How is the M8 measuring up to your Criteria?

[innerimager]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

Please, I'm not really a bad guy. I think some of the photos that Marc posted really show what the camera can do. Especially the good skin tones that he gets. (I haven't seen many others who are getting such good skin tones.) I've seen other shots from the M8 that look very good too. But let's not close our eyes...

?

Mark- Of course you're not a bad guy. And you're a good photographer. But can you reflect on why you, as someone who does not own an M8, are posting in a thread whose subject is whether the M8 has met the expectations of those who have one? I think Michael R.'s part 2 review on LL said it well. The M8 has issues, for some it's worth dealing with them. You're many, many posts about it's problems here and elsewhere says you are not in that category. OK, we hear you. best....Peter

[jaapv]

As it happens, my M8 does not have too many sensor problems,,,

 

 

75 @ 1.4, 1/30th.

 

[Peter41951]

Jaap, very nice indeed.

[jaapv]

Thanks Peter. Just a quick shot on our boxing day walk. (one minor band and a miniscule amount of blooming, but who cares? the shot counts. )Just imagne: Fuji Sensia pushed to 1600 ISO....

[jaapv]

No it is only there because it is there. It was obvious to me the first second I saw it. Besides, it was posted as an example of how well that specific camera works for night shots.

It was not; it was posted to show how a lens draws

 

With digital capture, even night shots can be rendered with more shadow detail and color than I used to get with film. Almost all of the M8 night shots (and many dusk and night shots from other cameras) that I have seen posted are too dark for my taste

 

As you say, a matter of taste. In my part of the world, it is usually dark at night....

[robbegibson]

As it happens, my M8 does not have too many sensor problems,,,

 

 

75 @ 1.4, 1/30th.

 

Are you kidding me?? Look at all those horrible streaks in the water! :) :)

 

Just kidding. I like it.

 

Robbe Gibson

[chrism]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Those reflections in the water, they're..........lickable, to use Steve Jobs' term! Very nice indeed.

 

Chris

[george +]

How it satisfies MY needs?

This picture involving no great art or photographic expertise summarizes my feelings.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[AlanG]

Mark- Of course you're not a bad guy. And you're a good photographer. But can you reflect on why you, as someone who does not own an M8, are posting in a thread whose subject is whether the M8 has met the expectations of those who have one? ...

 

Sorry, I will stop posting on this. The question asked was "How is the M8 measuring up to your Criteria?" I wasn't aware that the question was qualified further. To reflect on it - I came to this forum hoping to see some work that would convince me that I absolutely positively had to have an M8. Marc's lifestyle shots convinced me it could work for the people/lifestyle shots I do. Maybe the night shots will get better once the cameras have been fixed for the banding. I do think night shots have to be more open when they are shot for reproduction in ads and brochures. I've learned this from years as an architectural and advertising shooter and know what sells. I don't mean it as criticism but as a constructive suggestion. I've been harping on this for years the times I've spoken at camera clubs and elsewhere.

 

And I know I am hyper-critical. (Probably more so than all but a tiny fraction of commercial photographers.) That is how I was taught and is one of the things that keeps me working so hard and pushing to get better. Unfortunately, the day after I take a nice picture, I often see a better way I could have done it. For instance, right after I posted that Tampa shot, I started not liking the green in the bridge and went back to the file and retouched it. (It was embarrassing to me.) So I don't mean to be picking on anyone.

[mwilliamsphotography]

(Probably more so [critical} than all but a tiny fraction of commercial photographers.)

 

You have to do what you have to to make a living Alan. But I think the other people are more interested in capturing night scenes as they see it.

 

Frankly, if I were doing that type of commercial work I don't think I'd even consider a M8 even if it the banding were fixed ... you know, horses for courses.

 

But that's what this post is all about in a way. Defining the cameras abilities as measured against need.

 

For example, this is the last camera I'd select for work in the studio (even though I tried it that way just to see). Last one I'd use for macro work also, even though they make a macro lens for it, and I've seen some nice stuff from that 90/4 lens.

 

Heck, I won't even use a 21 on an M8 because I'd have to use an aux shoe mount finder, which I hate.

[AlanG]

 

Frankly, if I were doing that type of commercial work I don't think I'd even consider a M8 even if it the banding were fixed ... you know, horses for courses.

