dll927
Well-known
I don't have an M8, and have no intention of getting one, but reading through this forum makes me wonder if for once, Leica jumped the gun. It seems there have been complaints about them ever since they came out.
I have an M4-2. It's reaching 25 years old, but has never presented any problems. Of course, it's what Leica made long before the M4-2, so by then they had long experience. Mine doesn't even know what a battery is.
I don't mean to sound dubious, but digital just isn't what Leica did for 80 years.
I have an M4-2. It's reaching 25 years old, but has never presented any problems. Of course, it's what Leica made long before the M4-2, so by then they had long experience. Mine doesn't even know what a battery is.
I don't mean to sound dubious, but digital just isn't what Leica did for 80 years.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
dll927 said:
But they had to start somewhere and I don't think the M8 is a BAD start ... I sort of wonder what Leica's first 35mm camera was like in the minds of the photographers of the day? It obviously caught on!
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
M8 is a good start. Yes a few teething problems, but the fact is that the images it produces are better than anything else I've seen short of MF.
Check out the threads at DPR following the introduction of ANY hi-end digital camera in the last few years and you will find ALL of them have suffered from problems early on.
So, no, I'm glad to have the M8 I have and can see it only getting better in the future.
Check out the threads at DPR following the introduction of ANY hi-end digital camera in the last few years and you will find ALL of them have suffered from problems early on.
So, no, I'm glad to have the M8 I have and can see it only getting better in the future.
Terao
Kiloran
Keith said:But they had to start somewhere and I don't think the M8 is a BAD start ... I sort of wonder what Leica's first 35mm camera was like in the minds of the photographers of the day? It obviously caught on!
You can imagine the reviews:
Difficult to load
Small fiddly controls
Corner softness
Tiny negatives lacking dynamic range
etc.
In comparison to any of the medium/large format gear of the time
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Terao said:You can imagine the reviews:
Difficult to load
Small fiddly controls
Corner softness
Tiny negatives lacking dynamic range
etc.
In comparison to any of the medium/large format gear of the time
Exactly, in point of fact, it was regarded as something of an expensive toy for the well-heeled -- sound familiar?
sherm
Well-known
I have had the M8 for 2 weeks now and can say that yes, it's a terrific start and Leica did have to start somewhere. My problem with this is that the 5K price tag for a learners permit is what's hard to swallow. I would be all the more happy with my purchase if Leica had a lot of these early issues already workrd out.
Yes M8 sales are robust in Europe and here in the US, but if you look at sales numbers in the Pacific Rim where Leica and Rangefinders enjoy an almost "cult" following the sales there are flat. Why? because the idea of a 10MP camera for 5K doesn't make sense.
So, yes I'm enjoying my M8 more everyday, should I have waited? I waited this long and film is getting more and more difficult to deal with. I think the learning curve for Leica is a bit more steep than they originally anticipated and I hope the next improvement will be an upgradable sensor or credit for one, because I do fear that if Leica can't develop a program like this you won't have a market for new digital M cameras that cost 5K every 3-5 years. Hell, look at the majority of us here, we're using cameras that average 20 yrs old.
Oh well, I guess I'll start saving for the M9 now
Scott
Yes M8 sales are robust in Europe and here in the US, but if you look at sales numbers in the Pacific Rim where Leica and Rangefinders enjoy an almost "cult" following the sales there are flat. Why? because the idea of a 10MP camera for 5K doesn't make sense.
So, yes I'm enjoying my M8 more everyday, should I have waited? I waited this long and film is getting more and more difficult to deal with. I think the learning curve for Leica is a bit more steep than they originally anticipated and I hope the next improvement will be an upgradable sensor or credit for one, because I do fear that if Leica can't develop a program like this you won't have a market for new digital M cameras that cost 5K every 3-5 years. Hell, look at the majority of us here, we're using cameras that average 20 yrs old.
Oh well, I guess I'll start saving for the M9 now
Scott
rejcd
Newbie
The M9 could even present more worries; in order to please the lamenting crowd they could introduce a whack of filters in front of the sensor; bye bye sharpness!!!
rejcd
Newbie
I cannot wait to see the M9 with a robust AA filter and i will spend hours reading the complaints about lost sharpness and soft images. Leica should be commended for the M8 as it came, after all instead of taking pics of your models, wifes, or G/F wearing black underwear.....shoot them nudes and post. i believe that as in the Mamiya ZD, any AA filter should be removable, in or out at will.
Cheers
Cheers
Ronald M
Veteran
Even Ford and GM had to improve the cars when the price went to 25/30 grand.
Film is going away sadly, so Leica needs to compete with what does sell. There is simply no choice.
How long can they sell 5 grand camers with a 5 year or shorter life span? Not long once the initial surge is over.
Round two better be upgradeable or a big improvement like full frame sensor so the lenses will work as designed. Oskar planned his to be up graded.
As much as we don`t like certain things, the M8 does make incredable pics.
Film is going away sadly, so Leica needs to compete with what does sell. There is simply no choice.
How long can they sell 5 grand camers with a 5 year or shorter life span? Not long once the initial surge is over.
Round two better be upgradeable or a big improvement like full frame sensor so the lenses will work as designed. Oskar planned his to be up graded.
As much as we don`t like certain things, the M8 does make incredable pics.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Ronald M said:
He built a DIGITAL Leica 0 ???
