Slides or M8 ?

dee

dee

Well-known
Local time
8:04 PM
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
1,925
I have set my heart on an M8 ... from a modest inheritance - it will not happen again ...

Yet , how many slide films can I buy for £3000 to use in my many adequate film cameras - including Leica II / IIIc / IIIf ...

It's not adding up !

But I will probably ignore the logic !

dee
 
Suggest looking at it as a long term investment rather than simple materials economics. There are many things to factor into the equation.
 
Buy one used from a reputable person, and that way if you decide against it you will be able to sell it for the same price you paid. If you decide to buy other things instead, you will probably lust and lust and lust until you break down and sell a child or sibling to afford it.
 
Hi Dee,

I wouldn't think of it as an investment of any sort, long term or short term (buy stocks for investment, and cameras for taking photos) - I'd look on it as a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to have the camera of my dreams. So go for it, and enjoy it, that's what I say :D
 
dee, go for it and don't look back.I too received a "modest inheritance" paid off my truck and bought the M8 and 2 lenses.By the way I'm 64 yrs old...what do I care...Buy the M8 and enjoy.I still have my original M2 and lenses..they are now semi retired and I have a big smile....regards,Bill
 
Stick to slide; focus on output and the most comfortable way (financially and creatively) for you to generate the output you want. And avoid buying a first generation camera of any sort- film or digital.

Truth be told, I'd probably buy an M8 if I had the cash to blow, so nobody needs to flame me ;)
 
Dee, how many M-lenses have you got? if none, you need to add to that price :)

I'd stick with film, to me the M8 is not worth the price of admission with the problems it has and the workaround that I needed to do.
 
I think for a once-in-a-lifetime purchase, any current digital camera is a poor choice. An M3 can use the newest film just like an MP, but an M8 will forever have the same sensor. And sensors are (very rapidly) getting better. I'd set the money aside if I were you.
 
dee said:
I have set my heart on an M8 ... from a modest inheritance - it will not happen again ...

Yet , how many slide films can I buy for £3000 to use in my many adequate film cameras - including Leica II / IIIc / IIIf ...

It's not adding up !

But I will probably ignore the logic !

dee
Click to expand...

At around £9 per 36 slide film (Provia 100 plus dev and mount) that would be slightly less than 350 films or around 12,000 frames. However, if you need to scan or get scans the equation changes downward. If you were to consider a new RD1S (a very, very good camera - I have both RD1 and M8) then you're looking at around 160 films and 5,500 frames.

Another way of looking at this is that if you are happy with the results you get from slide, then, if you shoot a roll a week on average you'll get seven years worth of shooting for the price of the M8, by which time the M12 will probably be on sale with 20 terrapixels for next to nothing :) If you shoot colour neg, you're probably looking at 10 to 15 years by which time the M42 will be out.

Once in a lifetime inheritance - use it to travel and get great picture opportunities.

Good luck with you're decision
 
If you are taking an inheritance for it and could not otherwise justify the expense, I have to advise you to wait.

Shoot some color neg, process thru photoshop, and use a digital projector. Good ones will do an adequate job for home use.

The M8 has perhaps a 5 year life and there will be something better. Some good scans will do a job equal to the M8.
 
There is but one option: both slides and M8...;)
Then you will find that after a few weeks you will have to start dusting off your film body - and the decision will have been made.
As for investment - I never understood this attitude. Hobby equipment is bought for pleasure so can be written off for 100% at purchase. If any resale value should materialize, that is a happy bonus. For a pro it is writeoff vs income generated, something else altogether.....
 
jaapv said:
There is but one option: both slides and M8...;)
Then you will find that after a few weeks you will have to start dusting off your film body - and the decision will have been made.
As for investment - I never understood this attitude. Hobby equipment is bought for pleasure so can be written off for 100% at purchase. If any resale value should materialize, that is a happy bonus. For a pro it is writeoff vs income generated, something else altogether.....
Click to expand...

Other's experience may differ from yours and the M8 may be the one collecting dust (due to personal feelings regarding image aesthetics, ergonomics, reliability, etc.)

And even people who buy for pleasure consider resale value in the decision. How many hobbiest would buy an M8, Tri-Elmar, Noctilux, etc, etc., if the resale value were nothing? If there were no secondary market, there would be many fewer Leicas sold and a lot more Voigtlanders! Though I agree the term "investment" is not really applicable in most cases.
 
shenkerian said:
I think for a once-in-a-lifetime purchase, any current digital camera is a poor choice. An M3 can use the newest film
Click to expand...
True. There are a few exceptions, though: in the digital world, the Canon 1D Mark-I (you know, the original 1D) is highly valued by its owners, and some people would kill for one. Now, about the "newest film" statement...I dunno. Not in the case for slide film, anyway. We're condemned to see oversharpened, pixelated shots on the major magazines now, for a very long time, until digital workflow skills come up to par with the film workflow skills that publishers had pretty much nailed down. Cost over quality...
 
emraphoto said:
hey gabriel...
out of curiosity what is it that makes the mk 1 so coveted?
Click to expand...
Although it "only" has about 4MP, it has a CCD sensor as opposed to a CMOS one; the "sharpest" camera in Canon's dSLR lineup. That, and it has a 1.3x crop factor, so it's more image area compared to the current Canon 1.6x crop crop (not a redundant redundancy?)
 
