Don't you think we could stop yelling at Leica?

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I may be a heathen, but even I will say "amen" to this thread!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[hammam]

I was one of the "loud mouths" Olivier, having blown the whistle on the IR issue the day after I got the camera which was one day after it was shipped in the US.

 

But having beat the horse to death, ground it up for dog food, fed it to the dog who pooped it out and fertilized the grass with it ... so the next horse could eat ... then beating THAT horse to death and continuing the cycle ad nausium ... seems excessive don't you think?

 

The question was shouldn't we stop and see what Leica does, NOT that we should never have.

 

BTW, I don't care if I have to use IR filters at all now ... I never argue with any method that delivers results like this.

 

Absolutely, Marc, I'm with you on that one. I've even been banned for a couple of months on another Leica forum for fimly opposing a nasty poster who doesn't miss an opportunity to bash Leica, and who has never even owned a Leica. Apparently Leica bashers are welcome there. Just a hint.

 

I'm not a professional and I don't mind using IR filters either, and I've said so a good while ago. I've also commended Leica for the fantastics first pictures that were posted here, and for prints I had seen at my dealer's. And I have also said that I kept going from elation to deep disappointment. What I'm saying is let's nuance the whole concept of leniency towards Leica at least as much as is asked of Leica critics.

[artur5]

Well in short, I agree, we all should stop discussing pointlessly and let Leica do what they would, or could do.

To quote 3 record titles from my beloved Alison Krauss & Union Station:

 

- Forget about it .......... -if you're not interested on the M8.

- So long, so wrong ......... -If you were interested, but don't like the issues / compromises

- New Favorite ............ -if you think that the M8 is the camera you were waiting for.

 

Let's calm down, take two long breaths and don't forget the Patience is the mother of Science.

 

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to everybody..

[Jager]

"And by the way, Marc's pic is the exception that proves the rule. A shot in the living room can be artistic and beautiful!"

 

Actually Jeff, it was at a bar after filling the table with dead Heineken soldiers. 75mm f/1.4 @ 1/60th in the hands of a wobbly legged drunk : -)

 

 

LOL. All the better, Marc! Just goes to show that your new M8 is following in its predecessors' long-standing heritage of being carried into bars and cafes and the like, places where its unobtrusiveness makes it a welcome partner. Not to mention that lining up all those dead soldiers can be a splendid way to pass an afternoon!

[ChrisC]

Gerard - I was hoping that someone would disagree with you thus sparing me this post. I strongly disagree with the sentiments of your post, your perspective on the recent weeks M8 story, and the assertion that there has been shouting when there hasn't. I therefore disagree with your supporters who believe your post to be sensible.

 

For the record; I have paid in advance for an M8. I reserve the right to be critical where criticism is due, and likewise, to give praise where praise is earned. Aside from some minor and irrelevant trolling, Leica have been criticised respectfully, and often with genteel good manners in this forum. The company enjoys being represented as an engineering driven concern sustaining the highest standards of products and customer consideration. By those, and far lower standards , the handling of the M8 introduction has been worryingly abysmal. The M8 was brought to market whilst unfit for purpose and without sufficient testing; which was inexcusable and dangerous for the company.

 

Most of the regulars in this forum, I believe, want Leica to survive as a modern vibrant company fit for this millennium, no doubt there would be many variations as to what that could be. China, India, Japan etc. are flexing their engineering muscles and that fact is on Leica's horizon. The sentiment held by many Leica fans that criticising Leica harms them, is absurd. Those who believe it is a good thing for Leica to pander to the retro market of collectors who love cameras finished by bespoke Parisian handbag makers, probably have not noticed that the bulk of camera purchasers who might otherwise be attracted to Leica have gone elsewhere.

 

I do not know, and I have never met a professional photographer who uses Leica for professional work. Despite the goodwill for the company amongst photographers, the fiasco of the M8 launch will have cost Leica sales they could otherwise have had. Leica lacked the required level of self criticism prior to the release of the M8, as a consequence they have reaped valid criticism from the customer base. That criticism was and is healthy for Leica. A company which knows that it cannot get away with 'pulling a fast one' with it's customers is strengthened by that knowledge.

 

And praise where praise is due; Sean, Guy, Jamie, and others - bravo, fantastic, and thank you from many of us.

 

....................Chris

[robsteve]

Blasko makes a valid point and this may be one of the reasons Leica is getting so much flack. In the past, If you bought a Leica camera or Leica lens, you knew it would maintian a lot of its value and still be the as good as the best, even years later. With digital, things are just not that way. When I plunked out the $4,700 for a DMR, I did it with the knowledge that it may be worth $500 four or five years later and a R10 may also appear. I wanted a digital R then (last year) so I bought the DMR rather than wait for a dedicated digital such as a R10.

 

If you buy a digital M, you just have to expect it will be worth much less a few years down the road when a new M comes out. It will drop much more than the various versions of the mechanical M did when new versions came out. As I said above with the DMR, if you want a digital solution, you have the M8 now. Otherwise, it may be a long wait for a M9.

 

Now that the M8 has been out for a while, the new buyers are perfectly aware of all the short commings and can make an informed decision as to whether to buy it or not. I made my decision to buy a M8. Hopefully, I will have one next week.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There's no doubt in my mind that the involvement of Hermes and the steady flood of special edition - and completely pointless - cameras took their eye off the ball. When the digital onslaught cut faster and deeper into their sales than expected, they were ill-prepared.

 

The best thing they have going for them now is investors who take a long term view and for whom a $1m recall is just a little local difficulty, putting off still further the day when Leica has the chance to return to consistent profitability.

 

We all know that Leica has handled the M8 launch badly and there's no point in restating the reasons. Some of the blame may rest with their partners who should have blown the whistle if they knew better instead of just pocketing their fees. Maybe they did and Leica wasn't listening or had their head buried in the sand. Otherwise, Leica has probably learned some tough lessons.

 

We're all hopeful that the recall fix and the IR-sensors are the end of the hardware changes required, though there are still questions over the WATE to my mind.

[AlanG]

I do not know, and I have never met a professional photographer who uses Leica for professional work. Despite the goodwill for the company amongst photographers, the fiasco of the M8 launch will have cost Leica sales they could otherwise have had.

 

I think this is pretty true. The M8 seems to mostly appeal to existing Leica enthusiasts. I've looked at this forum and decided that at this point, the camera doesn't offer compelling reasons for me to buy it. (Maybe if I were enamored by range finders or thought other cameras were too big, too loud, or too heavy - I don't.) After looking at many posted images - especially the Yellowstone travelog series, I'd have real concerns about being able to reliably and conveniently meet my color standards with it. And I do prefer a sensor with an AA filter because moire is a deal breaker for me. (My pictures are plenty sharp enough already.)

 

I think in the right hands, when carefully used, the camera currently may be capable of taking great pictures. (Especially if the user is competant in doing RAW conversions and post production.) And assuming the color issues and other problems get straightened out, I'm sure it could serve as a tool for more professionals. However, as illustrated by Thomas Hoepker's field report, it isn't necessarily the choice of photojournalists and many other pros any more. There are a number of reasons for this despite the possibly nostalgic attachment that some people seem to have for HCB's use of the Leica. (Remember, he worked quite a long time ago and times have changed.)

 

I don't think the emergence of even a "perfect" M8 will expand the Leica user base very much. Thus the camera seems to be limited to somewhat of a niche market. Which is not necessarily a bad thing as long as Leica can at least sell them at a profit.

[drjon]

The M8 was brought to market whilst unfit for purpose and without sufficient testing; which was inexcusable and dangerous for the company.

....................Chris

 

"Unfit for Purpose" - a legalistic term at best, and usually almost impossible to prove even where well defined specs and contracts exist. In relation to what is, in fact, a piece of consumer electronics, bought as seen, references to fitness are completely irrelevant and do not help anyone.

 

"Without sufficient testing"; according to whom? Ask Microsoft their opinion on "sufficient testing". Several so-called experienced reviewers 'tested' the M8; by commom consent, none of them spotted the blobs, the bands, the streaks or the magentas. For the M8 to perform at the level it does at launch, it must have been tested very extensively.

 

"Inexcusable"; the buying public will make this call. I'm voting to excuse Leica. They acheived a minor technical miracle in marrying M lenses to a digital sensor mounted inside a rangefinder body; the engineering compromises (in relation to IR) were well judged in my view. As for the blobs et al, these are more or less typical digital hardware bugs which will be overcome in short order.

 

"Dangerous"; business is risky, especially digital electronics. Not to have launched the M8 at this time would alomost certainly have been terminal. Leica made the right call.

 

I believe that the heated debates within certain web forum in relation to the M8 are a temporary phenomena unlikely to make much impact on M8 sales. When the early cameras are fixed and the updated versions hit the market, the blobs will be forgotten very quickly. What will emerge over the coming months are the stunning results possible with the camera; the M8 will grow and prosper as will Leica.

[blakley]

What does "unfit for purpose" mean here? Something like this?

[reddawn]

Yeah, well it's a really terrible test camera, and all you Pollyannas know it!

 

Downright crap when shooting highly overexposed shots with my lens cap on. Every freaking' time I grossly underexpose an ISO 2500 shot of a pitch black wall and lift it 5 stops in processing it looks HORRIBLE !!!!!

 

But when I WANT those effects while shooting in the real world, the dumb thing just takes excellent photos. I am SOoooooo angry. I want something to complain about while sitting in front of the computer instead of taking photographs.

 

Merry Christmas from my M8 @ ISO 1250, and it's new best friend the 75 lux. As my friends at the Morgue say, "Have a cold on on me" : -)

 

Hi sorry to break up this thread, and I sit up and listen whenever Marc makes a post, but.... am I the only one noticing purple horizontal banding and little green blobs in this shot?

[AlanG]

Hi sorry to break up this thread, and I sit up and listen whenever Marc makes a post, but.... am I the only one noticing purple horizontal banding and little green blobs in this shot?

 

The image overall looks ok to me for what it is, a snapshot. (I feel it is a little underexposed even though the specular highlights are long gone.) I can't make out any purple horizontal banding but maybe I don't know what to look for. I hate to pile on but once you posted, I was drawn to look at the image very closely.

 

At the top left quarter, I did see several dark spots which at first I assumed were dust spots on the sensor. (I used to clean up dust spots from scans and now I study all my shots at 100% to clean up dust spots from sensors. So perhaps I'm hyper-sensitive to these kinds of things.) This seemed odd to me as I wouldn't expect to see dust spots on an image show so badly on an image shot at such a large f stop. So I realized they were mirror images of the bright lights on the other side of the image. Plus I could just make out the slight off center vertical line that has been mentioned before although this is not any kind of distracting factor on this shot.

[reddawn]

The image overall looks ok to me for what it is, a snapshot. (I feel it is a little underexposed even though the specular highlights are long gone.) I can't make out any purple horizontal banding but maybe I don't know what to look for. I hate to pile on but once you posted, I was drawn to look at the image very closely.

 

Look at the top half of the image - also in the darker parts of the image on the top right where the branches of the christmas tree are..

 

I think Marc's camera has not been sent for the hardware fix. So the good news is these are actually problems of the past.

 

I'm just surprised that after 2 pages of postings, nobody has noticed it... the bands leapt out at me more than the green blobs.....

 

At the top left quarter, I did see several dark spots which at first I assumed were dust spots on the sensor. (I used to clean up dust spots from scans and now I study all my shots at 100% to clean up dust spots from sensors. So perhaps I'm hyper-sensitive to these kinds of things.) This seemed odd to me as I wouldn't expect to see dust spots on an image show so badly on an image shot at such a large f stop. So I realized they were mirror images of the bright lights on the other side of the image. Plus I could just make out the slight off center vertical line that has been mentioned before although this is not any kind of distracting factor on this shot.

 

I can't see the vertical line though...

[rvaubel]

 

Now that the M8 has been out for a while, the new buyers are perfectly aware of all the short commings and can make an informed decision as to whether to buy it or not. I made my decision to buy a M8. Hopefully, I will have one next week.

