eleskin
Well-known
I have used my M8 since new (I bought it in 2007) and have had no problems at all (mine even fell flat on a marble floor a week ago and no sign of damage at all, tripped over the tripod!). Over the years, I have picked lenses based on how they render the image (color tone, bokeh, angle of view, flare resistance, price, etc,,,). I also am now using cameras in the same way as lenses. Each camera has it's own signature as to how it renders an image. My M8 is my primary camera, but I recently bought a NEX 5n for the high ISO ability and focus peaking feature which is wonderful with my Noctilux at f1.0. Now we have the Fuji X1 PRO which I am very attracted to as an M8 owner. The nice thing is the Fuji and others are all under $2K which is great after spending alot on an M body.
So how many M8/M9 owners have other bodies because they offer a look or features the M8/M9 do not have?
So how many M8/M9 owners have other bodies because they offer a look or features the M8/M9 do not have?
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Well . . . I have seven film M Leicas and four Barnacks, that have features My M8 has not got. For one thing, they are full frame. And for another thing, they take film. 
Ben Z
Veteran
I sold my M8 after I got the M9, because I found it clunky to shoot the 2 together (crop factor and IR filters) and too much cash to leave in a backup body that was out of warranty and could costa plenty to fix. Same reasons I sold my RD1 when I got the M8. I've investigated M lenses on various mirrorless bodies, but so far I haven't found one I was satisfied with enough to buy. I detest rear-screen viewing, haven't found an EVF I like (they all seem like camcorders to me), and seem like big step backward in terms of the crop factor thing. I'm saving my loose change to see what the M10 offers, then waiting for used ones at lower prices. There were a few irritations with the M8, but the M9 does everything I need. Back in the days of film I was quite a camera junkie, when I could buy it used from KEH and then sell it privately 2 yrs later at no loss. Nowadays, the thrill of that is gone due to the quick depreciation of digital. I'm still with a Canon 20D and 5D-Mk1, no desire to upgrade at all.
filmfan
Well-known
It's a strange world, no?
I use a Fuji X100 for high ISO. Will buy the X-Pro1 for the same reason. Also Fuji sensor vs. Kodak sensor gives different looks to photos.
willie_901
Veteran
While I have never owned a Leica product, I did enjoy using a Zeiss ZM with several M and LTM lenses. I appreciated the unique characteristics of each lens.
I think it is ill-advised to use M lenses (especially with focal lengths below 35mm) with a sensor that was not designed for optimum performance with M lenses. I would not expect to get realize the full potential of the lens.
I think it is ill-advised to use M lenses (especially with focal lengths below 35mm) with a sensor that was not designed for optimum performance with M lenses. I would not expect to get realize the full potential of the lens.
Reddot9
This Is Not Here
One camera I purchased on a whim was the Lumix GF1 with a 20mm f 1.7. I was really quite surprised at the quality of the images it produced. I used it to photograph a few days at the Occupy movement. It was fast, discreet and on point. I even used a Leica lens or two on it with the use of a Novaflex adapter. But was not satisfied with the crop factor nor did the images "pop" like they do on my M6 and M9. But as a stand alone unit with its own dedicated lenses, it is real nice.
I think the Nex-5 is an excellent choice of camera which I think you will be very happy with. I know its 'big brother' the NEX-7 wow'd the writers at Pop Photography who named it camera of the year. The images are stunning at 24+ MP. Anyway...good choice.
I think the Nex-5 is an excellent choice of camera which I think you will be very happy with. I know its 'big brother' the NEX-7 wow'd the writers at Pop Photography who named it camera of the year. The images are stunning at 24+ MP. Anyway...good choice.
Lss
Well-known
Film cameras for film. DSLR's for long lenses and macro. NEX-5N mainly for video.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I have a Ricoh GXR with A12 Camera Mount to use as a versatile TTL system camera, an M4-2 because I just like it too much, and I will soon buy an M9 because I want the M4-2 shooting experience in a digital capture body. I also have an Olympus E-1 because I love the photos it makes. They all have their uses. ;-)
Jim Evidon
Jim
A dissenting opinion on this entire subject:
I bought a Lumix GF1 when it came out as a companion to my M8+. Immediately, I ran some quick and dirty lens comparison tests in my office using books on a shelf as my target figuring I could get a pretty good idea of comparative color renderings and sharpness. Immediately, I found that the Panasonic lenses performed as well or better that the M lenses on the GF1. I believe that stands more for performance of lenses designed for a specific sensor than anything else.
