What is it that draws you to a Digital M? Poll.

What is it that draws you to a Digital M? Poll.

  • Build quality (Metal instead of Plastic).

    Votes: 12 3.7%
  • Optics.

    Votes: 60 18.6%
  • Focussing method.

    Votes: 39 12.1%
  • The name.

    Votes: 3 0.9%
  • Image Quality.

    Votes: 44 13.7%
  • Makes me feel good and adds to my credibility as a photographer (in my mind at least).

    Votes: 7 2.2%
  • All the above.

    Votes: 75 23.3%
  • Other.

    Votes: 82 25.5%

  • Total voters
    322
  • Poll closed .

Ming Rider

Film, the next evolution.
Local time
4:08 AM
Joined
May 22, 2009
Messages
302
Location
The District of Lakes.
Yippee, another poll.

But with a General Election looming in the UK, these questions must be answered for the good of the nation (Yes, I made that bit up).

P.S. My new gallery is now online.
 
Last edited:
What does it for me is the sheer simplicity of the camera. No bells or whistles (they tend to draw attention anyway) and the purity of the glass.

Plus, take a picture, add a sprinkle of Color Efex Kodachrome 64 and there you have it. Instant Bill Eggleston.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The M8 was, at the time I bought it, the only digital camera out there that was, you know, like a camera. It's not a wunderplastik thingy with plastic lenses that's twice as big as my F3, it's camera sized and recognizable as a camera. Oh, and it uses the best glass on the planet!
 
I use a digital M because it works exactly like my film M but makes my job easier.

I'll be the first to admit any pro Nikon or Canon could achieve the same results. But I prefer working with my Leica because of the way it works.
 
I voted "other" since there was no option that mentioned size. Or more accurately, quality/size ratio. Optics and Image Quality would be the next reasons. But really if Nikon stuck a D3 sensor in an FM3 body, I'd probably be using that over my M9.

j
 
I voted "other" since there was no option that mentioned size.

Ditto here. I gravitated to the Leica M back when I was shooting film, because I could tuck 2 bodies and 4-6 lenses in a reasonably-compact, body-hugging bag that was convenient to travelling, especially when using public transportation, and to keep on my lap in a restaurant. However now that I'm not travelling much anymore, I find myself gravitating back to SLR.
 
A rangefinder without having to deal with film. *runs and hides*

hehe, heresy!
but i do understand it. As an amateur I cant spend 2500 bucks on c41 without having serious trouble with my significant other. And I like the fast results. specially when shooting thetered.... 🙂
But I choose the M8 as well for the build quality, compact size without being finicky and I can get better pictures with this.
 
Hi Ming Rider

I think you left out the most important reason:

General quickness and ease of integration into new media.

There are no other reasons that attract me to digital. For the quick snap shot and post to a website, digital is easier (more convenient). Is it better or worse than film? No. Is it more convenient? Yes.

JP
 
I voted "other" since there was no option that mentioned size. Or more accurately, quality/size ratio. Optics and Image Quality would be the next reasons. But really if Nikon stuck a D3 sensor in an FM3 body, I'd probably be using that over my M9.

j
Second that. Its hard to see why Nikon dont offer such a niche camera, a compact DSLR for thsoe wanting to do photography (as opposed to fiddling around with menus and joysticks). Or Olympus a D-OM-2.
 
Agreed with Roger Hicks. Other.

I am a bit confused by the question, though. Is it really digital M as opposed to other digital cameras, digital M as opposed to film Ms, or digital M as opposed to every other photograph producing machine?

For a one system solution I see a film plus a digital M and lens (or a few) as the current solution.
 
Back
Top Bottom