0
and, of course, the question: why not go D700 - I had one and the files are amazing. But a D700/24-70 or D700/35G package is just kinda ridiculous in size and attention drawn.)
Agree with your point but Nikon doesn't make any primes?
C'mon (agreeing here) - the M8's scores on DxOMark:
M8 Sensor Scores
Overall: 59
Color Depth: 21.1 bits
Dynamic Range: 11.3 EVS
Low Light: 663
The 2009 Nikon D5000 - an entry-level Nikon
Overall: 72
Color Depth: 22.7 bits
Dynamic Range: 12.5 EVS
Low Light: 868
Both cameras are out of production now. But you can get left-over D5000 bodies, refurbed, at B&H for $399, and Amazon is selling the M8.2 "discounted" for $6,299.99. You can get fifteen 15(!) refurbed Nikon bodies for the price Amazon is selling the M8.2 body. Please. Not even getting into the better sensor scores overall and in every category of
an entry level DSLR the price disparity is laughably ridiculous to the point of absurdity. Yeah, sure, Leica commands a premium - fine, but c'mon this is simply gouging - holding Leica glass holders hostage.
Nikon makes great primes including a dirt cheap plastic fantastic 35/1.8 that auto focuses on their cheap DSLR line. The upgrade (5100) is even better (supposed to be a terrific camera for the money). With said prime, not a zoom (of course) the kit is very compact. And hey, at least I have the option of many good zoom lenses if I want them.
I find the whole "digital rangefinder" thing silly. Why in the world...? Kinda thing, especially in light of reliability issues. The only sane reason is if you have a lot sunk into Leica glass - then it only
kindamakes sense... if you don't mind being held hostage. Otherwise? You gotta be kidding me. It's a joke - right? The lenses don't even autofocus, and I can autofocus or easily manually focus with a cheap $200 Nikon prime.
Oh - and PS, here are the full frame $7000+ body M9 scores:
Overall: 69
Color Depth: 22.5
Dynamic Range: 12.5
Low-light: 884.
Still lower overall technical scores than a sub $800 APS-C entry-level DSLR body...
EDIT/ADD: I don't put much stock in these minutia tech scores, personally. I publish them more to show that from an IQ standpoint, the Leica doesn't offer any benefits for all that extra cost than a mass-produced entry-level Nikon. Fine. You used to be able to argue on durability. But reading this thread, that's not even the case it appears.