M8 vs Nikon D700

[ArtZ]

Looks very attractive for just 2599 € (full frame, D3 sensor, D3 EXPEED image processor and "it also includes several function improvements over the D3 including Image Sensor cleaning ('sensor shake'), more flexible 'hard button' programming, virtual horizon in Live View and different DX mode indication on the focusing screen"

Nikon D700 plus hands-on preview: Digital Photography Review

.

[wattsy]

I think if you are not stuck on the rangefinder concept (which, I guess, some of us are) then this is a much more compelling piece of kit than the M8 - even if it was the same price.

[Rona|d]

It´s so ugly, can a girl in front of your camera ever smile when looking in that "face"?

[Shootist]

About the only thing I can say is some D300 owners are going to be P O'ed this camera was so well kept under wraps until now.
Having sold all my Nikon gear, except a SB800 and 10 pin cable release, I have no interest is anything Nikon or Canon.

[wattsy]

Also demonstrates how difficult Leica will find shifting the forthcoming digital R - if they haven't already knocked the idea on the head.

[wattsy]

Originally Posted by Shootist

About the only thing I can say is some D300 owners are going to be P O'ed this camera was so well kept under wraps until now.

Possibly, but isn't the new body twice the price of the D300? I think I'd be more pissed off if I had recently bought a D3 for it's full-frame sensor.

[akiralx]

Yes, if I'd bought a D300 in the last few months I'd be a bit ticked off I think...

I like my D200 a lot, so may well be interested in the D700 next year. FX would be more appropriate for my 14-24 f/2.8 I suppose.

[marknorton]

A new camera like this - less than the cost of a 28mm Summicron M - must make for depressing reading in Solms. Sad to say, Leica does not have the critical mass to do something like this, maybe the Jenoptik tie up will help.

I think the R10 has an impossibly steep mountain to climb and it has to be radically different in concept so as not to be immediately compared to this and (presumably) new announcements from Canon. If it's not FF (and assuming it exists, as Ian says), it will have well and truly missed the boat.

The D700 looks great and although there might be a firmware upgrade to the D3 to add some of the new functions, things like the sensor cleaning function are new and missed the D3 hardware cutoff date. We can expect the D3x though to be more than just a D3 with a higher resolution sensor but also to include new "stuff" which is constantly being developed. Maybe there will be a D3s to include some hardware rework.

However they do it, it's clear D3 secondhand prices will drop sharply. Still, nobody said investing in digital SLRs made sense...

[ArtZ]

Originally Posted by wattsy

I think if you are not stuck on the rangefinder concept (which, I guess, some of us are) then this is a much more compelling piece of kit than the M8 - even if it was the same price.

I love the rangefinder concept, that's not the question. I have two M8 and a set of 12 lenses (3 CV and 2 ZM) but a few things p%#& me off with the M8:

1.- M8 ISO at 1200 and 2500.

2.- All the front/back focus shift. YES, Leica makes wonderful lenses which cannot be fully explored wide open with the M8 because getting the correct focus is aleatory.

3.- All the irritaing flaws that every owner of a M8 knows (it's worthless to enumerate them again).

I must say, I haven't used my Canon gear very often since I got the M8s (mainly for the size and the weight) but when I can't miss the shot, I take my Canons.
.

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by ArtZ

I3.- All the irritaing flaws that every owner of a M8 knows (it's worthless to enumerate them again).

I'll give it 8 hours before this turns into a slagging off the M8 thread.

[ArtZ]

Originally Posted by stunsworth

I'll give it 8 hours before this turns into a slagging off the M8 thread.

Hope not. That's not the intention.

[lct]

Will manual focussing work better than with the D200 or D300? 0.95x instead of 1:1 is not encouraging so far.

[rosuna]

Originally Posted by lct

Will manual focussing work better than with the D200 or D300? 0.95x instead of 1:1 is not encouraging so far.

That lower coverage allows for a much smaller prism, and cost reductions. A "full frame" camera with 100% coverage requieres a huge prism. See this picture:


... the D700 even includes a flash unit on the prism hull!

[hankg]

This has nothing to do with the M as it's not a range finder.

But for the R with full frame cameras from Nikon, Canon and Sony at very competitive prices and entry MF kit coming down close to $10,000 the bar is getting reset really really high.

[wattsy]

Originally Posted by hankg

This has nothing to do with the M as it's not a range finder.

I'm not so sure. The M8 may be a rangefinder but Leica doesn't operate in a vacuum. Not everyone who has bought an M8 is necessary a committed rangefinder user. There comes a point when, to the non-committed, the M8 begins to look like a very poor value purchase in the digital camera marketplace and the market for the digital Leica M shrinks (how many M8s can Leica continue to sell going forward?). We can also already see anecdotal evidence in this forum that some keen M8 buyers of a year or so ago have since moved on to the next "big thing" (and I don't just mean Guy). Leica may well find it increasingly difficult to compete in the wider '35mm' digital camera marketplace and those of us continuing to use the Leica M are going to be asked to pay ever more exorbitant 'boutique' prices for future kit.