 

The lack of distortion in the lenses appealed to me. (Maybe less of an issue now that I have DxO) I have done handheld night lifestyle shots at places such as Disney World and South Beach so I was hoping the M8 would be ideal for low light work. (That is the Leica tradition isn't it?) In the old days, I had no choice but to work with several systems. It's hard to say if I want to do that today. When I shot that Tampa image, I also had my 4x5 on another tripod right next to me. It wasn't a joy dragging both systems and a laptop up 8 or 10 flights of stairs a few times. But the M8 would be a lot lighter. When I shot film I had about 20 cameras over several formats and systems. So 2 systems wouldn't be a big stretch. I just think the M8 has to mature a bit and I'll reconsider it then.

[mitchell]

My M8 left on the Dec. 5 for N.J. and on to Solms. I miss it badly.

 

I shot a lot of dusk and night pictures in Amsterdam with it, and they were almost all badly banded. It was pretty dissapointing because I liked the shots and shooting that way. It sounds like the banding issue is pretty much fixed except, maybe with blown lights at the edges. I certainly hope my camera returns with no issues, except IR.

 

I'm dissapointed I'll need to use IR filters, not so much filter per se, but the magenta color seems to be out of science fiction TV, and quite noticable.

 

But, when banding or IR are not issues, the IQ seems special, often painterly tones, and great resolution.

 

But, the thing that I think I'm really most excited about is the combination of M ergonomics, and instant feedback with a large LCD. I think I'll learn a lot from the instant feedback, trying things I wouldn't before. It's a camera to become inseparable from. A camera that in time will become an extention, and extender of my eyes. The process promises inextricable connection between tool and mind more so than film M's because of the instant feedback.

 

As others have said, it's just so much fun to use.

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

[blakley]

I had four criteria:

 

1) A digital camera which would take my M lenses. It met this one before I received it :-)

 

2) With a simple control interface - as similar as possible to using a film M. My theory was that I would set the ISO to "about 400" (640 as it turns out), the mode to RAW (DNG), white balance to "auto", and then shoot manually with no further adjustments forever.

 

In practice, setting the menu options has turned out to be a piece of cake, and I can do almost exactly what I wanted. I do find that I set RAW+JPG fine from time to time, and then set color saturation to B&W, so I can see what things look like in mono on the LCD. I also sometimes dial the ISO back down to 320 or 160 - I've never had a situation which called for 1250 or higher yet, so I haven't done that. I'd say that my expectations have been met in this area.

 

3) Which was completely usable in the dark. Here I'm "pretty happy", but the well-publicized issues do intrude especially in this situation and I've seen some of them in my own shooting - especially color shifts, so the grade is "OK and getting better but not quite up to expectations yet".

 

4) And which would allow me to take pictures I like as well as those I get with the M3 or MP on film. Here my answer is an unqualified "yes". I'm attaching two examples; clicking the pictures takes you to actual-pixels versions for closer examination.

 

 

[Irakly Shanidze]

Here are a few shots from yesterday's Christmas visit where I practiced using the 75 Lux and 24 ASPH in low light using ISO 640 and 1250, (with some shutter speeds I shouldn't have even tried : -) That's my dad right after the big Christmas feast; and my Niece with her long suffering pet named "Nacho". Family snaps, some at 1/30th using the 75, but good practice for the real thing ...

 

That boy was shot with 75? I want this bloody lens!!!!!!!

[ulphoto]

I've been hanging back in commenting on my experience using he M8

As background - I've been a news photographer/journalist in New Hampshire for over 35 years. Bought my first Leica (an M2-r) in 1976 with money earned covering the NH Primary for Newsweek - always a nice day rate. I've had several since then including the Minolta CLE and M6 ttl as well as the R-4 series and quite a few lenses.

I work as the chief photographer at the Union Leader now and brought them into the digital age in 1990. We use Nikons and I haven't shot more than 5 rolls of film since them - with both my Leica outfits sitting in the equipment closet. When the DMR came out I got one and a used R-8 - longing to use those nice R lenses again, at least for personal use - I love it!! But I really wanted to use the M system again.

While waiting for the M digital I got the Digilux 2 a couple of ears ago and have used it a lot for work, including as an embedded photographer in Iraq. As long as you use it a low ISO's its make gorgeous photos and is very unintimidating to the many regular folks I photograph. (I work up close and personal and sticking a big Nikon D2X in someone's face can be quite off puting). Now that I have the M8, I find I'm using it easily for 75% of my daily assignments.

While in no way rigorous in test methods here are a few observations:

The camera handles just like the film M's, though I miss the film advance lever which helps one hold on to it and I often hesitate when removing the base plate, wondering if I'd rewound the film.