(I'm convinced he would have, given the possibility)
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
dll927 said:
The Leica isn't what they did before 1925, either. They were making microscopes.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Always a good start for a discussion about the camera, especially under the title "Should have waited"dll927 said:
An overrepresentation of complaints is an inevitable byproduct of any internet forum. For example, the thread you just started describes is centered on M8 problems even though you have neither an M8 nor problems with it. If one were to judge by internet forum content alone, any new high-end digital camera apparently is a crippling disaster for the company that makes it.dll927 said:
The Leica M forum here is full of complaints and problems people are apparently having with their Leicas, such as build quality on the M4-2 supposedly not being on par with the M3, or about viewfinder flare, or about film reminder wheels falling off new MPs, etc. Or look for complaints after the M7 introduction, there were a lot.dll927 said:
This type of complaints is mainly a result of the medium they're propagated in, not a result of their subject matter.
Oh, the S-1 came ten years ago.dll927 said:
Philipp
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Well, the Internet being what it is we can assume that most complaints will hit this subforum. So they are coming in - at a rate of about one a week. Considering that there have probably far more that 10.000 units sold, I would hardly call that a disastrous number. I recall the introduction of five new Canon digitals over time at FM forums - It does not even compare to the frenzy there..
Opinions by pro users over here : http://www.lightstalkers.org/leica_m8___is_it_any_good
Considering that they actually seem to know what they are talking about, this thread seems to start with a bit of a fizzle.
Opinions by pro users over here : http://www.lightstalkers.org/leica_m8___is_it_any_good
Considering that they actually seem to know what they are talking about, this thread seems to start with a bit of a fizzle.
Last edited:
Leica should go cap in hand to Canon and get them to produce a full frame sensor for the M9.
A full frame Leica M-Digital would blow the ceiling off sales in Asia.
They erred on the side of caution.
A full frame Leica M-Digital would blow the ceiling off sales in Asia.
They erred on the side of caution.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
It wouldn't sell; the Canon 5D is just on the right side of the limit of what is possible for a 24x36 sensor. On a rangefinder, with the short lens register, picture quality would be disastrous. Leica and Kodak had to pull a number of rabbits out of their electronic hats to make even a 18x27 possible: shifted microlenses, no AA filter, minimal IR filter,electronic correction and coding of WA lenses, you name it. I tip my hat btw to the Canon marketing machine for ramming the words "full frame" into the collective photographic brains of their customers and managing to make some kind of quality criterium out of it on top of that. The notion that the format of the recording medium should take precedence over the quality of the files is ludicrous.
Maybe indeed in the future - but please no Cmos sensor - it would kill the camera and the unique rendering it has now. The development of such a sensor is highly uncertain at the moment anyway - that is the the reason that ZI, who have bent their spine to the full-frame storm, have missed the boat altogether on a digital rangefinder
Maybe indeed in the future - but please no Cmos sensor - it would kill the camera and the unique rendering it has now. The development of such a sensor is highly uncertain at the moment anyway - that is the the reason that ZI, who have bent their spine to the full-frame storm, have missed the boat altogether on a digital rangefinder
Last edited:
ywenz
Veteran
jaapv said:
Full frame owns because the 35mm that you own is a true 35mm - not some 45mm or 56mm garbage..
When I spend money on a fast wide angle 35mm lens, that is exactly what I want! If wanted a longer lens, I would have bought a 50mm at a cheaper price. This is why cropped sensors suck.
Finder
Veteran
jaapv said:
So you do not think pixel size and the number of pixels has anything to do with quality? For example, well size, noise, and quantum efficency are completely unrelated.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Finder said:
All fine in theory, but when I see reputable photographers and premier printers comparing the results of the M8 favorably with undisputed top cameras like the 5d , d2x, 1DsII etc, using terms like "comparable to mid-format"(not my words!)I feel such considerations should be subject to the real world.
There is far more to rendering quality than pixel size and pixel density. As soon as the diffraction limit of the lenses, the airy disk size, the configuration of the light mountain, edge contrast response, frequency reponse of the sensor and many more parameters are considered the equation gets far more complicated than simple pixel counting and surface measuring.
ywenz said:
Strange - my lenses do not change their focal length whatever camera I mount them on - not even when I remove them from the camera.... I think you are a bit confused between Field of View and Focal Length....
Last edited:
Finder
Veteran
jaapv said:
So you are saying the the science that creates the camera is no longer valid in describing the camera? And does "comparable" mean "the same"? I am sorry, I just find the blanket statement that the physical qualities of a medium are simply irrelavant strange. Then, by that logic, all lenses, film, and processing are equal.
BTW, this is not an endorsement of any camera. I am not even suggesting that format adds aesthetic values. This is simply a technical issue which has measueable results. Canon has legitamate technical reason to go to larger sensors.
BTW, "theory" is an idea that is supported by evidence. It is not simply an opinion.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
That was not what I was saying. I said you singled out two of many parameters, without even knowing whether those are the ones that influence the quality most. Theory must take into account all factors contributing to a result. Just looking at pixel size is too simplistic. Failing enough hard facts and maybe brain power to evaluate the complete picture,as I am not a sensor theorist nor a first-class mathematician, nor a genius, I feel a good yardstick is the observed results.
Oh - and comparable, in my dictionary, does not mean the same. It cannot be the same, as these are different processes. It means, err... comparable.
Having said all this, there are hints coming out of Leica that a larger sensored M camera is starting to be developed. No timeframe however. My gues is that it would be an addition to the M8, not a replacement - at a considerable higher price-point.
Oh - and comparable, in my dictionary, does not mean the same. It cannot be the same, as these are different processes. It means, err... comparable.
Having said all this, there are hints coming out of Leica that a larger sensored M camera is starting to be developed. No timeframe however. My gues is that it would be an addition to the M8, not a replacement - at a considerable higher price-point.
Last edited: