Is the Leica M8 worth it

[j. borger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If the first thing to get with a rangefinder is a flashunit and you consider a heavy DSLR a valid alternative ......... the M8 or any RF will never be the camera for you ...

[Ecaton]

Thank you for your reply.

 

Provided I keep the M8, what kind of photography is it good for. What did you mean by getting into RF photography.ys

 

Amir

 

I would not know of any other camera concept providing such superb picture quality yet being as compact, light, fast and having such great ergonomics. Yes, my DSLR has MF, but by now means is it as fast and accurate as the M8. After only 10 days with the M8, I found the camera which I like to carry with me as often as possible (definitely not something I can say about the SLR), without compromising on picture quality (as I did in the past with a p&sh). Sure, the M8 has its weaknesses, I do not consider them as flaws, as some do. But couldn't the trunk space of a Ferrari be bigger and the rearview mirror of the Lamborghini better positioned?

And by the way, I find the thought of available light photography compelling. That is why I decided "never" to buy a flash for my M8.

Wish you luck with your decision

:)

[sparkie]

Like this fabulous Garry Winogrand picture for example. (taken from masters-of-photography.com)

 

tim, any idea what focal length/lens used?

[Riley]

perhaps 'buyers remorse' is visiting you

i would like to suggest you try this

 

first, get back into more photography for a short term, find some time each day

take your favorite camera and M8 on alternate days, and shoot similar subjects

 

later when it feels more right, find some time to compare the files

base your decisions on how worthwhile it is on what counts, the images

 

if it suits your style at all, you will in time adjust to the machine

it will in time become worth it and fun for you

 

give it some time, if buying may seem like a mistake

selling it might seem like one too

[TimF]

tim, any idea what focal length/lens used?

Sparkie - to the best of my knowledge (and I'm happy to be corrected) Winogrand used the 28mm almost exclusively. He had, I believe, a pair of M4 bodies both fitted with the same focal length. The lens may have been a Canon optic rather than Leica, but don't quote me on that for now.

[sparkie]

thanks tim. it looks like a wider FL. more like 21mm? cheers

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I don't know if Amir is still reading these posts, but I'll just throw my 2 cents in here...

 

I moved from a 1ds2 system to the DMR and M8. If I had a coin for every complaint I've read about (or had myself) on the Canon EOS flash system, I'd be a wealthy guy right now!

 

In my experience, portable, on-camera autoflash almost always doesn't work the way people think it should, which is to illuminate perfectly the scene without looking "flashy"

 

I have no direct experience with Leica branded flashes, but in my experience modern digital autoflash systems seem to fall into two camps:

 

1) The "let's preserve highlights at all costs" models like the Canons, which typically would underexpose a neutral shot for me on all my 1d*2 bodies by 1/3 to 1/2 a stop. But they were consistently off, so that's an easy fix. Still annoying, though.

 

2) The "we'll power our way out of here, and you better know how to think about guide numbers" models. This is newer Metz digital system. I love them when I need them, but I'm always turning them down down down!

 

To some extent, my Nikon flashes were like this too--far more liable to overexpose than underexpose--and we're talking bounced or diffused here too. But if I had to pick, they were the "best" (average) overall for auto-pilot operations.

 

Fortunately, you can just use the Metz as an old-fashioned thyristor flash and figure out how much flash you need for the ISO you're shooting anyway.

 

BTW--the M8 is wonderful with studio flash and a pocket wizard or something else that keeps you mobile and largely unencumbered--I don't find them heavy at all on the M8

 

Bottom line? There's nothing inherently wrong with using the M8 with a flash; it will produce a file equal to the 1ds2 (better in some regards, I think). But flash is also about quality of light, and it's tricky to do with on-camera flash. If you're not bouncing or modifying, it will look bad regardless of the digital camera you use (and for some reason, digital looks even worse with direct flash than film).

[charlesphoto99]

I agree with Jamie above. TTL flash, no matter what the camera, is not some kind of magic bullet. I've used the SF-20 for years with my M7 with great success (and with extra diffusion taped to the front) but one has to know the right situations/subject when it will look good. And my Vivitar 285 has been a trusty companion with my other cameras for years though recently supplanted by a Quantum Turbo flash (and Nikon flash for D200 - good but not great). And yes, film does seem to be more forgiving than digital with on camera flashes (carefully controled studio flash is a whole 'nother thing). One should also keep in mind that with any kind of on-camera flash photography one may need to spend much time in post correcting theimage (ie dodge and burn). I have one famous image of Kurt Cobain that takes at least 20 or so dodges and burns in the darkroom. Needless to say I print it rarely.

 

I think flash and Leica M is a fine combination - after all it's just a camera and we don't poo-poo using flash with Nikons, Mamiyas, Hassies, etc. And some photographer's have made their name with that combination - like Bruce Gilden. I think for some photographers it's the rangefinder that's at issue - I remember my first roll through an M (12 years ago) - all the heads were in the middle of the frame. I wasn't reframing after focusing! It's a beast that takes some getting used to when coming from slrs. But how sweet it is once you do.

 

Charles

[TimF]

thanks tim. it looks like a wider FL. more like 21mm? cheers

I doubt that it was a 21mm (though that's not to say it wasn't of course). Winogrand experimented with that focal length for a while, but rejected it as he was unable to conceal the wide angle distortion that comes as part of the deal. The 28mm was the widest he could go without distorting his subjects.

 

[Ecaton]

I doubt that it was a 21mm (though that's not to say it wasn't of course). Winogrand experimented with that focal length for a while, but rejected it as he was unable to conceal the wide angle distortion that comes as part of the deal. The 28mm was the widest he could go without distorting his subjects.

 

 

are you guys on the right thread or is this some sort of abstract humor?

 

[banifa]

I don't know if Amir is still reading these posts, but I'll just throw my 2 cents in here...

 

I moved from a 1ds2 system to the DMR and M8. If I had a coin for every complaint I've read about (or had myself) on the Canon EOS flash system, I'd be a wealthy guy right now!

 

In my experience, portable, on-camera autoflash almost always doesn't work the way people think it should, which is to illuminate perfectly the scene without looking "flashy"

 

I have no direct experience with Leica branded flashes, but in my experience modern digital autoflash systems seem to fall into two camps:

 

1) The "let's preserve highlights at all costs" models like the Canons, which typically would underexpose a neutral shot for me on all my 1d*2 bodies by 1/3 to 1/2 a stop. But they were consistently off, so that's an easy fix. Still annoying, though.

 

2) The "we'll power our way out of here, and you better know how to think about guide numbers" models. This is newer Metz digital system. I love them when I need them, but I'm always turning them down down down!

 

To some extent, my Nikon flashes were like this too--far more liable to overexpose than underexpose--and we're talking bounced or diffused here too. But if I had to pick, they were the "best" (average) overall for auto-pilot operations.

 

Fortunately, you can just use the Metz as an old-fashioned thyristor flash and figure out how much flash you need for the ISO you're shooting anyway.

 

BTW--the M8 is wonderful with studio flash and a pocket wizard or something else that keeps you mobile and largely unencumbered--I don't find them heavy at all on the M8

 

Bottom line? There's nothing inherently wrong with using the M8 with a flash; it will produce a file equal to the 1ds2 (better in some regards, I think). But flash is also about quality of light, and it's tricky to do with on-camera flash. If you're not bouncing or modifying, it will look bad regardless of the digital camera you use (and for some reason, digital looks even worse with direct flash than film).

 

Thanks for the comment Jamie,

 

Since my post I have continued to take pictures with the Leica Flash,an old Sunpak, a Metz and a Nikon SB. the best results came fromthe Sunpak (surpisingly) with no shadow or too flashy subjects. Probalby because all the settings are manual and I do take the time doing the settings. The TTL in the Leica flash does not bring much at this point...in addition, it is a small flash with no real power and make the M8 bulky..

 

Thanks, Amir

[banifa]

M8 is NOT an intermediate body till the next increase in resolution, WB, etc. Unlike other companies, Leica's product cycles run into years. Leica waited 10 years into the digital photography resolution before they released a flagship product because they wanted a digital camera that wouldn't be obsolete for a long while. So if you want the M9, you'd probably have to wait till 2010 or later.

 

Thanks for taking the time to help me with your comments. I agree with you that Leica does not produce a new camera just as a fantasy and have spent a lot of time coming with this design. However, I am doubting for now that they could stay with this model for 5 years giving the number of other cameras that produce close to very good results on the market, not mentioning the fast progress in CMOS sensors, larger size sensors that do not crop the image, and overall market competition.

 

Thanks again.

 

Amir

[TimF]

are you guys on the right thread or is this some sort of abstract humor?

Yes and No in that order. Cheers!

[bayerische]

I started in my early youth to take pictures with a Nikon PAS camera. It was a very cheap one that my mother (who has no interest in photography) bought.

 

In my early teens I in a state of madness thought the APS system was a good idea. I got a SLR style compact Fuji APS camera.