The frame lines seem dimmer, though that just may be my memory that is dimmer and they don't seem quite so accurate, but at least they're looser.

The crop factor is resonably useable - my beloved 21 Elmarit is now like a 28mm (The whole viewfinder area seems a pretty accurate frame - though with glasses you have to look around to see it all) To get back to a 21mm perspective I got the Voigtlander 15mm - it is a really fine lens and at $350 a bargain to boot! as a bonus the 21mm auxillary finder works perfectly.

The rest of my lenses - 35 and 50mm Summicrons and the 90mm tele-elmarit look really good. These are all the older lenses, I can't imagine what the new glass must look like, but I can't afford them and am quite happy with them none the less.

The images right out of the camera are spectacular (I shoot jpegs for work and have only tried raw a few times) They are sharp, contrasty and the color is excellent, especially if I use the manual white balance since I generally shoot available light. They have that Kadachrome skin tone look as does the DMR. Yes I have occasionally had blacks with a magenta cast - I just go to the magenta channel in Photoshop and dial the magenta back until it looks right - pretty straight forward and doesn't seem to effect the main magenta tone.

I've used the 320 ISO quite often and its virtually noise free, 640 ISO nearly as good, have only gone to 1280 a couple of times and its quite useable too - remember I'm working with newspaper reproduction so there is some forgiveness in the noise area and Noise Ninja is a great tool.

Having been away from the rangefinder system for quite some time it has been taking some practice to relearn the art of focusing (been relying on auto focus due to my declining eyesight) and I do find that I'm having more trouble getting sharp photos at 1/15th that I've done with ease with the D2X and Digilux2. I think it is due to the low mass of the camera and what seems to be a rather long travel on the shutter release, I found my old soft release add-on which seem to help. Also, the battery life is not very good and the camera stops working without warning when they die - a bit unnerving the first few times. Got to have 2 at a minimum, but they are expensive.

I have seen som of the so-called banding at high ISO - I suspect its akin to blooming that sometimes plagues video.

Overall I'm very happy with the camera for its intuitive use, easy menu navigation, resonably quiet operation and color/contrast reproduction. I suppose its not perfect, but neither is the D2X at a similar cost. As a digital camera its main strength is the immediate feedback, but especially its familiar M style handling and the ability to once again use the fine lenses.

 

Bob LaPree

P.S. I have an exhibit of my work on the NH National Guard's deployement to Iraq - at least half were made with the Digilux2. The photos can be seen by clicking on the link on the unionleader.com web site.

[khanosu]

Very much satisfied with the camera. Love the color in the files. I am coming from a Canon 5D but don’t find the noise in the M8 files that bad. This picture is in natural light, ISO 1250, 50mm Summicron, Heliopan+CS3.

 

Furrukh

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[stevme]

Sorry, I will stop posting on this. The question asked was "How is the M8 measuring up to your Criteria?" I wasn't aware that the question was qualified further.

 

Be a mensch Alan. If you do get an M8, post some of your M8 images and let others take a shot. There are several waiting for you!

 

Steve

[Peter41951]

Bob

 

Thanks for posting such an interesting account of a working photographer; I was also much moved by the photos on your link.

[mwilliamsphotography]

Yes Bob, if this thread was of any value it has been to bring you forward and allow us to see your work. Personally, it moved me to tears. You are doing those brave men and their families a great service.

 

That an experienced photojournalist has been lured back to the M tradition is also testimony to the M8 camera, warts and all.

 

On the technical side, I also found the soft release of some value, but am still practicing the amount of pressure needed to lock the exposure reading when using AE.

 

I also have "aging eyes" Bob, and wonder if you have utilized a Leica diopter which helped me a great deal ... (those shots with the 75/1.4 wouldn't happen without it). It took trying a few different strengths for me to get it right ... as my eyes had gotten worse since my last diopter purchase for the film Ms.

 

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts and photographs with us.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[robsteve]

I also have "aging eyes" Bob, and wonder if you have utilized a Leica diopter which helped me a great deal ... (those shots with the 75/1.4 wouldn't happen without it). It took trying a few different strengths for me to get it right ... as my eyes had gotten worse since my last diopter purchase for the film Ms.

 

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts and photographs with us.

 

I have wondered about the diopter thing myself. Do you mount one so you can use the M without your glasses on or is it because you need the correction even with your glasses on?