Reassurance required...Leica m8

[rbelyell]

i think there are many reasons to choose an m9 over an rd1. but i will never get useability arguments for an m8 over an rd1. especially characterizing the m8 as 'simpler'. with more analogue controls, less clutter in the vf, no required IR filter to be put on lenses, how in the world is the rd1 less simple? look, ive no problem with prefering the results of the m8--i dont, but thats subjective and everyones entitled to their opinions. some may like the m8 feel better--agsin, i dont get it, but i dont have to--thats what subjective means. but a line by line operational comparison is not a matter of opinion. there is no subjective way the m8 is simpler than the rd1. that the rd1 doesnt present focus or color shift problems that the m8 does is not an opinion. that it has a 1:1 vf vs a .65, one set of framelines vs 2, those are facts. maybe theyre not important to some, but they shouldnt be summarily dismissed. and they make a real difference in user experience. i'll tell you this, if leica ever came out with a 1:1 digital rf these red-dotters would be creaming in their skinny jeans.

 

[nikonosguy]

Love my m8, it's black, used to belong to seal, using 28,50,90

 

[Lss]

rd1: lets you use virtually any rangefinder lens without filters, without focus shift and without color shift. m8: must use IR filters on every lens because it cannot properly render black. it has color shift and focus shift issues with numerous lenses, especially wider angled ones.

Pure preferences and opinions aside, what's the story with focus shift? The Epson surely has a lower pixel count, but it's sufficiently high for anyone to be able to tell the plane of focus.

Using IR cut filters is, of course, super easy, and so is using 6 bit coding or running Cornerfix for dealing with color shifts where necessary.

 

[Lss]

have you used an rd1? i do every day. never a problem rendering black. never. leica instructs the m8 be used only with IR filters. there is no such issue with the rd1, not for me, nor have i ever seen nor heard any user complain about it.

I have owned and used the R-D1 for years. It is sensitive to IR. It is not really a problem like on the M8, but the camera would benefit from IR cut filters. I saw the effect very clearly in a few shots with certain materials.

The M8 obviously requires using IR cut filters, there is a clear difference. And it's not a complicated issue that many make it to be.

Here's an example in harsh sun light with black T shirts.

 

[LCT]

Everything has be said above, save that the R-D1 is not based on the D70 sensor (D100) and is less prone to IR contamination than the M8. But it is indeed advised to use IR-cut filters with it. Another (free) 😉 advice. Use a modern raw converter folks and you'll re-discover your R-D1 pics. Great camera indeed if 6MP is not a problem for you.

 

[willie_901]

Great feedback, I'm leaning more to the M8 so far.....

Good plan.

Either choice has significant risks. In my view the M8 risk reward ratio is preferable.

 

[jaapv]

have you used an rd1? i do every day. never a problem rendering black. never. leica instructs the m8 be used only with IR filters. there is no such issue with the rd1, not for me, nor have i ever seen nor heard any user complain about it.

IR contamination is not just black; it is all colours, specifically greens from Chlorophyll ( olive and yellow results)and Caucasian skin (blotchy magenta). If you balance the black (easy to do) the RD1 will produce a slight green cast. And the M8 a stronger green cast.

 

[jaapv]

Everything has be said above, save that the R-D1 is not based on the D70 sensor (D100) and is less prone to IR contamination than the M8. But it is indeed advised to use IR-cut filters with it. Another (free) 😉 advice. Use a modern raw converter folks and you'll re-discover your R-D1 pics. Great camera indeed if 6MP is not a problem for you.

AFAIK the D70 and D100 have the same 6 MP sensor.

 

[LCT]

Both sensors are made by Sony but they have not the same ref (ICX453AK vs ICX413AK) and the D70 has a thinner AA filter hence more moiré but also more crispness than D100/R-D1. D70 & R-D1 owner here BTW.

 

[jaapv]

Thanks 🙂.

 

[Bille]

New M8 owner here. It´s the "real deal" in terms of handling like an M but the sensor shows its age at 10 MP and IR cut filters are a must for color photography. The 1.3 crop is not a big deal.

 

[TRGRichie]

I intend to use the M8 for black and white photography, does the IR issues affect its performance in this respect?

 

[jaapv]

Yes- it lightens up the shadows, giving a pleasing tonal curve, and it introduces a slight unsharpness, which may not affect your photography, depending on your requirements.
The unsharpness is caused by the focus shift of the IR light, but is of course underexposed by four stops.

