ppolla Posted December 22, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) OK...first of all I realize this is a Leica forum, but I have to ask the question as I might be getting a M8.2. So here comes my maybe stupid question: Is there a lot of difference between images taken with Canon 1D mkIII, or new 7D and a M8.2..providing Canon was being used with L lenses 24-70 or 70-200 f/2.8?IF so, what is the difference? Please don't jump at me...I know these are 2 completely different cameras, that are used differently, but I need to understand the differences and advantages/disadvantages... Apologies if this offended you. Please let me know. Thanks, P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Hi ppolla, Take a look here M8.2 vs Canon 1Dmk3 or 7D?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
digitalfx Posted December 22, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 22, 2009 I have both a M8 and a canon 5DII. The Canon sensor is more sensitive, so will exhibit far less noise in low light situations. The Canon is an SLR so it is faster to use than a rangefinder but the M8 is much more compact. But they shouldnt really be compared as they are two different animals. The M8, although much older technology produces stunning images and Leica's lenses are legendary. That said a competent photographer can produce stunning images with either tool. If you had to own just one, its really a matter of personal preference, I wouldn't base your decision from comments on a forum Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted December 22, 2009 I own a 1Dmk3, and am planning on replacing with 7D....for kids photos, sports...and for everything else I would like to use the M8.2...that is the idea... But I am not 100% sure yet...that is the reason for the question... P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 22, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 22, 2009 I own a 1Dmk3, and am planning on replacing with 7D....for kids photos, sports...and for everything else I would like to use the M8.2...that is the idea...But I am not 100% sure yet...that is the reason for the question... P Have you ever used a rangefinder? Are you asking about pros/cons of RF versus SLR, the wisdom of having two different systems, or the image quality (IQ) differences? If the latter, you will need to be more specific about your photo output...screen or print, print size, etc. Leica is also about the lenses, mostly primes, so then there's another discussion. The more you tell us, the more likely folks will jump in to assist. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted December 22, 2009 I have never used a RF camera....only DSLR. To date I have shot a lot of sports (Sport Photography), and kids stuff...but would really like to get into a more creative mode and shoot more when I am out visiting cities, or going for nice walks, but also portraits. In some respect I think M8.2 would compliment the DSLR...as I really don't see taking photos of kids in action with M8.2. I would possibly get back into printing photos, but only some good ones. Majority of shots would be used on my family website. Not sure I am any wiser after writing this... P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 22, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 22, 2009 I have never used a RF camera....only DSLR. To date I have shot a lot of sports (Sport Photography), and kids stuff...but would really like to get into a more creative mode and shoot more when I am out visiting cities, or going for nice walks, but also portraits.In some respect I think M8.2 would compliment the DSLR...as I really don't see taking photos of kids in action with M8.2. I would possibly get back into printing photos, but only some good ones. Majority of shots would be used on my family website. Not sure I am any wiser after writing this... P A few suggestions. One, I recommend, along with many other forum members, that you subscribe to Sean Reid's site...Welcome to ReidReviews It requires a small annual fee, and you'll get your value back in no time. He has essays on the RF experience, Leica and other equipment, as well as very useful and insightful essays on photography. You can also search the forum for other related threads, which might answer some questions you hadn't even thought about. If you have a dealer nearby, check out an M8 or M8.2 and see if you can test it out a bit. Some people take to it very quickly; others not. It's a wonderful tool in capable hands. And, its size and portability better ensures you'll have a camera around when you want one. You can find used M8s that won't break the bank...just to see how you like it...and, if not, you won't lose much if anything. Beware, though. Once you get hooked, you'll be checking out lenses and finding new ways to empty your wallet. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walt Calahan Posted December 22, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Canon lenses do not compare. