How good is the M8?

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well let's face some facts , guys like me are cheating the MF world and if I can pull the rabbit out of the hat with a leica M8 and DMR than i am doing a good job because my clients are NOT asking for the 39mpx camera and untill they do than i can get by working with a much easier more versitile system. Have you played with a H3 i have and i need a freaking sherpa with me. LOL. Not saying the leica will match the hassy, Aptus, Phase backs but they are the closet to it and the 3d look of leica is extremely hard to ignore when no other camera that i have used can show that mystic. So I may give up some MPX but not giving up the look . I think this is what Bill is more referring too, now let's look beyond these 10 mpx, there is much more MPX headroom in Leica glass than any other in 35mm so you have to think ahead also. these M lense can easily handle 20 mpx, not many lens makers can truly make that claim in this market

[Advertisement]

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

[larry]

Let's not get carried away. The M8 produces a really good file, and the M lenses are superb, and there are certainly many "rangerfinder" shooting advantages. But that said, a Canon 1Ds mk2 with Canon's prime lenses out performs it in MOST "commercial", "photo shoot" situations. The Canon 35mm 1.4, 50 1.2, 85 1.2, 135 2.0 are outstanding lenses. The full frame 17mp sensor with these lenses simply capture considerably more detail. Period.

 

I agree, provided you use one of the lenses you listed -- otherwise it can get ugly.

 

Larry

[Riley]

Jose

while you have no doubt enjoyed the entertainment of these guys beating each other to death...

 

even Guy would admit, hes taken better images with M8 than what you saw today

some of the first images he posted were quite stunning, i think all of us were floored by the incredible sharpness and resolution, i believe it has no equal in 35mm digital frame

 

I am an Oly user too, and I know their faults, and what there is to enjoy about them. I make my living from my cameras, but Im probably not as discerning as some of the photographers you will find here. In particular the 'art' photographers.

 

umb makes the point to wait for PMA coming up soon...hes right

the E3 anouncement is going to be made at this event. I am pretty sure of a few things about E3, it has a kodak sensor and more. I believe it uses some of the experience gained in M8 within its sensor. A clue is they have been talking about 640 iso speed, which is a speed that M8 sensor uses. It is also a very unusual speed to incorporate as you would be aware, not an Oly standard. launch has been delayed, i suspect thats an IR issue, perhaps like M8's

 

so it comes down to this, if you think you may rather have a FT dSLR but had no other options, that will change. If a rangefinder camera suffices your needs, you will be more than happy with M8, this despite its flaws and past issues. It has handling that emulates 35mm film, with aperture and speed (this is akin to D2 and panas LC1) trust me it makes a difference and will make you smile.

 

While rumours are just rumours, there has been some side chat about E3 that suggests this one will be special, I cant tell you what to do but, the PMA is so close now, I would wait. However if you are bent on a rangefinder, give it a week and buy in, you wont be sorry.

[jaapv]

If the photographer isn´t choosen by his creativity but by the equipment he owns, the client will always prefer a 39MP 36x48mm medium format back over a 10MP 18x27mm sensor.

 

So if you want to convince by telling "I have the best of the best" better buy the Hasselblad H3D39!

Camels are a bit expensive to rent nowadays...

[Riley]

if i leave the house without my Hubble telescope i feel naked !

[Leica DeOcean]

 

I, too, have used an Olympus E1 over the past three years and I would not think of giving up the long lens (200mm) capability of the Olympus. Yet I purchased the M8 as my first ever Leica product along with the Noctilux 1.0 and Summicron 28 f2.0 for the artistic potential that it gives me in low light situations.

 

I am not as well versed as most of the technically erudite gentlemen on this forum. I can only say that I am very taken with the clarity and "3 dimensionality" of the pictures that I take with the M8. I cannot say anything but good about the feeling that the M8 gives me.

 

Yes, I spent a lot of money .......... but .....for me.......... it was and is well worth it.

 

 

Attila

[Guest umb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are you not saying the same thing that I am? That this camera will become required for pro's?

 

Bill, if this was true I would go and buy hundreds of M8s because Solms won't even nearly be able to fill the supplies which by itself will lead to a tremendoes shortage in the market making your M8s worth probably 10000 bucks each. As say say at the stock exchange: strong buy!

[like_no_other]

Jose,

 

First let me issue a disclaimer: I shoot professionally and have been using Leica M's exclusively since 1970. I also have used the Digilux-2 since Feb of 2004.

 

Now, let me put it this way:

 

This camera is so good that it will become a REQUIRED device for every professional digital photographer within 2 years.

 

It will not replace the monster Canon sports photog tools that are visible in the corners of every sporting event on TV, because it's not a reflex camera and therefore can't take 200mm and up lenses.

 

For everything else, a rangefinder that uses Leica lenses blows away any other combination.

 

Canon uses a full-size sensor in their pro digicams. Leica cannot do this, so will always give away points for digital noise. Canon gets to have a larger pixel, so the noise will always be lower.

 

However, Leica's M lenses are so good that it's a trade-off at the higher ISO's. I don't see enough noise in the lower ISO settings (160 thru 640) to give any points to the Canon sensor. BTW, the M8 ISO settings are too conservative. They equilibrate to:

200, 400, 800, 1600, and 3200.

 

In my opinion, pictures from any camera other than a Leica have a flatness to them. The images I see from Leica lenses, even reflex lenses, are "rounder." This makes them more interesting, visceral, and realistic to my eye.

 

Run, do not walk, to buy one of these cameras that is a beautiful on the inside as the outside. Why stop there? get two.

 

You will never regret the purchase.

 

Phil,

 

admit, you are a real M8 fan.

 

Are you sure that the M8 is sharper and has more resolution than any other 35mm camera (or smaller?). I like the look of many M8 pictures shown in this forum but think this is a question of the lenses (same with film cameras). But these picutures don't look sharper than pictures from any other camera, my Sony Alpha pics with good primes look even sharper (with no sharpening artefacts).

The lack of flatness seems to be a question of the lenses, too. I'm not sure if 'flatness' is the correct word because my pictures with other cameras don't lok flat, too.

 

Philip

[KM-25]

While I think the images thus far look good, I still see them looking a bit too, well, digital.

 

I use a full frame Canon system that looks great, but when I want to get away from the non-rich, too much dynamic range look of digital, I shoot with my film Leica and Nikons.

 

Another part of the problem for me with the M8 images may be that the very distinct look of peripherial bokeh on fast lenses has been cropped out. The look is not one of a flaw, just that wonderful swimming bokeh I get with my 50 1.4 and even the more clinical 28/2.

 

These lenses have a very distinct signature that I refuse to have cropped out. I am sure the M8 is going to do great for Leica now that some of the bugs are getting worked out. I really hope it does as Leica needs it too. But if I have to sit in front a computer for hours to replicate the look of Kodachrome or sacrifice the lens signature that I rely on in my style, I think I will sit this one out and continue to make great film images until the M9 comes along.

 

The Kodachrome Project

[bsmith]

I agree, provided you use one of the lenses you listed -- otherwise it can get ugly.

 

Larry

 

True, but the same is true for the M8, put on an inferior lens and it won't look as good as with the leitz lens. I'm just saying that in the commercial world when you need the absolute optimum quality for your client, AND the budget does not allow for medium format digital (phase one back etc. ) or 8x10 film, I would always choose my 1Ds over my M8 because there is simply more detail in the file. The Leica (asph) glass may be the best in the world , but the "prime " Canon glass are also very, very good, so the difference becomes the overwhelming amount of megapixels. (it's not 10vs12, it's 10 vs 17) I wish it wasn't true, but it is. I have wishfully compared the 2 side by side many times in my studio and on jobs. 100% of all art directors, editors, clients and other photographers viewing the files side by side agree. The Canon 1Ds will be 22mp soon and the gap will widen, I hope as much as anyone that the net M digital will exceed the Canon one day.