 

[Redseele]

I intend to use the M8 for black and white photography, does the IR issues affect its performance in this respect?

If you're using it exclusively for black and white simply shoot without IR filters in front of the lenses. IR filters introduce all the things said in the post above for the sake of color photography, but without it the DNGs are beautifully workable for black and white conversion 🙂

 

[uhoh7]

I intend to use the M8 for black and white photography, does the IR issues affect its performance in this respect?

Until the MM arrived, many thought the M8 was the best BW digital ever made 🙂 As Redseele says, most guys did not use the filters shooting BW.

Hope you give us a link to follow your progress with a digital RF 🙂

 

[Fraser]

As much as I like leica cameras and had an M8 a few years ago and now an M9 if I was on a budget I would just pick up a Canon 5d classic and a 50 1.8 in the uk you could probably find that for about £350. But its a whole different story if you've already got some M mount lenses then you're hooked!!!

 

[TRGRichie]

As much as I like leica cameras and had an M8 a few years ago and now an M9 if I was on a budget I would just pick up a Canon 5d classic and a 50 1.8 in the uk you could probably find that for about £350. But its a whole different story if you've already got some M mount lenses then you're hooked!!!

I shoot with a canon 6d and either my 24-105 or 70-200, and the results from the full frame sensor and L-series glass is superb, I also have a couple of vintage lenses that I shoot with, namely the Dog Schidt FF58 being my favourite, it's a re-engineered Helios 58mm with a fixed oval apeture of f2 and some trick coating on the lens that produces the most wonderful vintage looking shots.

But I have found that it has become a pain taking the canon out (and I shoot on canon for work everyday) I have a big bag of 'stuff' that you seem to end up needing.....

So the R-D1 was just wonderful, what a pleasure to have a camera that made me smile and other people smile too, walking around with it I could just be any other sightseer.

If it hadn't of stopped working after just 15 shots I'd still be happily using it.
But as the title of the thread suggests am I now better off spending a bit more to get a M8 - will it be more reliable.....

Thanks again to all for your comments.
Rich.

 

[TRGRichie]

First 3 images taken with the R-d1, second 3 images Canon 6D

 

[rbelyell]

ritchie, if the question is solely will an m8 be more reliable than an rd1, then we wasted alot of words on other stuff! ):

look, youre buying used, old cameras, so you are rolling the dice. unfortunately, you didnt roll a 7 on this particukar rd1. ive had zero problems with mine. if you review the web as i did a few years ago i believe you will find that while both cameras are pretty reliable, the m8 may be less so. but regardless of this, you are still taking a chance. one thing that is absolutely certain: both cameras will need to have their rf mechanism adjusted at some point. when that happens you will have to send the m8 into leica, they will keep it for at least a couple months, and you will pay them a couple hundred dollars. the rd1 is fully user adjustable--meaning the easy instructions for doing this yourself are available even on this very site! no sending it away, no hundreds of dollars.

the other truth is that you will pay much less for another rd1. since you are taking a chance on either camera, if you have limited funds, and you loved using the rd1, given these facts, you may simply want to go with the most economical choice.

 

[TRGRichie]

I hope I haven't wasted anybody time and words...

Reliability is a major concern, but not the only one. I guess i'm trying to work out is the higher price tag of the M8 justified, reliability being one facor and will it make me smile using it and of course will the results (quality) be pleasing.

ritchie, if the question is solely will an m8 be more reliable than an rd1, then we wasted alot of words on other stuff! ):

look, youre buying used, old cameras, so you are rolling the dice. unfortunately, you didnt roll a 7 on this particukar rd1. ive had zero problems with mine. if you review the web as i did a few years ago i believe you will find that while both cameras are pretty reliable, the m8 may be less so. but regardless of this, you are still taking a chance. one thing that is absolutely certain: both cameras will need to have their rf mechanism adjusted at some point. when that happens you will have to send the m8 into leica, they will keep it for at least a couple months, and you will pay them a couple hundred dollars. the rd1 is fully user adjustable--meaning the easy instructions for doing this yourself are available even on this very site! no sending it away, no hundreds of dollars.

the other truth is that you will pay much less for another rd1. since you are taking a chance on either camera, if you have limited funds, and you loved using the rd1, given these facts, you may simply want to go with the most economical choice.