 

About the only real issue I have with the M8, is I'm going to have to use those darn filters. If I was a proctective filter kind of guy, that may have been an asset!

 

All the other problems with banding, etc either are solved, will be solved, and are so minor as to not have any practical significants.

 

Probably by the time of the M9, the filter thing will be resolved. But meanwhile, the M8 fulfills my needs perfectly. So what if I end up with a few filters that I can only use on my old M8 in a few years? That would be a good thing! I'm not gonna wait

 

Rex

[rvaubel]

Look at the top half of the image - also in the darker parts of the image on the top right where the branches of the christmas tree are..

 

I think Marc's camera has not been sent for the hardware fix. So the good news is these are actually problems of the past.

 

I'm just surprised that after 2 pages of postings, nobody has noticed it... the bands leapt out at me more than the green blobs.....

 

 

 

I can't see the vertical line though...

 

I did see the "green blobs" although they are not easily to see unless your looking for them. Your right, the blobs are an artifact that was present in the 1st model that has since been corrected. What the "blobs" are is a mirror dark image of the blown out highlights of the Xmas tree bulbs. I have found that the highlights have to be blown out by more about 4 stops to show up. Thats why they don't show up very often.

 

Secondly, what bands? I've been looking for awhile now

 

Rex

[4season]

I'm happy with my M8: It looks like an M, it handles like an M, and the DNG files look great. I never expect perfection at any price: I think the IR issue is being handled as well as the today's technology allows, and the other unresolved issues have not had any practical consequence in my actual shooting.

 

One thing's for sure: The M8 has rattled more than a few cages in a way that no other M has done in a very long time.

[egibaud]

Gérard, I agree 1000000000 % with you

 

I think the problem is that many people hoped for THE miraculous camera that makes shots in any situation... but that camera does and will probably never exist.

 

Here there are 2 types of negative writers, some have bought an M8, often for specific jobs, and they were very disapointed with the results in some situation (IR mainly)

 

Other type were the ones who did not buy an M8 yet, some have not even thought about it either but they just have fun at shoting at Leica and showing how crazy we are to their eyes spending so much money.

 

The funny thing is that most of the disapointed early owners have all worked on solutions, filters, tests, post production and many came to the conclusion that they are almost 100% happy with their camera.

 

At the begining I had your attitude of saying, wait for Leica's solution and I was always flamed so now I just don't bother. If I see that a negative post is by an M8 owner I read and ask opinions etc, if I see negative from a non M8 owner preaching for a 5D (mainly) I do not bother.

 

So you are right, let's stop yelling at Leica because no one should forget that NO CAMERA MAKER as come up to the M8 quality results with its first digital camera... so if I add 3 or 4 camera bodies to come up to the Canon 5D results... well the M8 appears to be quite cheap to me!!! without forgeting that Nikon and Canon make their clients' lenses not as backward compatible as what Leica is doing (back to 1954), coding a Leica lense cost around 100 $... buying a new Canon / Nikon lense for a digital body slightly more expensive !

[ChrisC]

"Without sufficient testing"; according to whom?

 

I surely hope you are joking, but in case you aren't I will point to the self evident and bleeding obvious fallout in this forum that occurred within 36 hours of the first early adopters receiving their much anticipated cameras. But you were just being a tease right? I mean, it's Christmas and a little gentle teasing is OK amongst consenting adults right?

 

..........................................Chris

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[egibaud]

If Leica going to soon make it M9 .

soon and Leica are not synonimous! I do not think anyone here wants the M8 to stay so M9 does not appear soon so we do not lose money.... because if this was the Leica owner pilosophy everyone would me using an M3 maybe M4 and why bother with later ones?

[drjon]

I surely hope you are joking, but in case you aren't I will point to the self evident and bleeding obvious fallout in this forum that occurred within 36 hours of the first early adopters receiving their much anticipated cameras. But you were just being a tease right? I mean, it's Christmas and a little gentle teasing is OK amongst consenting adults right?

 

..........................................Chris

 

No further comment necessary. Happy Xmas.