The joy of an M8 is like the joy a grandparent gets with the arrival of a grandchild - The chance to be young again and to be free/experiment. Going digital allowed me to join many new networks in life where I never visited. Participating actively in online communities and getting instant feedback/praise is also a joy which although can be achieved by a film/scanner combination, is actually hassle free with a digital cameras. Loneliness is a fear for many old people. Having this camera in one's hand, allows a person to have a life of fun as well as leave a legacy behind.

Some random thoughts....
Arif
 
emraphoto said:
hey gabriel...
out of curiosity what is it that makes the mk 1 so coveted?
Click to expand...
The color rendition of the sensor is different than the newer cameras; most people who own the 1D prefer it, myself included. It's probably the best camera there is to shoot JPG's with - they don't take up much space but they hold a lot of detail. With the right lenses and lighting gear so you don't ever have to shoot at ISO 3200, it's a perfect camera for newspaper and even magazine work (you won't be able to crop much for magazine print, but newsprint isn't very discerning).

It's also the only Canon camera that lets you sync flashes at 1/500th of a second. You can actually push it to about 1/2000th with non-TTL flash if you need to. Its shutter also tops out at 1/16000th of a second, a stop faster than most.

It's a tried-and-true workhorse camera. I'd be stupid to get rid of this thing, even though the battery technology it uses is pretty dated and it's a lot of camera to carry around. Newer sensors make improvements in noise at high ISO, and long exposures for sure - the rebel XT is a great bang for the buck in those situations, but just because a new model is out doesn't mean everything before it sucks. A thing about the CCD sensor - the dynamic range stays the same as you raise the ISO. With CMOS, it gets smaller at high ISO so you blow the highlights and lose the shadows as well as introducing grain. Progress, eh?
 
Last edited:
Gid said:
At around £9 per 36 slide film (Provia 100 plus dev and mount) that would be slightly less than 350 films or around 12,000 frames. However, if you need to scan or get scans the equation changes downward. If you were to consider a new RD1S (a very, very good camera - I have both RD1 and M8) then you're looking at around 160 films and 5,500 frames.
Good luck with you're decision
Click to expand...


Sorry , I simply dont agree. This is a simplistic way of viewing things that forgets few important variables : if you just use the M8 in JPEG then comparing the M8 to a film camera is fine.

Otherwise, you will shoot in RAW, means that you want to tune up ( and you should, in the M8 at least ) your images. If you do that in the M8, you will most likely want to scan the slide film as well.

Few things to note : with a good scanner will most likely provide more resolution than a M8, but scratches and gran spoil the thing. ( I have both a MP and a M8, can concour that ) - although my files that come out from my Minolta Dual Scan are gorgeous and huge, if I want a picture ( in terms of quality, ie non sractched and smooth graduations ) to look like a M8, I must spend a very good time in Photoshop with the clone and heal tools plus a couple of layers. Time consuming just due to the ineherent nature of film.

Do you considered that time ? Equate that time and the M8 makes sense from the economic point of view from much much earlier on than 350 roll of film.

For example : I just came from my visit from Asia, where I bought my M8 - I shoot around 500 images, wherabouts 90 or so are keepers and needed to be adjusted. From those 90, around 5 or 6 are gorgeous ones and needed some special attention in photoshop.

First of all, with the MP I would have not shoot much - with film with make each photo count , because processing costs add up. But apart from that, scanning and adjusting 90 images ? Oh brother....

Dont get me wrong - both are good platforms ( that's why Im keeping my MP and the M8, side by side ) , but you cant just translate the price difference / roll of films : with a digital you shoot more, processing and developing costs are 0 , much faster to get the images and "instant gratification".

My MP will always live ( and perhaps outlive ) beside my M8.

But now that I have my M8, can't go back on JUST a MP. Time is money my friend... :)
 
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A. said:
True. There are a few exceptions, though: in the digital world, the Canon 1D Mark-I (you know, the original 1D) is highly valued by its owners, and some people would kill for one. Now, about the "newest film" statement...I dunno. Not in the case for slide film, anyway. We're condemned to see oversharpened, pixelated shots on the major magazines now, for a very long time, until digital workflow skills come up to par with the film workflow skills that publishers had pretty much nailed down. Cost over quality...
Click to expand...

So true - the "old" 1D is a classic. it produces great photos right out of cam. I'll never let go of mine but use it together with my new M8.
Inunnguaq
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom