35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
True. I may have to downsize to a Porsche Carrera to get better gas mileage.
yanidel
Well-known
1000 a day !!!! Most I ever did was around 300 which I already felt like I was shooting everything. What do you shoot ?
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
absolutely true.
spiderfrank
just a dreamer
3500 dollars is not attractive... Is a nightmare !!! Are you all so rich? ;-)
Tuolumne
Veteran
Sometimes it is amazing to me what parsimonious skin flints we amateur photographers are. ( ) Try any other hobby and see what it costs:
1) Fishing - Bass boat, gear and tackle of infinite variety and expense, vacation time, travel expenses. And what do you have to show for it? A dead thing on the wall.
2) Hunting - ditto
3) Golf - fuggetaboutit
4) Amateur astronomy - outlays of thousands to tens of thousands of dollars on very expensive lenses, mirrors, telescopes, books, travel, etc.
I could go on but you get the picture. Photography - even at the high end - is pretty economical as hobbies go. And you have those lovely images to show for it when you're done.
/T
) Try any other hobby and see what it costs:1) Fishing - Bass boat, gear and tackle of infinite variety and expense, vacation time, travel expenses. And what do you have to show for it? A dead thing on the wall.
2) Hunting - ditto
3) Golf - fuggetaboutit
4) Amateur astronomy - outlays of thousands to tens of thousands of dollars on very expensive lenses, mirrors, telescopes, books, travel, etc.
I could go on but you get the picture. Photography - even at the high end - is pretty economical as hobbies go. And you have those lovely images to show for it when you're done.
/T
M. Valdemar
Well-known
Just from reading the posts on this forum, I don't think the M8 is appropriate for about 40% or more of the people here who own them.
In fact, many would be FAR better off with a point and shoot.
It's obvious that many are totally befuddled by their expensive cameras, are completely in the dark about computer skills needed to post process their images, and are clueless in general. But they have convinced themselves that the M8 and other high end cameras are appropriate for them, for whatever internal drama they are playing out.
In fact, many would be FAR better off with a point and shoot.
It's obvious that many are totally befuddled by their expensive cameras, are completely in the dark about computer skills needed to post process their images, and are clueless in general. But they have convinced themselves that the M8 and other high end cameras are appropriate for them, for whatever internal drama they are playing out.
Jim Evidon
Jim
To tmfabian as well as everybody else,
First of all tmfabian refers to an official price drop. I believe that was the price of a used M8. There is no officail price for a used camera. Used M8's are priced all over the map. I bought a demo from Tamarkin recently and paid approx. $4300. I could have bought for less but this one has a Leica warranty sold by a well known and reliable shop. That's worth a small premium in purchase price. Leica has a track record of sticking with a model for several years and it's unlikely that they will issue a new digital RF any time soon. Upgrades (for a price) are more likely.
As for you D700 lovers (imagine that one- a camera that is still months away), I have a D300 and I love it. It does everything you'd ever want a camera to do and I have no intention of buying a D700. It is basically a D300 with the D3 sensor (full frame). To use my considerable investment in DX lenses, including a couple of wonderful VR versions, the D700/D3 automatically switches to a DX mode with 6 megapixels. I have that on my D70S and 12 mgpxls on the D300. D700? Big Deal.
As for those that think the D700 will kill off the M8, think again. I already had Nikon DSLR's for years and I went out and bought a M8. The D300 and the soon to appear D700 is enough to give me neck and shoulder sprain as a walk around camera. Especially with the 16-85 mm VR zoom lens.
The M8 is my walk around travel camera, and as soon as I really learn to use it, that will be the one I travel with. It's light, simple to use, fewer controls to fiddle with and so far, at the lower ISO numbers (160 ISO to 640 ISO) anyway, it's output is as good as the Nikon D300. The D300 is my camera for field trips and really serious picture taking and the M8 is my quick draw light weight.
Don't make the mistake of comparing the two. That makes as much sense as comparing a brain surgeon to an orthopedic surgeon, or in my case comparing a trial attorney to a corporate lawyer. They all do the job; they just do it differently.
Jim Evidon
First of all tmfabian refers to an official price drop. I believe that was the price of a used M8. There is no officail price for a used camera. Used M8's are priced all over the map. I bought a demo from Tamarkin recently and paid approx. $4300. I could have bought for less but this one has a Leica warranty sold by a well known and reliable shop. That's worth a small premium in purchase price. Leica has a track record of sticking with a model for several years and it's unlikely that they will issue a new digital RF any time soon. Upgrades (for a price) are more likely.
As for you D700 lovers (imagine that one- a camera that is still months away), I have a D300 and I love it. It does everything you'd ever want a camera to do and I have no intention of buying a D700. It is basically a D300 with the D3 sensor (full frame). To use my considerable investment in DX lenses, including a couple of wonderful VR versions, the D700/D3 automatically switches to a DX mode with 6 megapixels. I have that on my D70S and 12 mgpxls on the D300. D700? Big Deal.
As for those that think the D700 will kill off the M8, think again. I already had Nikon DSLR's for years and I went out and bought a M8. The D300 and the soon to appear D700 is enough to give me neck and shoulder sprain as a walk around camera. Especially with the 16-85 mm VR zoom lens.
The M8 is my walk around travel camera, and as soon as I really learn to use it, that will be the one I travel with. It's light, simple to use, fewer controls to fiddle with and so far, at the lower ISO numbers (160 ISO to 640 ISO) anyway, it's output is as good as the Nikon D300. The D300 is my camera for field trips and really serious picture taking and the M8 is my quick draw light weight.
Don't make the mistake of comparing the two. That makes as much sense as comparing a brain surgeon to an orthopedic surgeon, or in my case comparing a trial attorney to a corporate lawyer. They all do the job; they just do it differently.
Jim Evidon
tomasis
Well-known
Sure, why not
Carrera drinks much less than v8 pickups, minivans or anything else of old junkies. What I remember, new carrera use almost under 1 liter per 100km for mixed driving conditions About 0,25 gallon right? Now people say same about price of car as M8 Unimaginable price ...Tuolumne
Veteran
I am the camera police and I will be coming around to collect the M8s of all you bad boys who bought one but shouldn't have.
Shame on you. Next time you will know better!/T
Sheriff of M8 Territory
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Nice to know that for once I belong to a 1% group.....I wonder who the other guy is in this forum
aniMal
Well-known
What I hope for is for the second-hand prices to fall so that I can get a second M8.
I also hope that there will be a really good upgrade program, although I do not count on it...
The really best thing would be if somebody really skilled in electronics would be able to service it, it is after all modular and based on some standard components...
Maybe it is hoping for too much, but I somehow hope that I will keep the one I have going for years - with or without servicing.
After all, that should be the idea of having a real, metal housing? To really use it until it shows, and keep it going for a long time...
(Maybe I should add that for me the M platform is what feels right to work with - its got nothing to do with Leica prestige or anything like it. I enjoy using my Voigtländer L as much as the M8 - a secondhand L is actually cheaper than a battery for the M8... )
I also hope that there will be a really good upgrade program, although I do not count on it...
The really best thing would be if somebody really skilled in electronics would be able to service it, it is after all modular and based on some standard components...
Maybe it is hoping for too much, but I somehow hope that I will keep the one I have going for years - with or without servicing.
After all, that should be the idea of having a real, metal housing? To really use it until it shows, and keep it going for a long time...