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by wattsy

I'm not so sure. The M8 may be a rangefinder but Leica doesn't operate in a vacuum. Not everyone who has bought an M8 is necessary a committed rangefinder user. There comes a point when, to the non-committed, the M8 begins to look like a very poor value purchase in the digital camera marketplace and the market for the digital Leica M shrinks (how many M8s can Leica continue to sell going forward?). We can also already see anecdotal evidence in this forum that some keen M8 buyers of a year or so ago have since moved on to the next "big thing" (and I don't just mean Guy). Leica may well find it increasingly difficult to compete in the wider '35mm' digital camera marketplace and those of us continuing to use the Leica M are going to be asked to pay ever more exorbitant 'boutique' prices for future kit.

Ian well said . It is coming down to a value issue and that is really the worry if I was leica management. This new D700 coming in the US will be 3k far less than a 5k or more M8. Obviously different types of camera's but the issue is some folks will not see it as that. What they will say to themselves is for 3k I can get a camera that will do a lot of things and the images will not be that far different than the M8. They also pick up functionality macro, tele and such. Plus the size is not much different , lenses are far cheaper.
This just get's folks thinking more about there options and for the economy right now when things are tough as a system to buy they can save thousands by going Nikon.

I'm not saying the image quality is better or worse here this is simply coming down to value added decisions. Leica will always have it's following of ultimate lens folks and RF style of shooting but this stuff that Nikon is throwing out there will start peeling away those not so committed to Leica. And we have YET to hear from Canon, Sony and others and look already the buzz the D700 is creating on this forum and actually on mine also. This will start to shake up the market and what people will buy and accept.

[vieri]

Originally Posted by wattsy

Possibly, but isn't the new body twice the price of the D300? I think I'd be more pissed off if I had recently bought a D3 for it's full-frame sensor.

Depends - I got a D3 - D300 combo (besides my M stuff), and IMHO the D300 & the D700 cover a very different user base; having the D3 & D700 available, I would still buy one of these AND a D300. I don't own any DX lenses except for the 10.5 Fisheye, so my reasoning is not driven by that concern; however, having a 12MP 1.5x F mount camera is useful for my work, the crop factor helps with long lenses and high ISO is not at all bad with the D300. The D3 vs D700 is a different story; 2 card slots, longer battery life, faster shutter, bigger viewfinder, tougher body overall & vertical grip incorporated, that would still make me choose the D3 over the D700 + grip; but I see how many others would choose differently, and I think Nikon did a great job in offering these options.

Back to the point, I am very happy about my D3 - D300 and, definitely, not pi$$ed off at all.

[stunsworth]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Ian well said . It is coming down to a value issue and that is really the worry if I was leica management. This new D700 coming in the US will be 3k far less than a 5k or more M8. Obviously different types of camera's but the issue is some folks will not see it as that. What they will say to themselves is for 3k I can get a camera that will do a lot of things and the images will not be that far different than the M8. They also pick up functionality macro, tele and such. Plus the size is not much different , lenses are far cheaper.

This has been the case in the Leica world for decades. Leica cannot, and should not, attempt to compete on price with the likes of Canon and Nikon.

[Kittyphoto]

D700 still use CMOS like D3. I never like files from CMOS. Too much file process. It always look flat to me.

[hankg]

Originally Posted by wattsy

I'm not so sure. The M8 may be a rangefinder but Leica doesn't operate in a vacuum. Not everyone who has bought an M8 is necessary a committed rangefinder user.

The fact is that if you are not smitten by the rangefinder way of seeing/shooting the M8 is very poor value. The value proposition depends on how much value you put on the ergonomics of the M. IQ wise and feature wise you could get any number of cameras for a third the price that can do as well if not better then the M. I can't imagine any rational reason why someone who was not a 'commited' rangefinder user would fork over the price of an M8 and Leica lenses with the wealth of choice available today.

It is true though that all those new goodies in DSLR land can make you think about how much you really do value manual focus rangefinders as a working tool. So far, for a lot of situations where I'm most comfortable using an M I'm not willing to give my M8 up.

Leica did have the hot new novelty factor going for it for a while but that is gone now. It now has to live off of those commited rangefinder users. Leica might want to think about it's price point. There are a lot of PJ's that would consider a DRF with a wide fast prime to complement their DSLR kit at the right price. Leica might want to focus less on more IQ and more on a more responsive, reliable and cheaper M. What's the point of MF quality in a RF if the typical RF user doesn't need it and can't afford it.