Selling my M8 Kit!!!!

The iEye will need a software plug in that allows the user to choose the year that he wants the iEye to simulate.

If you choose 1954 from the drop-down menu, the iEye emulates a Leica M3.

If you choose 2007 from the drop-down menu, the iEye emulates a Nikon D2Xs.
 
BillRogers said:
The iEye will need a software plug in that allows the user to choose the year that he wants the iEye to simulate.

If you choose 1954 from the drop-down menu, the iEye emulates a Leica M3.

If you choose 2007 from the drop-down menu, the iEye emulates a Nikon D2Xs.
Click to expand...

Hmmm I'm not sure what you mean by this but I have an idea and in a way I agree however.... The lack of the overly smooth and plastic veneer of Canon is not necessarily the Nikon look. I have noticed that if I apply smoothing and a little too much noise reduction (more then my usual which is to say zero with most images) I can create a very convincing representation of a Canon image with my M8. I can also create a convincing representation of 35mm film and scanned medium format. Because Leica chose to leave these decisions to the photog post process there's the very real possibility someone can get it wrong and this I believe is a prime source for the consternation surrounding this camera- The M8 is the digital antithesis of the iEye.

Just an observation.
 
Last edited:
Robert said:
Ha! Ha! this is a wind-up. Isn't it?
Click to expand...

"One caveat thought. Like the Leica M8, the iEye has but one battery and it’s HEAVY. So heavy in fact that it’s not possible to remove it. So just as with the M8 you’ll have to get your projects done on one charge, or take a break for several hours at the hotel for a recharge (at least with the iEye you’ll never need to leave your hotel again)."
 
Sailor Ted said:
Hmmm I'm not sure what you mean by this but I have an idea and in a way I agree however.... The lack of the overly smooth and plastic veneer of Canon is not necessarily the Nikon look. I have noticed that if I apply smoothing and a little too much noise reduction (more then my usual which is to say zero with most images) I can create a very convincing representation of a Canon image with my M8. I can also create a convincing representation of 35mm film and scanned medium format. Because Leica chose to leave these decisions to the photog post process there's the very real possibility someone can get it wrong and this I believe is a prime source for the consternation surrounding this camera- The M8 is the digital antithesis of the iEye.

Just an observation.
Click to expand...


Here's what I meant: http://www.br-digiphoto.com/weblog/rangefinder-cameras

I always shoot raw with my D200, and that gives me control.

From what I have seen, M8 images are superior to Nikon images, but not superior enough to justify the high cost and the limitations I described on my website.

No criticism intended; I'm just explaining what works for me.

Bill
 
BillRogers said:
From what I have seen, M8 images are superior to Nikon images, but not superior enough to justify the high cost and the limitations
Click to expand...

We agree and we disagree so we shall just have to agree to disagree 🙄

I do agree the Nikon creates fantastic images that are of a lower IQ and much softer then the images produced by the Leica M8. That the superior IQ of the Leica over Nikon is not worth the extra dosh is where we disagree. That the Nikon is a superior DSLR we agree and I would hasten to add that were I in the market for a DSLR I would much prefer the Nikon look to that of Canon so far as my prints are concerned.
 
Last edited:
Agree to disagree, aye aye, sailor. (Or should I say iEye, sailor?)
 
You all find the oddest things to talk about. Why would you sell an M8 you just
bought? All the techno BS about the M8's problems?

A cop-out I think. Couldn't afford it in the first place. And then you need a lens
or two.
 
Sailor Ted said:
Hmmm I'm not sure what you mean by this but I have an idea and in a way I agree however.... The lack of the overly smooth and plastic veneer of Canon is not necessarily the Nikon look. I have noticed that if I apply smoothing and a little too much noise reduction (more then my usual which is to say zero with most images) I can create a very convincing representation of a Canon image with my M8. I can also create a convincing representation of 35mm film and scanned medium format. Because Leica chose to leave these decisions to the photog post process there's the very real possibility someone can get it wrong and this I believe is a prime source for the consternation surrounding this camera- The M8 is the digital antithesis of the iEye.
Click to expand...

If you can apply NR to your high ISO M8 DNG images using a "correct" method to achieve the same high ISO quality as the "inferior" in-camera processed Canon images, then I'll be a believer!

I'll start things off - 3200ISO f/4 1/60 shot @ Medium-JPEG setting.

305477148_ecf70ff761_o.jpg


Okay, the whole point of this post is to remind everyone that as much in-camera processing the Canon cameras do, the resulting image is still industry leading. "Give credit where credit is due." Of all people, I would think the M8 owners should appreciate this mentality the most..
 
Last edited:
The absence of "grain" is not the same thing as superior high ISO IQ IMO. As good as the Canon images are at high ISO, I personally do not care for the Canon "Glaze" that is so liberally poured over every image. I prefer the film like clarity of my M8 and if I want some syrup poured on all I need do is apply smoothing and NR in Lightroom and BINGO- instant Canon. Try doing that in reverse with your consumer grade 5D, no offense.
 
Sailor Ted said:
The absence of "grain" is not the same thing as superior high ISO IQ IMO. As good as the Canon images are at high ISO, I personally do not care for the Canon "Glaze" that is so liberally poured over every image. I prefer the film like clarity of my M8 and if I want some syrup poured on all I need do is apply smoothing and NR in Lightroom and BINGO- instant Canon. Try doing that in reverse with your consumer grade 5D, no offense.
Click to expand...

I have not experienced this "syrup" that you speak of. Take a 3200ISO image from the 5D and compare it to an 800ISO image from the M8 and you'll find that the Canon image show more details than the M8. I don't really care about the in-camera processing that is occuring, as long as the end-result kicks ass!

You think my above image is syrupy? Okay, turn up the iso on your M8 and aim at your drywall for a noisy drywall and I'll llay that pic over my 5D image and voila! instant magic!
 
Last edited:
ywenz said:
I have not experienced this "syrup" that you speak of. Take a 3200ISO image from the 5D and compare it to an 800ISO image from the M8 and you'll find that the Canon image show more details than the M8. I don't really the in-camera processing that is occuring, as long as the end-result kicks ass!
Click to expand...

This statement is patently untrue and will only sway noobs. ISO for ISO the Canon is far behind the M8 in resolution. Really Ben.
 
Sailor Ted said:
This statement is patently untrue and will only sway noobs. ISO for ISO the Canon is far behind the M8 in resolution. Really Ben.
Click to expand...

Okay Sailor, you said it.. not me. I needed to quote your statement just in case if you decide to delete it later on.
 
ywenz said:
If you can apply NR to your high ISO M8 DNG images using a "correct" method to achieve the same high ISO quality as the "inferior" in-camera processed Canon images, then I'll be a believer!

I'll start things off - 3200ISO f/4 1/60 shot @ Medium-JPEG setting.

305477148_ecf70ff761_o.jpg


Okay, the whole point of this post is to remind everyone that as much in-camera processing the Canon cameras do, the resulting image is still industry leading. "Give credit where credit is due." Of all people, I would think the M8 owners should appreciate this mentality the most..
Click to expand...

Ben that is by far the most interesting image I've ever seen from you- now how's this for giving credit where credit is due? The Leica does not load film that fast so at ISO 3200 you win by default however at ISO 1250 (1600) and lower the Leica is higher resolution and has a more film like appearance. Now allow me to retort ISO 640 (800): http://farm1.static.flickr.com/149/345158413_1a46cce31a_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom