M8 doesnt work for me...

[clat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I write this to solicit thoughts, opinions, and experiences regarding M8's. Five months ago I bought a lovely, pristine, but slightly used M8 from a pro photographer in my area. Box, papers, everything was there and it was beautiful. I have the most current firmware loaded. I cant make the camera work for me. Please understand that "work for me" means the pictures it delivers are underwhelming. My 70's vintage film lenses need to be tuned for the M8 to take care of a little front focus and back focus and I am planning to have DAG take care of that for me. But, the image quality just doesnt do it for me. I love my 50 summicron and 35 summicron on my E-PL1 but the images from the M8 always are a little soft, white balance a little weird, and colors a little off. I just dont like them. I also really like my X1 image quality. So, my question is this: is it me or is it the M8? (referring to jpegs).

Thank you.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

Shoot DNG, use UV/IR filters, get focus straightened out, ensure proper workflow from camera to display to print....then let us know. With your two superb lenses, a properly sorted M8 should present no obstacles.

 

Have you sought any guidance from the pro who sold it to you?

 

Jeff

[Want-a-leica]

I write this to solicit thoughts, opinions, and experiences regarding M8's. Five months ago I bought a lovely, pristine, but slightly used M8 from a pro photographer in my area. Box, papers, everything was there and it was beautiful. I have the most current firmware loaded. I cant make the camera work for me. Please understand that "work for me" means the pictures it delivers are underwhelming. My 70's vintage film lenses need to be tuned for the M8 to take care of a little front focus and back focus and I am planning to have DAG take care of that for me. But, the image quality just doesnt do it for me. I love my 50 summicron and 35 summicron on my E-PL1 but the images from the M8 always are a little soft, white balance a little weird, and colors a little off. I just dont like them. I also really like my X1 image quality. So, my question is this: is it me or is it the M8? (referring to jpegs).

Thank you.

 

Do you only shoot jpeg? The M8's jpeg engine doesn't have the best rep in the world (although personally I like the jpegs I get, especially in black and white).

 

Have you tried DNG or DNG plus JPEG?

 

And when you say the images are underwhelming, do you mean straight from the camera? Do you do any PP?

 

Alternatively, it might just be that the colours aren't to your personal taste. I know that Ken Rockwell raved about the M9 but said he hated the colours it produced out of camera. If that's the case, then there's not so much you can do about personal taste.

[CharlesL]

The good: You can get marvelous images from the M8.

The price: You need to post-process the DNG files.

 

Colors: Ken Rockwell wrote about how to shift Leica digital hues. I often need to shift yellow-greens toward green. Rockwell likes red more than I do, and you can shift to your preference.

 

White balance: If you know filters for your film camera, you are half way to something analogous: set the M8 white balance with the Kelvin temperature option. Again, you will need to refine the result in post-processing. A raw converter program (Picture Window Pro, Raw Therapee, others) gives you sliders for color temperature (blue-yellow) and tint (green-magenta). As I slowly get better with these, my eyes become more proficient, able to recognize color casts, see which way to go for a desired mood, etc.

 

Soft images: Again, post-processing, especially adjusting contrast on the RGB curve (or the HSV or HSL curve if you wish). It makes a huge difference where you establish two points on the curve, then expand the region between them.

 

I, too, have used M-mount lenses on an Olympus E-P1. Much of the time the image has pop. After awhile, though, the relatively narrow range of interpretation built into the JPGs becomes apparent in comparison with the wider scope of possibilities from an M8 raw file. And maybe 20 to 25 percent of the time, the Olympus JPG engine doesn't do a good job. But if I'm going to work on a raw file, I much prefer the M8 to the E-P1. The M8 files are more resilient. The larger sensor on the M8 pays off here, and the manufacturer, Kodak, did a fine job.

[ho_co]

The 70's 50 should be okay; the 70's 35 will be soft by today's standard. But that can be popped up easily in post-processing.

 

Have you checked the lenses for haze or scratches?

 

If it doesn't work for you, so be it. But I'm glad you asked here, because that's an infrequent occurrence.

 

Get the lenses checked first. The M8 is a brutally accurate tool as for focus. If you're off a hair, you're way off.

 

If DAG sets the lenses up and you're still not happy, it may be that your rangefinder is off.

 

But the way it sounds to me, something just needs a little tweaking and you'll be squeaking with delight.

[otto.f]

An M8 or M9 is for RAW only, Jpeg is always relatively disappointing when directly compared with for instance DLux's and I presume X1 too

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I write this to solicit thoughts, opinions, and experiences regarding M8's. Five months ago I bought a lovely, pristine, but slightly used M8 from a pro photographer in my area. Box, papers, everything was there and it was beautiful. I have the most current firmware loaded. I cant make the camera work for me. Please understand that "work for me" means the pictures it delivers are underwhelming. My 70's vintage film lenses need to be tuned for the M8 to take care of a little front focus and back focus and I am planning to have DAG take care of that for me. But, the image quality just doesnt do it for me. I love my 50 summicron and 35 summicron on my E-PL1 but the images from the M8 always are a little soft, white balance a little weird, and colors a little off. I just dont like them. I also really like my X1 image quality. So, my question is this: is it me or is it the M8? (referring to jpegs).

Thank you.

 

I had a similar experience, when my M8.2 has been new to me.

 

First, your points:

 

"the images from the M8 always are a little soft"

 

Any softness, you will see in a M8 image is not normal or not attributed to a well adjusted camera body. The images from the M8 should be blistering sharp, compared to the other camera's files, you mention.

I assume, you didn't see the image quality form your M8 yet with a well paired modern lens. I would send the M8 and all your M lenses to DAG after finding a way with him, to get the whole batch back in a reasonable time frame. He could adjust all lenses to perfection and the M8 body accordingly.

 

"white balance a little weird"

 

This will always be. I white balance every color image (the little number, I develop from the M8.2) in Lightroom. This is debatable, but Color Balance from digital Leica Ms just doesn't cut it, compared with more consistent other camera manufacturers products.

 

I am aware of this and make color balancing a necessary task in my post processing.

 

"and colors a little off"

This will always be with the M8.

I would take care of this with this way (I work in Lightroom):

 

- create Importprofile with AWB and color corrections after AWB to your taste

- import DNGs from M8 into Lightroom with Importprofile

- fineset WB in Lightroom

 

The two mainly used cameras, before I stared with the M8.2 were a EPSON R-D1 and a Nikon D3.

Both camera's files are very easy, to use and develop.

 

When I got the M8.2, it took me several weeks (!) of intensive daily post processing and experimenting, to get into the files, having them look the way, I wanted.

 

During this time I cursed and almost gave up on the M8.2, but have been always pulled back by the fantastic, crisp file detail, no other camera, I used gave me.

 

My biggest complaint though has been, how quickly M8 files fall apart, when pushing - even the ancient R-D1 delivers much more robust performance for this.

 

Since then, Lightroom has made big advances, giving maybe a full stop more leeway to M8 files, which transformed the camera completely for me.

 

You either need a lot more work in different directions with the M8 or it indeed is not for you - I strongly suspect the first one ;-)

 

Good luck!

[Erik Gunst Lund]

I agree with the above, I'm also a Nikon D3 user.

I would only add; use Capture One Pro for Leica M8 files if you want to have the best raw file processing, sharpness and removal of moire are the main advantages... Or use CS or Bibble Pro

[clat]

Thank you all for your insightful comments. I've always been satisfied with the JPEGS from the X1, E-PL1, and D300 so I have been reluctant to invest a lot of time in post-processing.

 

It sounds like I need to have DAG check out the lenses and include the body as well in order to be certain that focus is spot on.. and, learn to work well with RAW files. Perhaps, also, I should be more patient and concentrate on working with the M8 exclusively for a while.

 

Thanks again.

[ho_co]

Yeah, the M9's JPGs are improved from those of the M8. A lot of folks were disappointed by the M8's JPG files; and predictably, some are still disappointed by those of the M9.

 

Also, the cameras are both quicker with DNG images than with JPGs. Although the DNG files are larger, they get written to card more quickly because they don't involve the extra computations the camera has to do to convert them to JPG.

[BJDrew]

Short answer - it's likely both you and the camera.

Here's a slightly different take.

The M8 makes nothing really easy. Compared to my Canon DSLRs, for example, the M8 essentially requires you to shoot RAW, to endlessly tweak colors, delicately balance sharpness & noise, you have to learn its meter and compensate very specific ways based on the light.

It's finicky. It's a bit of a princess.

It's the digital equivalent of shooting film.

In my opinion, it's worth it.

But - if you're not willing or able to deal with all this and look past it - and work hard to get your results, you should pass.

 

Look, in reality, the M8 is an amazing camera body with an old, noisy, hot-running, somewhat defect-prone CCD crop sensor in it and pretty awful in-camera JPG processing.

 

Can you get past it?

[Guest Ming Rider]

Yep, I agree. The JPEG's from the M8 are a crock of sh*t. Shoot RAW only.