 

I loved it then.

 

But the APS camera got me away from the PAS cameras and into SLR. Been using SLR analog and Digital for aprox 10 years.

 

Got into Leica this autumn, I wanted to try it earlier, but there was so many other camera systems that I also wanted to try out, and now I LOVE my M6.

 

I'm most likely going to buy an M8. The RF system is different from SLR. the SLR is more versatile. But I don't photograph birds, or wild animals which would require me to get a 200mm + lens. I don't do much macro. I don't even own a macro lens, I lend my Cousins if I need one.

 

My Canon eos 5D setup is a 24mm, 50mm and 85mm lens. The type of pictures I enjoy taking I can take with a Leica RF.

 

RF is not for everyone. I'm glad I took the leap into RF, I enjoy using the M6 very much. And I'm sure I would enjoy the M8 aswell. The M8 is not the best digital camera, nor is the 5D. They both have different qualities.

 

I hang around this digital Leica forum every day, this = I'm getting an M8 soon:)

[fotografr]

Thank you for your reply.

 

Provided I keep the M8, what kind of photography is it good for. What did you mean by getting into RF photography.

 

Amir

 

I am completely baffled. Why would you buy a camera without knowing what it is capable of and what you want to do with it?

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped} However, I am doubting for now that they could stay with this model for 5 years giving the number of other cameras that produce close to very good results on the market, not mentioning the fast progress in CMOS sensors, larger size sensors that do not crop the image, and overall market competition.

Amir

 

Amir--a great print is a great print. The M8 makes great prints--not movies, not post DOF selections, not 8fps time sequences. Great prints.

 

Print and RAW technology will change by 2010 (which is only 3 years away, not 5). So if you have an M8, I'm pretty darned sure the images you print in the future will actually look better than the ones you get now.

 

And sharp is sharp is sharp. You're throwing away data after a certain amount of resolution at normal sized prints (larger prints absolutely require more resolution and larger sensor sizes to maintain absolute quality).

 

So there's a quality curve in this form factor--the sensor can only be so big! And--short of some truly revolutionary technology, like a fully exploitable Foveon-like sensor technology--we're sort of no longer at the fast ramp up the quality scale with something like the M8.

 

Yes, there will be improvements in ISO speed, selective focus, etc.. and the bottom end of the consumer market will ramp up fast.

 

Soon Canon will have a full-frame, $1000 dSLR (I have no knowledge directly, but if I was a betting man...). Soon it will not just clean itself, but send files directly to your wireless enabled computer and send the shots you want to your favourite lab so you can pick them up on your way home. Someday, it will have a 5fps unlimited shot buffer, and it will one day take movies. One day not too long from now, it will sell for only $399 (ah but the lenses....)

 

And none of that will affect the image quality your 5 year old, or 10 year old, M8 will give you with a photographic print.

 

And that's completely aside the fact that there is virtually no digital rangefinder competition here at all.

[Riley]

I dont think CMOS are developing rapidly at all

considering theres just 1 group working on them

 

and CCD's positively trounce them in sales

they dominate the P&S market which is the real money in this business

hence thats where the R&D capital will go

[MP3]

Leicaphiles seldom or never shot with flash...

 

Sports photography... you are trying to hammer nails with screw driver =)

 

Cheers

Matthew

[fastdap@mac.com]

My M8/Noct shots look very much like my 5D 85 1.2 shots. My MP/Noct shots have more of the Noct signature, but so far, the M8 has not 100% wowed me. Colors are a bit off and AWB is awful. My MP and film gets me much more pleasing colors and tones. The M8 looks VERY digital to me. Maybe Im just used to film since Ive been shooting it daily for 8 months. I like the M8 body and usability, but so far no WOW factor for me, expecially at nearly $5k. I prefer, by a wide margin my Rd1 shots for color, quality and the way it captured the light.

 

Ill keep chugging with the M8 and give it a chance though. I would be thrilled to keep this for a long time to come.

Yes, the 5d and 85 1.2 is similar, for sure, but not a duplicate to me. I agree that the noct and mp will fully utilize the feel of the lense because film is full frame capturing the wonderful noct vignetting, so sadly missed with the crop of the m8. Film is still film and has it's own feel.

best, mark

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[sparkie]

I doubt that it was a 21mm (though that's not to say it wasn't of course). Winogrand experimented with that focal length for a while, but rejected it as he was unable to conceal the wide angle distortion that comes as part of the deal. The 28mm was the widest he could go without distorting his subjects.

 

 

 

it sure looks wider to me, at least to me