the M8. iz it worth it?

Glad I have mine

Glad I have mine

I have 2 M8's (One needs a shutter repair and I am happy to put the money into it) and I have no plans to sell them, especially after reading posts like this. I agree about the M8's ability to render superior tones for Black and White conversion. I base this on darkroom experience since 1987 with many hundreds of hours of getting my hands wet in trays. I print 17" x 27" Exhibition Fiber cut from a roll, flattened and printed on an Epson 3800. To my eye, the M8 looses nothing in tone and resolution, especially with framed exhibition prints. I had a mix of images scanned from film and M8 in a recent show and no person could tell or even questioned which came from my M8. By the way, I bought wood frames from Michael's art supply at 55% off. They measured 24" x 30" and worked really well with 17"x27" Exhibition Fiber. Mounting was simple. One piece of art tape in the middle top of each print. I have had no problems with flatness or waves forming in the prints.
 
I shoot to print!!!!

I shoot to print!!!!

By the way, the print is always my final goal. The M8 never lets me down. I tested the M9 3 times and I swear, they looked more mushy and lacked the bite of the M8. I cannot afford a Monochrome, so the M8 is a keeper for me! Heck, if I get that screen problem, I would buy another M8. In a year or two, $1,000 or so would be a great buy!
 
Wow, now the M9 is mushy, along with worse tones, DR, and, I suppose worse noise. I think there is a heap of rationalizing going on in favor if the M8. I can see people imagining the M8 being slightly better on some B&W shots than others - but to claim it is far better than the M9 shows a lack of objectivity. Having thousands of shots from each to compare clearly shows me no disadvantage in the M9.

Though I did compare the M8 to the RedOne and found the M8's 1080p video clearly superior and more film like than the Red.
 
I will be going to London soon and hopefully get a look at some M8s (or them X-E1s...).

Any advice on what flaws to look for in an M8? Can you tell when the screen is on the way to his doom...?
 
gdi said:
Wow, now the M9 is mushy, along with worse tones, DR, and, I suppose worse noise. I think there is a heap of rationalizing going on in favor if the M8. I can see people imagining the M8 being slightly better on some B&W shots than others - but to claim it is far better than the M9 shows a lack of subjectivity.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is true. 🙁
 
E__WOK said:
Can you post some unprocessed straight out of the camera pictures?
Click to expand...


I'm sorry but as a rule I don't put RAW files online (I'm a professional so I worry about unauthorized high quality reproductions). Having just reviewed the RAW file I can tell you it's pretty close to the image I posted. I didn't do any noise reduction, just a bit of adjusting for contrast. If you are looking for unprocessed images there are tons of them online and probably quite a few links here on RFF...

I think the main reason to get an M8 is if you want an affordable digital M camera. I also use two film Ms in my work and I wanted a camera that felt the same as the others I use. The M8 certainly has its limitations, after all the design is five years old by now. But I think it still holds up well (except when it comes to high ISO but that doesn't seem to be a focus for Leica even with the new digital M). I would say buy it. If you hate it you can probably sell it for about what you paid for it.

Road_Trip_1056.jpg
 
gdi said:
The M9 sensor was based on Kodachrome 64? I have never heard that ( or of any sensor based in a particular film), where did your info come from?

Thx
Click to expand...

Here's the Quote from LUF: "I just belatedly read Thorsten Overgaard's update to page 16 of his M9 blog/subjective review/guide (which I find very useful). In it he states:

"It might be of interest to know that the Leica M9 and Leica M9-P, as well as the Kodak-Leica developed CCD-sensors for Leica M8 and Leica R9/DMR digital back, were developed with Kodachrome slide film as the ideal color look."

And the source: "This information was given by Stefan Daniel during the briefing for the LHSA at Leica Camera AG in September 2010."

(as per Thorsten Overgaard).
__________________
http://overgaard.dk

I could rephrase my comment by saying that the M9 sensor has a tight dynamic range. M9 files are a bit better than files from scanned slide film. Still, I find it hard to get a full range B&W print from a M9 file. And it is easier to get a B&W conversion from a M8 file because the IR sensitivity.

Personally, I'm waiting to see how the new M renders B&W before buying my next camera. With all three (M, MM and M8) to compare, I'll know if the Monochrom is worth the money or if the M or the M8 is a better bet.

Hope this makes sense.
 
I think that the M9 is an overall better camera than the M8, while the latter lucked out for good B&W performance due to increased IR sensitivty.
The rest is personal preferences and opinions, just like I have an opinion.

Both cameras are good cameras.
 
raid said:
I think that the M9 is an overall better camera than the M8, while the latter lucked out for good B&W performance due to increased IR sensitivty.
The rest is personal preferences and opinios, just like I have an opinion.

Both cameras are good cameras.
Click to expand...

I agree. I love my M9. But I've sold or traded all of my other small cameras and need a back up body. While I'd love a Monochrom, I'm not sure I can afford a one trick pony. Another M9 is the logical choice. An M8 would work equally as well except for swapping filtered and non filtered lenses or adding another lens in the 25-28 focal length range. With a 28mm lens like an Elmarit, the M8 it becomes a $4500 camera... vs a $4500 used M9 vs a $7000 new M.

I'll wait to see the reviews and sample images before deciding how to invest.
 
I am not worried about new cameras emerging. I have trust in hands on reports by experienced photographers who advised me to get the M8 and then the M9. I bought both as used cameras, and I am using the lenses that I already own.
 
jsrockit said:
They just don't hold up at larger sized compared to more modern cameras... up close that is. But I'll admit they don't bad compared to my 400 speed film 12x18" prints from the 90s... about the same.
Click to expand...

Ok, I have to quote myself and correct myself... I up-rezzed a M8 file to M9 size and made 20x30" prints from both and the differences in sharpness and resolution between the two were a lot closer than I thought they'd be. I guess the initial set of prints I made was with worse glass (35mm color skopar vs. c-biogon/summicron) and may have had a bit of user error involved with regard to focus. I'm actually impressed with the M8. I also made a print at this size from the Sigma DP2m and it impressed me more than both Leicas. Very happy.
 
I still use an M8 for various work. The M8 is fantastic...if you use CARE. You need to be intentional. dynamic range is tight on the M8 especially as ISO increases. You need to be well aware of this and expose 100% accurate the higher you go for your intended image. No shoot and hope for good. You need to be intentional. I can't stress this enough. Even at base ISO, the images are fantastic but will show grain should you screw it up. I can print big with the M8 no problem...if the images are made carefully, processed carefully, and sized carefully for my intended output. (do we see a trend here...)

The M8 is also the only camera (and the M9) that gives me images that I consistently look at and say, "wow...i can't believe my image looks like this!" Often I get a very unique look where I feel I can walk right into the photo. There is a depth and drawing with lenses that I cannot get from any dslr or other mirrorless.

The M8 is well worth the money...if you intend on being VERY intentional and knowing what you are doing, and what output result you are after. This camera takes work, but will reward you greatly if you do the work. Much more than any other camera.

This is not a "casual" camera in my experience. Though, I often use it as one for fun family snapshots when I'm not working. (I shoot commercial architecture and panoramic imaging) When I do shoot casually with the M8...i get casual results. They are good, but nothing amazing. You have to do the work for amazing.
 
M8, 35 1.2 Nokton ISO 640

M8, 35 1.2 Nokton ISO 640

I know I linked this on Flickr. I thought I would post it here too. The M8 is great for low light carnival shots. This was taken at the Great Allentown Fair last year.
 

Attachments

  • 8281573560_d461f8f2a6.jpg
    8281573560_d461f8f2a6.jpg
    108.7 KB · Views: 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom