an opinion

(2) I sent him not one, but two: (a) that opinions are essentially worthless but that (b) if you want an M8.2 and can afford it, the difference is worth it.

I have since added, to clarify matters, that I want one. I'd have thought that could be taken for granted, or I'd not have expressed the opinion that it was worth it.

Whether you or anyone else wants one or can afford it, I do not know. What I do know, though, is that people holding either opinion -- either that it's worth it, or it isn't -- are unlikely to change their minds; which I suppose is a pretty good reason for calling the original post a (successful) troll. With that realization, I suppose it's time to quit.

Cheers,

R.

 

[kevin m]

... I suppose is a pretty good reason for calling the original post a (successful) troll.

Wow. Not everyone agrees with Roger, so this post is a troll. 🙄

The original post asked a straightforward question, and you've turned it into another "all-about-Roger" thread. Give it a rest. Your sugar-tongued condescension for your fellow humans might be welcomed on the pages of Shutterbug, but it doesn't wear so well on a forum.

Take the day off. Go read Coriolanus.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Wow. Not everyone agrees with Roger, so this post is a troll. 🙄

Dear Kevin,

Well, I tried to answer the question.

Not many others have. Who are the ones that are turning it into an 'all about Roger' thread, because they don't like my opinions?

Cheers,

R.

 

[Morris]

Wow. Not everyone agrees with Roger, so this post is a troll. 🙄

The original post asked a straightforward question, and you've turned it into another "all-about-Roger" thread. Give it a rest. Your sugar-tongued condescension for your fellow humans might be welcomed on the pages of Shutterbug, but it doesn't wear so well on a forum.

Take the day off. Go read Coriolanus.

Too late, he's quit.

I suppose it's time to quit.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Morris]

Oh!

He's back again.

 

[Tuolumne]

I am a troll and Roger is a prig. I've said it before and I'll say it again. If not for my personal dislike of the man, I might subscribe to his site. As it is, it's all just his opinion, and how much is the opinion of a prig worth?

/T

 

[jack palmer]

Dear Jack,

If they could, why don't they?

Possibly because it's a small market, not worth their entering.

Possibly because the M8 is slightly harder to make than you imagine.

Possibly because there is no divine right to buy things at the price the buyer would like.

Possibly because you completely misunderstood what I said, that comparing second-hand prices with new is pretty pointlesss, and that improved products can usually be sold for more than the previous version (not counting computers).

I'm not trying to justify anything. All I'm saying is that to many people, as long as they can afford it, a new M8.2 is worth the money over a used M8. To those who think that all Leica products are overpriced -- which appears to include yourself -- this discussion is about as relevant as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. If no Leica is worth the price, then obviously a better Leica isn't worth any more

Believe it or not, I don't care what's written on the cameras I use, as long as they do what I want, reliably. When Nikon makes a better digital rangefinder for half the price, I'll buy it. Until then... Well, the M8.2 is worth the extra. If you want it. If you can afford it.

Cheers,

R.

You're right about one thing: I think Leicas products are ALL over priced but I was a big sucker and bought an MP and a couple of lenses.😀

 

[sherm]

You're right about one thing: I think Leicas products are ALL over priced but I was a big sucker and bought an MP and a couple of lenses.😀

Because you could afford it or because you thought it would make you a better photographer??

 

[kevin m]

Well, I tried to answer the question.

Did you? Here's your first response in this thread:

An impressively meaningless question.

New always costs more than second-hand.

The M8.2 is an even nicer camera than the M8.

 

[Tuolumne]

Can we get back to the OP's original question? (Oh, that was me.) As others have pointed out, I am, indeed, interested in the "value for money" question. And I am interested in your THINKING about this. Why some prigs equate your THINKING and REASONING with a meaningless question is something they should take up with their psychiatrists.

What is it about an M8.2 that would get you to buy it over the far cheaper used (but near-mint) M8? The reason this question has significance is that the two have, not nearly identical imaging systems, but TOTALLY identical imaging systems. So, the images they make are exactly the same. This is not at all true when other manufacturers introduce a new digital camera, which by the way, is usually CHEAPER than its predecessor, not more expensive as some self-styled experts here have claimed. So, when you buy a new high-end camera over a used previous version, you are getting a TOTALLY DIFFERENT imaging system from the predecessor's. For example, not only is Nikon's D300 cheaper than the predecessor D200 (sorry Roger), it has a TOTALLY DIFFERENT and vastly improved imaging system. That makes the value proposition pretty clear when buying a new D300 over used D200. This value proposition is not clear at all when it comes to the M8 and M8.2, since they have exactly the same imaging systems.

That's why I asked the question and that's why I am interested in your thinking about the matter.

/T

 

[shenkerian]

Roger's right: the way the question was stated, it's a troll:

Given the fact that the M8 and M8.2 have exactly the same picture making HW and SW, is the M8.2 worth almost 2x its predecessor?

Offering a factually incorrect statement as a given is a good sign that the poster is either genuinely ignorant or intentionally trolling, and I think Tuolumne knows perfectly well there are both hardware and software differences between the M8 and M8.2.

 

[jack palmer]

Because you could afford it or because you thought it would make you a better photographer??

There's not a camera made at any price that could make me a better photographer and I didn't file bankruptcy after I bought it.....so.........neither was the reason that I bought it.

 

[sherm]

There's not a camera made at any price that could make me a better photographer and I didn't file bankruptcy after I bought it.....so.........neither was the reason that I bought it.

O'kay inquiring minds... at least mine. Why did you buy it??

 

[Tuolumne]

Shenkerian: "Offering a factually incorrect statement as a given is a good sign that the poster is either genuinely ignorant or intentionally trolling, and I think Tuolumne knows perfectly well there are both hardware and software differences between the M8 and M8.2."

Tell me how the "imaging systems" are different. Frame lines, external knobs, finish are not part of the imaging system. Do they or don't they have the same lenses, sensor, processor, V2.0 firmware? What else is there to the imaging system? If so, they take identical pictures, i.e., the files are exactly the same. Where have you heard anyone, anywhere say otherwise?

/T

 

[kevin m]

That's why I asked the question and that's why I am interested in your thinking about the matter.

I think it's a fair question, and one that's plagued Leica recently. Why buy a new M7 for $4,400 when there are so many nice used ones selling for half that? Is a "flare-free" finder worth $2k? The M8.2 appears to pose a similar question: Why spend $3k to get a quieter shutter when the image quality produced hasn't changed a bit?

 

[dcsang]

I don't know enough about the M8.2 to comment unfortunately - I know I enjoy the M8 but seem to be enjoying the Point-and-shoots a lot more lately.

If it is, in fact true, that the M8.2 is exactly the same with respect to it's internals (both hardware and software) to the M8 and given the fact that one can still attain a brand new M8; then I would say, comparing a brand new M8.2 to a brand new M8 that the M8.2 is not worth more money (i.e. the $800 more for the M8.2 vs the M8 brand new)

Cheers,
Dave

 

[jack palmer]

O'kay inquiring minds... at least mine. Why did you buy it??

Shem, I can't take the bait but I will tell you this, the reason goes back 35 years....and .. I do prefer rangefinder cameras and Leica stuff is stupid over priced so I'm right in there with the rest of you.

 

[jky]

Can we get back to the OP's original question? (Oh, that was me.) As others have pointed out, I am, indeed, interested in the "value for money" question. And I am interested in your THINKING about this. Why some prigs equate your THINKING and REASONING with a meaningless question is something they should take up with their psychiatrists.

What is it about an M8.2 that would get you to buy it over the far cheaper used (but near-mint) M8? The reason this question has significance is that the two have, not nearly identical imaging systems, but TOTALLY identical imaging systems. So, the images they make are exactly the same. This is not at all true when other manufacturers introduce a new digital camera, which by the way, is usually CHEAPER than its predecessor, not more expensive as some self-styled experts here have claimed. So, when you buy a new high-end camera over a used previous version, you are getting a TOTALLY DIFFERENT imaging system from the predecessor's. For example, not only is Nikon's D300 cheaper than the predecessor D200 (sorry Roger), it has a TOTALLY DIFFERENT and vastly improved imaging system. That makes the value proposition pretty clear when buying a new D300 over used D200. This value proposition is not clear at all when it comes to the M8 and M8.2, since they have exactly the same imaging systems.

That's why I asked the question and that's why I am interested in your thinking about the matter.

/T

For me... no. I wouldn't buy the new one as the only feature I really want from it is the quieter shutter (which as mentioned I had done with mine). So... $3000 approx for a used M8+ around $1100 for the upgrade = a little over $4K... you save approx 2K.

Now if it had the same performance with high iso images like my D300... I'll have to buy flowers for the wife again.