[spersky]

Jose,

 

Some of the hyperbole that is spoken here is so ridiculous that I had to chime in.

 

Fact:

1) Leica makes some fantasic lenses which I have used and would love to use on my Canon without stop down metering.

2) You can take fantasic pictures with almost any high end Digital Camera.

3) The Leica M8 is a camera that is limited in its uses with many problems that some people feel does not warant it $5000 price tag.

4) Some people love it with the problems that it has and feel the $5000 price tag is worth it.

5) Like all Digital cameras. The Leica M8 will not hold it value very well especially considering a new version will likely be released eventually that addresses the IR filter issue.

 

Please do not get sucked into the BS and hyperbole that the Leica M8 has some mysterious magical qualities that allows it to take the best pictures in the world, even better than all medium format, large format cameras. These are likely quotes from people with a deperate need to validate an expensive purchase.

 

My recommendation if for you to stick with the facts about what you need and what your goals are in photography, and decide if the Leica M8 meets those goals.

 

Reading some of these post by some of the Leica fans out there is like asking a crack addict if crack is good. You will likely get a biased response.

 

Regards

Steve

[Guest umb]

guys like me are cheating the MF world and if I can pull the rabbit out of the hat with a leica M8 and DMR

 

Will you also be able to cheat when it comes to "bokeh"?

 

Maybe it should be recalled here that both M8 and R9/DMR are crop cam's limiting the photographers possibilties in creatively working with DOF. There are no wide-angle Summiluxes for M/R body anymore, because through the crop all these lenes have been converted to standard or telelenses. Thus, besides MF, Canon's are the only cameras that allow to shoot with a wide angle lens in low light conditions using the powerful 1.4 apperture that give you the beautiful bokeh M8 and other crop-cam users will miss forever.

[Riley]

Jose,

 

Some of the hyperbole that is spoken here is so ridiculous that I had to chime in.

 

Fact:

1) Leica makes some fantasic lenses which I have used and would love to use on my Canon without stop down metering.

2) You can take fantasic pictures with almost any high end Digital Camera.

3) The Leica M8 is a camera that is limited in its uses with many problems that some people feel does not warant it $5000 price tag.

4) Some people love it with the problems that it has and feel the $5000 price tag is worth it.

5) Like all Digital cameras. The Leica M8 will not hold it value very well especially considering a new version will likely be released eventually that addresses the IR filter issue.

 

Please do not get sucked into the BS and hyperbole that the Leica M8 has some mysterious magical qualities that allows it to take the best pictures in the world, even better than all medium format, large format cameras. These are likely quotes from people with a deperate need to validate an expensive purchase.

 

My recommendation if for you to stick with the facts about what you need and what your goals are in photography, and decide if the Leica M8 meets those goals.

 

Reading some of these post by some of the Leica fans out there is like asking a crack addict if crack is good. You will likely get a biased response.

 

Regards

Steve

 

 

of course, that wouldnt apply to you now would it ?

[spersky]

What would not apply to me? Having a bias. Of course, I think everyone will have a bias on one issue or another. Did you actually read some of the stuff that was posted in the earlier posts on this thread. I just wanted to give Jose a reasonable perspective from someone else who is not shouting that the M8 is making the best photographic images that exist today, even beyond the 17 MP cameras or medium format cameras I think the M8 just magically creates data to make the image perfect on all occasions.

[larry]

True, but the same is true for the M8, put on an inferior lens and it won't look as good as with the leitz lens. I'm just saying that in the commercial world when you need the absolute optimum quality for your client, AND the budget does not allow for medium format digital (phase one back etc. ) or 8x10 film, I would always choose my 1Ds over my M8 because there is simply more detail in the file. The Leica (asph) glass may be the best in the world , but the "prime " Canon glass are also very, very good, so the difference becomes the overwhelming amount of megapixels. (it's not 10vs12, it's 10 vs 17) I wish it wasn't true, but it is. I have wishfully compared the 2 side by side many times in my studio and on jobs. 100% of all art directors, editors, clients and other photographers viewing the files side by side agree. The Canon 1Ds will be 22mp soon and the gap will widen, I hope as much as anyone that the net M digital will exceed the Canon one day.

 

William,

 

I agree with this, too. I also shoot with Canon and the company makes some great lenses and some dogs as well. My point was that if you're using a top-quality camera like the 1Ds, you should use only L glass with few exceptions (the 100 macro comes to mind). Leica makes only great lenses, but you can find some less-than-stellar glass that will fit.

 

I'm not so wild about adding more megapixels to cameras, though. More megapixels doesn't necessarily translate into better quality.

 

Larry

[Riley]

Jose,

 

These are likely quotes from people with a deperate need to validate an expensive purchase.

 

Reading some of these post by some of the Leica fans out there is like asking a crack addict if crack is good. You will likely get a biased response.

 

Regards

Steve

 

the 'that' i refer to is imbolded

 

cast aside the acidic blatent negativity and vieled 'addict' references

 

'These people' as you call them, have made decisions based on the resolution achieved

 

what other facts are important ?

[Guest umb]

what other facts are important ?

 

"I LOVE MY MP"

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/film-forum/8842-i-love-my-mp.html

 

 

BTW, I see only the truth in what spersky wrote, no "acidic blatent negativity".

[jaapv]

Will you also be able to cheat when it comes to "bokeh"?

 

Maybe it should be recalled here that both M8 and R9/DMR are crop cam's limiting the photographers possibilties in creatively working with DOF. There are no wide-angle Summiluxes for M/R body anymore, because through the crop all these lenes have been converted to standard or telelenses. Thus, besides MF, Canon's are the only cameras that allow to shoot with a wide angle lens in low light conditions using the powerful 1.4 apperture that give you the beautiful bokeh M8 and other crop-cam users will miss forever.

 

I wonder if you really worked out the differences in DOF on a 1.3 and 1.0 sensor? In the real world, it comes down to about 2/3 stop. Not really relevant, except in the most extreme cases.

 

True, but the same is true for the M8, put on an inferior lens and it won't look as good as with the leitz lens. I'm just saying that in the commercial world when you need the absolute optimum quality for your client, AND the budget does not allow for medium format digital (phase one back etc. ) or 8x10 film, I would always choose my 1Ds over my M8 because there is simply more detail in the file. The Leica (asph) glass may be the best in the world , but the "prime " Canon glass are also very, very good, so the difference becomes the overwhelming amount of megapixels. (it's not 10vs12, it's 10 vs 17) I wish it wasn't true, but it is. I have wishfully compared the 2 side by side many times in my studio and on jobs. 100% of all art directors, editors, clients and other photographers viewing the files side by side agree. The Canon 1Ds will be 22mp soon and the gap will widen, I hope as much as anyone that the net M digital will exceed the Canon one day.

 

 

You overlook the detail lost by the heavy AA filtering in front of the Canon sensor, plus the stronger primary noise reduction. In the end result, the M8 and DMR might well hold a surprise for you in this respect. Resolution is not just determined by the number of pixels. It is a bit like audio. I once had a Fet-Mos (I think, as I recall) amplifier with a frequency response of 10-100.000 Hz. It sounded like the musicians were wrapped in a bundle of wool, because it needed strong noise filtering.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Riley]

"I LOVE MY MP"

 

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/film-forum/8842-i-love-my-mp.html

 

 

BTW, I see only the truth in what spersky wrote, no "acidic blatent negativity".

 

Reading some of these post by some of the Leica fans out there is like asking a crack addict if crack is good. You will likely get a biased response.

 

do you see it now umb ?

[spersky]

BTW,

 

I have tremendous respect for many Leica photographers. Some use their photographic tools better than I will likely ever be able too. I enjoy their art and their knowledge base. That is why I read these forums because many people I respect post here and in other places. I normally hate to be negative or attack people on a forum, but I wanted to bring a little more balanced persepctive to this thread.

 

Thanks