I quickly disabused myself of the idea that the GF1 could stand in for the M8 using the Leica and CV lenses. Consequently, I use the GF1 and lenses for times when I simply want to carry lighter equipment around and I use the M8 and M lenses together for almost everything else in addition to my D300. The GF1 and, I expect the other 4/3's cameras are wonderfully convenient and perform extremely well given the smaller sensor size. As a matter of fact, at lower ISO's, the GF1 produces images that compare very well to my Nikon D300 DSLR.
Additionally, when the M lenses are used on a camera that is designed for auto focus,
the manual focus features on the GF1, NEX 5or 7 or any other auto cameras are fiddly and less than satisfactory at best. The new interchangeable lens Fuji with the hybrid view finder may be an exception, but we will have to wait and see when it becomes available.
But I don't think it makes sense to buy an M compatible camera to use with Leica lenses and expect that the results will be as good as that achieved with lenses specifically designed for a given camera. It's OK for a backup, but that's all.
Anyway, that is my opinion for what it's worth.
I bought a Lumix GF1 when it came out as a companion to my M8+. Immediately, I ran some quick and dirty lens comparison tests in my office using books on a shelf as my target figuring I could get a pretty good idea of comparative color renderings and sharpness. Immediately, I found that the Panasonic lenses performed as well or better that the M lenses on the GF1. I believe that stands more for performance of lenses designed for a specific sensor than anything else.
I quickly disabused myself of the idea that the GF1 could stand in for the M8 using the Leica and CV lenses. Consequently, I use the GF1 and lenses for times when I simply want to carry lighter equipment around and I use the M8 and M lenses together for almost everything else in addition to my D300. The GF1 and, I expect the other 4/3's cameras are wonderfully convenient and perform extremely well given the smaller sensor size. As a matter of fact, at lower ISO's, the GF1 produces images that compare very well to my Nikon D300 DSLR.
Additionally, when the M lenses are used on a camera that is designed for auto focus,
the manual focus features on the GF1, NEX 5or 7 or any other auto cameras are fiddly and less than satisfactory at best. The new interchangeable lens Fuji with the hybrid view finder may be an exception, but we will have to wait and see when it becomes available.
But I don't think it makes sense to buy an M compatible camera to use with Leica lenses and expect that the results will be as good as that achieved with lenses specifically designed for a given camera. It's OK for a backup, but that's all.
Anyway, that is my opinion for what it's worth.
Last edited:
Reddot9
This Is Not Here
I used the electronic finder that I purchased along side the GF1. It was virtually impossible to focus with it with M lenses.
Jim Evidon
Jim
"..I used the electronic finder that I purchased along side the GF1. It was virtually impossible to focus with it with M lenses...."
Very true about the finder, although based on using my wife's Sony A33 DSLR, it is possible to make an electronic finder that is as good as a mirror reflex finder. Still, EVF's have a problem. Last weekend I took my GF1 to a dog show to get some action shots. Using the continuous shooting feature the EVF displayed only the first image and I was shooting blind for the rest of the sequence. This is a failing of all EVFs. So if your desire is to shoot action pics, stick to an optical viewfinder, either M type RF or a mirror type DSLR. It is possible that the new Fuji X series with the hybrid optical/EVF finder may solve the 1st image freeze problem with continuous shooting. Possibly some of you have used the Fuji X100 and can comment.
Very true about the finder, although based on using my wife's Sony A33 DSLR, it is possible to make an electronic finder that is as good as a mirror reflex finder. Still, EVF's have a problem. Last weekend I took my GF1 to a dog show to get some action shots. Using the continuous shooting feature the EVF displayed only the first image and I was shooting blind for the rest of the sequence. This is a failing of all EVFs. So if your desire is to shoot action pics, stick to an optical viewfinder, either M type RF or a mirror type DSLR. It is possible that the new Fuji X series with the hybrid optical/EVF finder may solve the 1st image freeze problem with continuous shooting. Possibly some of you have used the Fuji X100 and can comment.