[Jeff S]

The M8 makes nothing really easy. Compared to my Canon DSLRs, for example, the M8 essentially requires you to shoot RAW, to endlessly tweak colors, delicately balance sharpness & noise, you have to learn its meter and compensate very specific ways based on the light.

It's finicky. It's a bit of a princess.

It's the digital equivalent of shooting film.

 

In other words, it helps to understand Photography 101, and not expect the camera to know it for you.

 

Jeff

[mikenic]

Hehehe ... BJDrew ... "A bit of a princess" ... I laughed out loud at that description.

 

WRT mentions of the CCD sensor, it just goes to show the diversity of reasons we make our purchases. I specifically went M8 with the Kodak CCD because I wanted a sensor that was developed by a film company. I came to the M8 from the Fuji S2 Pro that I bought for that very reason. I personally like the look of their sensor taking characteristics.

 

My 2c anyhow.

Mike

[lct]

M8 jpegs and auto WB are not the best by far but raws out of it are second to none if you don't need high isos, if you don't mind IR-cut filters and if your wides can be 6-bit coded.

[colonel]

Thank you all for your insightful comments. I've always been satisfied with the JPEGS from the X1, E-PL1, and D300 so I have been reluctant to invest a lot of time in post-processing.

 

It sounds like I need to have DAG check out the lenses and include the body as well in order to be certain that focus is spot on.. and, learn to work well with RAW files. Perhaps, also, I should be more patient and concentrate on working with the M8 exclusively for a while.

 

Thanks again.

 

It can be quite fast

 

buy adobe lightroom, then you can just browse the DNGs, (adjust contrast, colour, sharpening, etc.) and export to JPG

Note that just loading a DNG into lightroom and exporting to JPG without doing anything will produce a much better picture then the JPG from the camera

 

Some tips:

 

1. Shoot on ISO 160 when you can (less cleaing up to do, but 320 and 640 can be free of cleaning if you don't mind grain at the pixel level)

2. Practise focusing. The contrast "pops" as optimum focus is achieved

3. Keep the camera steady (different technique to DSLR)

4. Apply a bit of contrast, vibrancy, clarity and sharpness in lightroom (the mark of a good sensor is how much you can increase contrast and colours without the image falling apart)

5. Use a IR/UV cut filter all the time (there are times when its best not to, but ignore these for the moment)

6. Remember to set the camera to say lens is using UV/IR cut filter (in menu)

7. Only use 6bit coding (I will get flak for this one). If your lens is not coded, get it coded. - Turn on (use 6bit coding) in menu.

 

good luck!

[colonel]

The good: You can get marvelous images from the M8.

The price: You need to post-process the DNG files.

 

Colors: Ken Rockwell wrote about how to shift Leica digital hues. .

 

Please don't quote Rockwell in an M8 forum ;-)

 

Although he has some useful Leica lens reviews and has some salient thoughts, he makes some big mistakes and then becomes incredibly forceful about them.

 

He writes off the entire Leica M8 without ever having used one and obviously ignoring all the wonderful photos out there.

He writes off the Summarit range despite their excellent reviews, mainly, it seems, as Leica used a different font on the aperture dial !!!!

 

On the DSLR side, an example is "never use spot metering" !!!!!!

 

Whilst I don't mind directing beginners to his site for the introductory guides, especially to show someone that the photographer is more improtant then the equipment, I would hesitate to send any beginner with Leica, or any other camera, to other sections of his site.

 

rgds

[jaapv]

Hehehe ... BJDrew ... "A bit of a princess" ... I laughed out loud at that description.

 

WRT mentions of the CCD sensor, it just goes to show the diversity of reasons we make our purchases. I specifically went M8 with the Kodak CCD because I wanted a sensor that was developed by a film company. I came to the M8 from the Fuji S2 Pro that I bought for that very reason. I personally like the look of their sensor taking characteristics.

 

My 2c anyhow.

Mike

 

Fuji is not a film producer???

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[likealeica]

Notice how many of the technically "in the know" guys are basically saying we have to accommodate the camera? Some of the world's greatest shots were made with Leica film cameras because the camera accommodated the photographer. Back when, lots of people thought Leica never belonged in the SLR market. I hope that isn't the case with digital. Why does Nikon make it so easy and Leica make it so hard?

[lct]

Because Nikon (and most others) chose a simpler route than Leica's. SLR, AA filter, AF, IS and so on help to take good enough pictures. Some LF, MF and Leica users are asking for more than that.