Upgrading the M8 Bright Lines?

[PasMichiel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do want the M sound back in my digital M. So I'm thinking about sending it away to do so. And because I have some dust behind the LCD I will do the Sapphire glass thing too.

 

But can someone tell me what that is about the Bright line frames?

[farnz]

The M8c has its frame lines set to 1 metre but upgrading them will set them to 2 metres, which matches the film M's, and will be more accurate for street shooting where the subject is often at around 2 metres.

 

Pete.

[PasMichiel]

The M8c has its frame lines set to 1 metre but upgrading them will set them to 2 metres, which matches the film M's, and will be more accurate for street shooting where the subject is often at around 2 metres.

 

Pete.

 

I'm not sure I understand yet. so the frame lines are gone at 1 metre and will stay after the upgrade till 2 metres?

[farnz]

If your frames lines are set to 1 metre (as with the standard M8) and you shoot a subject that's at a distance of 2 metres then there will be a little parallax error and exactly what you framed in the viewfinder won't appear in your photo.

 

With the frame lines set to 2 metres (as with upgraded frame lines) and you shoot a subject that's at a distance of 2 metres then there will be no parallax error and exactly what you framed in the viewfinder will appear in your photo.

 

Pete.

[PasMichiel]

Okay. I was thinking I needed some new contact lenses Sometimes I had more on the picture as I framed. Comming from the R I was thinking it was a M thing...

[epand56]

The bright lines are the only upgrade I did on my M8 and I'm very happy with the new ones.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just to amplify what Pete said:

 

The M8 originally had the frame lines set for the closest focus distance of the lens. That meant that when you focused at longer distances, you would get noticeably more in the image than what was in the framelines.

 

With the M8.2 framelines (same as on the upgraded M8), at distances closer than 2 m you will get less in the image than what appeared in the bright frame. At distances greater than 2 m you will still get more than what was in the framelines, but the extra amount will be far less than with the original framelines.

 

In other words, with the original M8 framelines you will always get as much as or more than you saw in the finder. With the upgraded M8 framelines, at distances closer than 2 m you will get less than the finder shows.

[bocaburger]

Funny thing, but on my upgraded M8 I never found I cut anything off if using the frames at the closest distance the lens could focus. Going back searching the net I found that there was speculation that the original lines were scaled down from the M7 and they forgot that the film cameras also took into consideration what a slide mount or negative carrier would crop, and that the upgrade was just rectifying that error. I'm not sure if that's the case, but from a long use of the upgraded M8 I am positive they are not "set at 2m" because at 2m I got what was framed at the very outer edges of the lines. I used the inner edges at closest mark and like I said never cut anything off.

 

I've also done some framing comparisons between my M9 and an MP and the MP shows a little less with each frame. About what a slide mount would crop...I'm just saying...

[jaapv]

In daily practice one gets so used to the framelines that one compensates instinctively, whatever the setting. Imo it is an upgrade that is not worth the money.

[Jeff S]

If someone uses two (or more) different M cameras, there might be some advantage in having similar frame lines for more seamless and consistent viewing.

 

Jeff

[Guest mc_k]

If your frames lines are set to 1 metre (as with the standard M8) and you shoot a subject that's at a distance of 2 metres then there will be a little parallax error and exactly what you framed in the viewfinder won't appear in your photo.

 

With the frame lines set to 2 metres (as with upgraded frame lines) and you shoot a subject that's at a distance of 2 metres then there will be no parallax error and exactly what you framed in the viewfinder will appear in your photo.

 

Pete.

 

I think "distance error," not "parallax error" ... the parallax is allegedly compensated.

[bocaburger]

In daily practice one gets so used to the framelines that one compensates instinctively, whatever the setting. Imo it is an upgrade that is not worth the money.

 

True, compensation is necessary with any M camera. At some point though, the actual framing can be so far out of the lines that they're practically useless as a reference. I'm not saying the classic M8 was that bad, but the upgraded version certainly makes compensation less challenging. I do agree it's not worth the money, especially not now, not with the current value of an M8.

[PasMichiel]

True, compensation is necessary with any M camera. At some point though, the actual framing can be so far out of the lines that they're practically useless as a reference. I'm not saying the classic M8 was that bad, but the upgraded version certainly makes compensation less challenging. I do agree it's not worth the money, especially not now, not with the current value of an M8.

 

 

That's my problem too. I do want a m sound back. And I even find that too expensive / not worth it. I think of waiting a bit and buying a M9.

[Jeff S]

I do want a m sound back.

 

Of course this only applies until you release your finger, even on the M9. It's not the shutter that makes all the noise; it's that dang motor advance. Nothing beats good old manual advance.

 

I have 2 M8.2s and almost never use the discreet shutter function after playing with it initially. BTW, the actual shutter sound (before the motor whirr) is marginally quieter on the M8.2 than on the M9. Don't know about an upgraded M8 version.

 

Jeff