(Maybe I should add that for me the M platform is what feels right to work with - its got nothing to do with Leica prestige or anything like it. I enjoy using my Voigtländer L as much as the M8 - a secondhand L is actually cheaper than a battery for the M8... )
sam_m
Well-known
On the issue of longevity, is it unreasonable to expect m8's to still be functional in 10 years time? The earliest DSLR's like the D1 are now approaching their 10th birthdays (D1 began shipping late 1999 I believe), and although few are still being used, I think this is largely due to megapixels, battery life, raw buffers and such things, not about reliability...?? 10mp is enough for my needs for the foreseeable future, and the m8 has most of the features I desire (I will probably get the shutter upgrade once I see/hear how it performs, mostly because I hope it has a smoother feel, the current release, on my m8 at least, is rough and notchy - a bit of a disappointment, but far from a deal breaker), and I have no need presently for anything more (ok, I'd rather not have to use ir filters, but then again, I wouldn't be able to shoot ir!)
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
Anyone have any thoughts on this?
aniMal
Well-known
Well, my very subjective hunch is that in a few years 99.9% of the M8s will be working just great... I think it is a definite plus that it is built in modules, just think of the possibilies of switching to a far better 10mpix sensor in the future!
In my mind there is just one think that Leica would need to do to really get back on top of the situation, and that is to offer such an upgrade. 10mpix is enough for a small camera anyway.
Would lots of owners buy and upgrade that makes the M8 as good in terms of low light as the D3? Or perhaps far BETTER in a few years? I know I would, even if it should be quite expensive....
Its going to be very interesting to see if there are any good news at photokina...
In my mind there is just one think that Leica would need to do to really get back on top of the situation, and that is to offer such an upgrade. 10mpix is enough for a small camera anyway.
Would lots of owners buy and upgrade that makes the M8 as good in terms of low light as the D3? Or perhaps far BETTER in a few years? I know I would, even if it should be quite expensive....
Its going to be very interesting to see if there are any good news at photokina...
nobbylon
Veteran
Nope, not attractive enough for me. When it's sorted out, has a full frame sensor and drops another 1000 then I might be tempted, until then I'm happy with my MP, M6, OM1's, Spotmatic F.......... must like film!
must like film!blazeicehockey
Brand New In Box
This opens up a bit of a dilema. What would happen if, in the future, the problem of noise went e.g. noise was not visible in digital captures up to say iso 124000 (or whatever it is)? Add to that to a camera wth double fuji sensor like dynamic range and 20mp plus detail. Say then that in the future, all cameras had this, all cameras performing equally well to the naked eye. What then would be the role of the Leica?
Would Leica glass come into its own or would the role of the RF die?
Would you reintroduce noise as an added effect because noise (aka grain) is an essential part of the photographer's art?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Being built in modules doesn't mean anything by itself. Just think of the possibilities of sticking a gigabit ethernet card into your 386!
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
This may have something to do with the gold price being driven up into the stratosphere by panicking people. In other news, the price of the M8 in barrels of crude oil has fallen, too.
In Germany at least there are several companies now trying to scam people into buying gold, asserting that the end of money-based civilisation is near and that gold is the only asset with a lasting value. I wonder if some of their customers ever looked at the development of the gold price over the last 30 years.
Philipp
M. Valdemar
Well-known
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
This is exactly the kind of Captain-Obvious-style half-truth that keeps gullible-but-afraid people flocking.
In 1923 people could protect their wealth by investing in just about anything, as long as they avoided keeping it around in cash. There was nothing particularly special about gold back then, except that gold coins were more common than they are today. But then again, a bit of fearmongering goes a long way if you're the party that is making the profit. As a result, precious metal prices are in a bubble at the moment. Gold is as secure an investment now as real estate was five years ago.
To come back to the original point of "them being right", if the assumption is that the cash-based economy will go away (which is kind of wacky in my book, to put it bluntly), this has a lot of interesting implications for the future of civilisation in general. In that case would doubt that a transition to a gold-based economy, of all things, is a particularly likely alternative scenario. Investing in canned foods may be a better idea.
Philipp
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
There is such a thing as diminishing returns, and in this case it is a biological limit. Even if an image is magnitudes "better" in objective measurement, if your eye cannot see it, it is meaningless. Sensor technology is close to hitting that limit.