Sony NEX as a Leica M8 alternative

[Gerard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Am I missing something here? How is this an M8 rival?

[Advertisement]

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

[luigi bertolotti]

Am I missing something here? How is this an M8 rival?

 

No way... is all another beast...but PROBABLY it will be able to mount M lenses (I won't surprise to see a 3rd party ring for sale in 1 month or so): in this sense for a M8-M9 user who searches for a 2nd body it could be an interesting alternative to a 2nd hand M8... not too dissimilar sensor size...good dimensionsing... but a completely different way of photographing...

Personally, I would consider to have it... even if this year could be that I switch from my M8 to M9 (10... ? ), I could not to buy a Luigi's case for it... about the cost of this Sony...

[Shootist]

When and if an adapter comes out for this mount to use Leica M lenses on it that may be the last straw for me and M cameras (Not M lenses).

Right now every time I take the M8 out for a shoot I wonder, is it going to freeze? Is the shutter going to fall apart or lock up somehow? Will the rangefinder be OK (yes I have had the RF go out just like that). Or will the whole camera become a paper weight and then be to expense to fix.

 

Come On Adapters.

[SJP]

When and if an adapter comes out for this mount to use Leica M lenses on it that may be the last straw for me and M cameras (Not M lenses).

Right now every time I take the M8 out for a shoot I wonder, is it going to freeze? Is the shutter going to fall apart or lock up somehow? Will the rangefinder be OK (yes I have had the RF go out just like that). Or will the whole camera become a paper weight and then be to expense to fix.

 

Come On Adapters.

Strange, the only thing I worry about is whether I am clever enough to get a decent exposure and a nicely framed image. Usually not I fear but that is operator error.

 

My M8 has frozen once in over 2½ and that was in Finland, probably due to condensation T-shock. Excluding a few drained battery shut-downs - the SDS shutdown is irritating.

 

The shutter should be fine for 100k operations unless unlucky and then Leica will probably replace at reduced cost (see other thread were this is mentioned). The rangefinder has remained rock solid except when the camera crashed headfirst into snow (again Finland, don't go there with an M8) & the misalignment was so minor that I only noticed it about 4 months later.

 

I firmly believe that this forum magnifies things going wrong compared to common experience.

[stunsworth]

When and if an adapter comes out for this mount to use Leica M lenses on it that may be the last straw for me and M cameras (Not M lenses)

 

Have you actually tried shooting manually focused lenses on a camera with a rear screen? I am having great problems getting anything consistently in focus on mine. Probably my problem rather than the camera's, but something to possibly consider.

[bill]

Have you actually tried shooting manually focused lenses on a camera with a rear screen? I am having great problems getting anything consistently in focus on mine. Probably my problem rather than the camera's, but something to possibly consider.

 

Steve, can you walk me through how it works on the GF-1? I'm doing the same with the EP-1 and although slow, it certainly works. On the EP-1 the whole centre of the image is enlarged on the screen; critical focussing is quite straightforward.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bill, it works the same way on the GF-1, but the problem is that in daylight I can't see enough detail on the screen to be able to judge focus.

 

The other thing about the magnified view is where do the pixels come from so that it can fill the rear screen? At that magnification I wouldn't have thought there were enough 'real' pixels to do that without interpolation.

[bill]

I see your point, Steve. I haven't tried in bright sunlight.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Shootist]

Have you actually tried shooting manually focused lenses on a camera with a rear screen? I am having great problems getting anything consistently in focus on mine. Probably my problem rather than the camera's, but something to possibly consider.

 

No I haven't. I've been holding off for a camera like the NEX 5 to come along. Looked at the GF1& Pen 1 and even had a GF1 in my shopping cart but stop just before the sale was final, didn't like the fact that it made the M lenses double there focal length. If and when I buy this Sony camera I'll get it with the 16mm pancake lens. Then use my 21-135 M lenses.

 

In any event I won't be selling my M8 but then I won't be looking at a M9/10/11/whatever.

[Gerjan]

For me no Japanese camera will be acceptable. I love beautiful camera's and have never bought anything Japanese after living for over a year in Japan.

I'm an old 59 years guy but have never seen something expensive made in Japan that's better!!!

If you look at optics like Zeiss/Swarovski/Leica don't tell me there's something better from the east. Don't let me talk about watches!!!

I love this Forum but please stop talking about Sony!

Gerjan:D:D:D

[jaapv]

Ummm... Zeiss lenses are made in Japan...

[stunsworth]

I see your point, Steve. I haven't tried in bright sunlight

 

Bill indoors it's much easier to focus, outdoors the image looks washed out most of the time. As I say, perhaps the problem lies with me and not the camera. With the 20mm lens it isn't a problem. I can see enough detail on the screen to compose the image, and I have the AF set to use just the central focussing point.

[wstotler]

Too understand my statement that high iso performance is overrated have a look at the exposure guide within following file:

 

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/shared/bin/ProfessionalFilmDataGuide.pdf

 

Thanks, Steve. I did have a look at the file's page 23 (Exposure Guide). In the context of film, this is a very handy guide, so thanks for providing the link.

 

 

M cameras are operated with wide angle, normal lens and short tele lenses only. This and the missing mirror allows for handheld shooting at quite low shutter speeds. According to the exposure almost all situations can be shot with ISO 400. Candle lit scenes -which I consider as low light photography- require 1/30sec @f2. From my own experience I can confirm that you will easily get sharp images with lenses like summicron 28 or summilux 50 at that speed.

 

Sure, agree on the good hand-holding capabilities of the rangefinders. But what if your subject moves?

 

I'm not doubting your experience regarding candlelight and other dim situations. I've found the same to be true with the M8 at ISO 320. You can get shots that you can push in post by a stop or two and get acceptable results. (You can feel free to point out that ISO 320 is almost filmic ISO 400, but read on.)

 

Shooting at an EV of 5 (dimmer indoor light) with f/1.2 at 1/30th of a second is completely doable. (As long as your subject doesn't move.) And, assuming that you don't mind the strong out-of-focus areas and also a lack of sharpness when you go to print at a larger size (let's say 16" x 20").

 

But what you may not know is that I'm shooting in darker situations than candlelight. With f/1.2 as an offset.

 

Your statement of almost all situations doesn't apply to the kind of work I've done and I'm doing in many cases.

 

Wanting the high ISO as a priority is not a theoretical "I wish." It's a "dammit, I could really use. . . ."

 

Shots like these were shot at ISO 320 at EV 0 (!) with f/1.2 at 1/15th of a second. The originals were underexposed by three to four stops. I pushed them up two or three stops in post, then bumped that again by a couple of stops before B&W conversion.

 

Here are the examples, BTW:

Lauren Lucidi - Urban Is As Urban Does on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Lauren Lucidi - Grey Alley on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Dasha Rene - Backlit on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

I want to do more shooting like this. It's very challenging work. It could be less challenging (or just as challenging at f/4 instead of f/1.2.)

 

But why can't I effectively use ISO 640 or ISO 1250 on the M8 to either give me more light OR a faster shutter speed? (I'd rather shoot at a minimum of 1/60th, when I can.) I absolutely could. But, while the ultimate target would be *closer* to where I'd need it to be if I jacked the M8's ISO, it would "push ugly." And I'd prefer not to resort to Noise Ninja or Define as I really don't like how they smooth files. And, yes, I've seen work from other forum members at 1250 and 640--and I've shot plenty myself--and I can say that I'd prefer cleaner appearance from the files at 640 and 1250, for sure. (Oh, and I'd prefer not to be forced into a B&W conversion because the color is awful when underexposed like I'm forced to do.)

 

While you might argue based on film performance that these are unreasonable expectations, if I had ISO 1250 that looked like 320, I could shoot in -1 EV conditions. Or more, if I wanted to push it. That's moonlight. And, OK, maybe unreasonable. But why should that be unreasonable? They should figure it out.

 

And I'm perfectly willing to wait on buying the future "M.x" until the ISO performance really kicks.

 

And, I'm also NOT bashing the M8 for not being able to give me clean files at 640 or 1250. (Yes, correct exposure at time of shot helps, but it doesn't get me clean. Not really.) The M8 is what it is and I'm very happy with it. We're talking about demands on a future M.

 

 

Good high iso performance is of advantage if you are using long telelenses with a wide open aperture of 2.8 "only" and when you require shutter speeds below 1/200sec to handheld and stop action. That is why it is much more important for DSLRs.

 

I respectfully disagree that good high ISO performance is "much more important for DSLRs" based on what I wrote above.

 

High ISO capability--clean ISO performance--is important regardless of what camera you are using, based on what you want to do with the lenses you have. Not having it is limiting. What shooter WOULDN'T take a clean ISO of 2500 if they could get it. Find me that shooter. Seriously.

 

You could argue that the M8 "offsets" its high ISO "weakness" with its rangefinder design, bringing it "on par" with DSLRs with higher ISOs.

 

What I want is clean, high ISO performance (let's say 2500, though 1250 would do it) and the rangefinder design, which will allow it to mercilessly stomp DSLR performance in low light.

 

Further, I say. Moonlight. On a partly-cloudy night. If I have just enough light to manage to focus with the rangefinder, dammit, I want a clean file at that light level. Ah. . . . unreasonable, maybe. But I can say that I won't be "upgrading" to an M.x until it can do this. I do have faith and believe they will figure it out, eventually.

 

Cheers!

Will

[menos I M6]

…

You could argue that the M8 "offsets" its high ISO "weakness" with its rangefinder design, bringing it "on par" with DSLRs with higher ISOs.

 

What I want is clean, high ISO performance (let's say 2500, though 1250 would do it) and the rangefinder design, which will allow it to mercilessly stomp DSLR performance in low light.

…

Will

 

Will, todays DSLRs are much further already than this.

A digital M with clean ISO1250 and the supposed "RF system advantage" in holding slower speeds really is far from "stomping" DSLR performance.

 

The old D3 from 2008 (!!!) gets me clean shots easy into the ISO3200 and can be handhold usually 1 − 2 stops faster than a RF camera (with a 50mm, I shoot at 1/15 the M8 safely ).

 

If you are then adding todays image stabilized lenses into the mix, they are back on par with low speeds with RF cameras on many occasions.

 

The issue with slow shutters though is, regardless from camera system, the lack of freezing motion.

The max ISO of 2500 with the digital M was always a big limit.

I enjoy shooting pushed BW film in the nights instead, as the M8 is useless there.

[wstotler]

Will, todays DSLRs are much further already than this. The old D3 from 2008 (!!!) gets me clean shots easy into the ISO3200 and can be handhold usually 1 − 2 stops faster than a RF camera (with a 50mm, I shoot at 1/15 the M8 safely ).

 

Arghhh! Perhaps mercilessly stomp was too strong. (Thanks for the details and facts from the DSLR side.) But, I was apparently asking for too little! I want DSLR-chewing ISO speeds in my M. But, actually, completely clean, digitally pushable 1250 (with 2500 comparable to 320, 5000 comparable to 640, etc.) in a future M would satisfy me. I wouldn't say the M8 is "useless" for night shooting, but could use some nice ISO enhancement. Three stops worth would do it for me, personally. But, again, I ask for too little, probably. Give me six stops! Film? Sigh. I still have a batch to process from the M6--including finishing up the roll of 1600 speed I have in there now. BTW, some great shots in your portfolio. Cheers! Will

[Ecaton]

If you can afford Leica lenses, you should be able to buy a used M8.

 

at least this puts the X1 to eternal rest. the sony is half the X1 price and quadrupel perfomance. i do hope that leica gets the message this time,

peter

 

"quadrupel" am impressed. Any evidence to support this?

[AlanG]

I think the price is considerably less than half. $550-$700 list (NEX 3 or 5, 16 pancake or zoom,) Maybe an even lower street price before too long. It looks like a very good image producer for its size and price. But with the zoom lens is a bit larger than what I'd be looking for in a "keep with me camera." (And the controls are p&s, not pro-oriented.) A lot of pro photographers have gone from a Canon G to a Panny GF-1 and now this is even larger. (With the zoom.) But it is very small compared with APS DSLRs so it might find a good market.

[menos I M6]

… Give me six stops! Film? Sigh. I still have a batch to process from the M6--including finishing up the roll of 1600 speed I have in there now. BTW, some great shots in your portfolio. Cheers! Will

 

Right on the six Will !

 

Thanks for the comment - much appreciated!

 

After setting the RF on the M6 classic yesterday, I shot a few rolls in the night and boy is this thing smoooooooth!

 

I could not believe, how smooth the film advance feels, how perfect the perfect shutter release feels, how silent the shutter and missing motor noise is and how sleek the body feels after sol long shooting the M8.2 and M7 now.

 

Film will always be ;-)

 

The Sony / Panasonic / … / adapter things won't do much for me.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

Sample images made with the 16mm pancake are now up at dpreview.

 

Not impressive - more red-green CA than I got from the Zeiss 14-70 ("24-120") on the Sony R1 four years ago, and really nasty noise-reduced mush at ISO 3200.

 

Presumably this is not the backlit Exmor sensor that was supposed to revolutionize CMOS high ISO performance. If it is - CMOS is in a world of hurt.

[sandymc]

Presumably this is not the backlit Exmor sensor that was supposed to revolutionize CMOS high ISO performance. If it is - CMOS is in a world of hurt.

 

Sony have stated that the "backlit" technology will not be used in their large sensors - in essence "backlit" only helps on sensors with a high ratio of wiring to cell size, so small sensors as found on P&S cameras. See here: Interview with Sony's Toru Katsumoto.

 

BTW, I disagree with you on the quality of that sensor - I think it's very good; probably it uses the same technology as the Nikon D300/D5000 sensors. However, Sony do clearly have some new high-ISO noise reduction technology in there - not so sure about that; we'll need to see more images.

 

Sandy