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan428s Posted December 22, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 22, 2009 I think it depends on how much money you have to spend... I personally have the Canon 1Dmk3 and Leica M8. I carry my Leica M8 when I do street shooting or needs to travel light. Canon 1Dmk3 has much better night time sensitivity I can shoot up to 1600 asa with very little noise, but the camera is way to big to be carried everywhere. If you have a limited amount to spend, I would go with the 7D or the 5D mark II. Both have excellent night sensitivity, HD movie and are relatively small compare to the 1Dmk3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #9 Posted December 22, 2009 I think it depends on how much money you have to spend... I personally have the Canon 1Dmk3 and Leica M8. I carry my Leica M8 when I do street shooting or needs to travel light. Canon 1Dmk3 has much better night time sensitivity I can shoot up to 1600 asa with very little noise, but the camera is way to big to be carried everywhere. If you have a limited amount to spend, I would go with the 7D or the 5D mark II. Both have excellent night sensitivity, HD movie and are relatively small compare to the 1Dmk3. Dan, how do you compare the IQ M8 vs MK3 in comparable situations? Thanks, P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knomad Posted December 22, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 22, 2009 There have been a few reviews of the M8, M8.2, or M9 against various top end DSLRs. Erwin Puts comes to mind, although I think his comparison was against the Nikon D3. I'm summarizing and generalizing here, but the easiest way to describe it is that the digital Leica M bodies are just barely edged out in resolution by the very top of the line full frame pro bodies from Nikon or Canon (although usually you need to look at the pixel level to see it), and Leicas consistently perform better than crop-sensor DSLRs. The Leicas compete well in part because, although the other brands have more megapixels and/or bigger sensors, DSLRs have anti-aliasing filters which cause a loss of resolution, and Leica chose not to use an anti-aliasing filter. Thus, no (or at least less) need for sharpening in post, while with Canon or Nikon sharpening is pretty much essential. The full frame DSLRs do generally have a bit of an edge in high ISO performance. However, this is offset to some extent by the fact that many Leica lenses perform better at full aperture, and because many of us are able to hand hold a rangefinder at lower shutter speeds because of the absence of mirror slap. So the short answer is yes and no. There isn't much difference in resolution. There is, to the perceptive eye, a lot of difference between the distinctive Leica glow and anything else. And the different cameras are good at, and intended for, different things. I haven't dumped my DSLR yet, because a few times a year I still need to shoot macro or sustained fast action, and rangefinders aren't good at those things... although if I still lived in a big city I might very possibly consider renting instead in those cases. But my M8 is my camera of choice 95% of the time. It's so compact and easy to carry that I seriously have come to despise the rare occasions when I need to travel with any other camera. The Leica rangefinder is in a class of it's own for not getting in the way of creating the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 22, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 22, 2009 Dan, how do you compare the IQ M8 vs MK3 in comparable situations?Thanks, P On your family's website, you probably won't know the difference for normal daylight shooting. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan428s Posted December 23, 2009 Share #12 Posted December 23, 2009 On your family's website, you probably won't know the difference for normal daylight shooting. Jeff Jeff is essentially right. Keep in mind that if you think you will do any sports, action, or kids shot. I would go with either the 1d or the 7d. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted December 23, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 23, 2009 Jeff is essentially right. Keep in mind that if you think you will do any sports, action, or kids shot. I would go with either the 1d or the 7d. He already has the 1D, and said he plans to keep it for sports and kids. There's a reason I asked questions before posting answers. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 23, 2009 Author Share #14 Posted December 23, 2009 He already has the 1D, and said he plans to keep it for sports and kids. There's a reason I asked questions before posting answers. Jeff Correct...but I am thinking of seling the 1dmk3 and getting 7d....and use rest of the cash to fund my M8.2 system... P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted December 23, 2009 Share #15 Posted December 23, 2009 I think M8.2 would compliment the DSLR... I think this summarizes the answer to your own question quite well, its not really a v. thing at all IMHO. All the cameras you mention are capable of producing extremely good images - at this level the image quality differences are nuances - differences that can be seen if you are prepared to look for them and use each system's characteristics. I'd suggest that the shift from the Canon to a 7D is a far more tenuous one than adding in an M8/8-2, but if this is how things would finance best then it might be an effective move. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted December 23, 2009 Share #16 Posted December 23, 2009 I have Canon DSLR stuff alongside my Leica. You need to keep a DSLR if you want to continue shooting sports and telephoto stuff. Getting a 7D for that is probably a good idea, or even a 50D - I dont see much difference in the cameras. You will lose the build quality of a 1 series camera of course. With regard to image quality then neither of the two lenses you mention will produce the quality of a Leica prime. I used to think the 24-70 was a great lens, but it does not match up to Leica. And it is massive. The 70-200 F2.8 is better but the latest 70-200 F4 is even better. Some may disagree what I'm about to write: The Leica will challenge you, slow you down and make you take different photographs and you will end up leaving the Canon stuff at home except when you need it's special abilities (high ISO, telephoto, AF etc). You could end up doing a lot of B&W work. If you decide to get a M8.2 dont be surprised when you realise that it's OK up to 640 ISO and usable at 1250. It has a CCD sensor. Hope this helps, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 23, 2009 Author Share #17 Posted December 23, 2009 Thanks to everyone for your replies.... I have just sold my mk3, so M8.2 and 7D here we come. Now to the next question...but in a separate thread...what lenses should I get? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeMyers Posted December 23, 2009 Share #18 Posted December 23, 2009 OK...first of all I realize this is a Leica forum, but I have to ask the question as I might be getting a M8.2. So here comes my maybe stupid question: Is there a lot of difference between images taken with Canon 1D mkIII, or new 7D and a M8.2..providing Canon was being used with L lenses 24-70 or 70-200 f/2.8?IF so, what is the difference? Please don't jump at me...I know these are 2 completely different cameras, that are used differently, but I need to understand the differences and advantages/disadvantages... Apologies if this offended you. Please let me know. Thanks, P To me, that's an impossible question for anyone to answer. It's like asking "Should I buy a sports car or a pickup truck?" How can anyone give you a good answer, without knowing what use you'd put it to? If you want to take sports photos, or close-ups, one of the choices would make you miserable. Try putting a 400mm lens on a RF camera and see how easy it is to use to shoot wildlife, or even a cat across the street. On the other hand, if you wanted to take candid photos of your kids, that same "miserable" camera would probably be far better than the other. If forced to answer, I'd just suggest whatever the equivalent is to a Nikon D40, something very inexpensive. If you don't know what you want to do, the D40 would make photography very easy, for very little money. Your last question is just as puzzling to me. Without your saying what you want to photograph, how can anyone suggest a lens that's right for YOU? Again, if forced to answer, I'd say get one lens with a "normal" field of view, one that's wide-angle, and one that's a medium length telephoto. Again, if you don't know what you're going to do with them, buy the Voigtlander lenses - it will be a fraction of the cost, and still get you great photos. They'll work beautifully on the M8 you're about to buy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 24, 2009 Share #19 Posted December 24, 2009 I have both a M8 and a canon 5DII. The Canon sensor is more sensitive, so will exhibit far less noise in low light situations. The Canon is an SLR so it is faster to use than a rangefinder but the M8 is much more compact. But they shouldnt really be compared as they are two different animals. The M8, although much older technology produces stunning images and Leica's lenses are legendary. That said a competent photographer can produce stunning images with either tool. If you had to own just one, its really a matter of personal preference, I wouldn't base your decision from comments on a forum I would second this. I have both the 5D Mark II and M8 and love both cameras. The M8 is great for those situations where you want to be less intrusive and more introverted in your shooting. The M8 B&W IQ is the best I have found in any digital camera of this format size. I often find myself trying to get the M8 look from the Canon, and I can achieve something comparable on the later if I use a Leica or Zeiss lens, but the M8 in the B&W arena remains my favorite. I believe it has the edge over the rest (including the new M9). Having said that, rangefinder photography can be frustrating for those who prefer auto-focus, especially for fast action. If you are going to stick to one system, then you need to choose wisely, and figure out what will best meet your needs? If you go with a DSLR you won't get any static from me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ppolla Posted December 24, 2009 Author Share #20 Posted December 24, 2009 Wow. great responses form everyone. I just purchased M8.2 today along with the summicrom 35mm lens....and tomorrow I am getting the 7D for the action shots... Can't wait to start using the M8.2! P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.