mmradman Posted February 10, 2012 Share #41 Posted February 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's not so long ago that they weren't. Three years ago the Fuji S5 Pro was the camera of choice for event photographers. It's a Nikon D200 with a Fuji sensor that produces images with very high dynamic range and wonderful skin tones. I bought a new one 3+ years ago for $550 from Ffordes when Fuji were selling them off. It's extremely reliable and built like a brick but it's not that much bigger than a Leica. I'm not upgrading... From you picture hardly any difference in size between MP & S5 and D300/D700/D800 are not much bigger or heavier than D200/S5, in reality M body is tiny compared to D***. Putting body size aside real difference is in the size of the lenses (advantage Leica) and dependability (advantage Nikon). On subject of lenses visoflex system is poor substitute for fast Nikon telephotos and Nikon is very happy with R lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 10, 2012 Posted February 10, 2012 Hi mmradman, Take a look here D4 v D800 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
peter_n Posted February 10, 2012 Share #42 Posted February 10, 2012 The S5 is a DX camera so it's a little smaller than a D700/D800. I agree about the lenses, the Leica glass is way better. Nikon's zoom lenses are in many cases better than their primes, I use a 17-55mm DX lens that is f2.8 throughout the range and that is a good lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted February 10, 2012 Share #43 Posted February 10, 2012 Nikon set the price, not Jessops. You are trying to compare two completely different cameras. That might go some way to answering your question. I was seeking to be ironic. I was cocking a snoop at Leica who will no doubt release a M10 at double the price of a M9 whereas Nikon are offering a much better camera for a reasonable premium over the exsting model. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted February 12, 2012 Share #44 Posted February 12, 2012 I was seeking to be ironic. I was cocking a snoop at Leica who will no doubt release a M10 at double the price of a M9 whereas Nikon are offering a much better camera for a reasonable premium over the exsting model. And there will be a waiting list for those who wanted an M10. There is no other manufacturer that can create such a 'must have at any cost' impulse as Leica can. Had Nikon or Canon produced a piece of digital junk like the M8, it would have no resale value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted February 12, 2012 Share #45 Posted February 12, 2012 Had Nikon or Canon produced a piece of digital junk like the M8, it would have no resale value. Hmm, I'm still using my 'junk' M8 over 4 years after I bought it, and can't say I've ever regarded it as anything other than fantastic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedi996sps Posted February 12, 2012 Share #46 Posted February 12, 2012 Hmm, I'm still using my 'junk' M8 over 4 years after I bought it, and can't say I've ever regarded it as anything other than fantastic. Me too, in fact i like and get on with it so much, i was not too bothered in upgrading to m9 :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted February 12, 2012 Share #47 Posted February 12, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Had Nikon or Canon produced a piece of digital junk like the M8, it would have no resale value. My 'digital junk' is now over 4 years old and the biggest problem I have is justifying replacing it with a camera which is twice the price of a D800E and only offers full-frame as its chief improvement and still fails to deliver anything close to the performance of a Nikon, Canon or even my Panasonic GH-2(!) at anything over iso640. I agree that Leica creates a 'must have impulse' but witness the number of fine second hand examples of M8s and M9s there are some owners who are 'fondlers' rather than photographers. LouisB PS Add to the list of better low light performers than the M9 my iPhone 4... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted February 12, 2012 Share #48 Posted February 12, 2012 Hmm, I'm still using my 'junk' M8 over 4 years after I bought it, and can't say I've ever regarded it as anything other than fantastic. Both yourself and biglouis illustrate my point. Like it or not, Nikon have pushed the goalposts aside with both the D4 and D800. For not a lot more money than some are willing to pay for a used (useless from my pov) M8, the D800 is within reach. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted February 12, 2012 Share #49 Posted February 12, 2012 Both yourself and biglouis illustrate my point. Like it or not, Nikon have pushed the goalposts aside with both the D4 and D800. For not a lot more money than some are willing to pay for a used (useless from my pov) M8, the D800 is within reach. Actually, I think we are in violent agreement. The price point for the D800 or more interestingly to Leica users, the D800E, really does make it a difficult case to spend more on a camera. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sailronin Posted February 12, 2012 Share #50 Posted February 12, 2012 My "digital junk" is also plodding along nicely. The added 8 Mp of the M9 is tempting but with a D800 offering twice the Mp count, vastly superior low light capability and the ability to use long lenses for wildlife... Sorry Leica, if my M8 "piece of digital junk" does pass away I'll have to say good bye to digital Leica (might keep an M6 around for travel). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedi996sps Posted February 12, 2012 Share #51 Posted February 12, 2012 My "digital junk" is also plodding along nicely. The added 8 Mp of the M9 is tempting but with a D800 offering twice the Mp count, vastly superior low light capability and the ability to use long lenses for wildlife... Sorry Leica, if my M8 "piece of digital junk" does pass away I'll have to say good bye to digital Leica (might keep an M6 around for travel). I agree, the D800E is far to tempting for someone like me who was/is satisfied with the M8 so much so that i decided not to go for the M9, thinking that the M10 would be a better bet. Guess, i must like junk! But the price point of the Nikon can not just be overlooked, especially if it produces the goods, even IF the M10 is exceptional, which it will need to be to stop/slow the drift away from Leica, unless of-course, its the tool that suits you. The M8 is staying with me though as my travel companion. :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
honcho Posted February 12, 2012 Share #52 Posted February 12, 2012 Actually, I think we are in violent agreement.... LouisB You've finally got your head around my earlier post! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted February 12, 2012 Share #53 Posted February 12, 2012 Wonder how much revenue Leica could generate by making MF lenses for Canon and Nikon? Any ideas on the numbers Zeiss reports for this revenue stream? My one concern with the D800 is whether or not the Nikkor lenses are good enough for the sensor. To be honest, I want to stick with Leica for not only my love of the rangefinder, but the glass.....it's all about the glass. I believe the M is only going to improve as Leica becomes more firmly entrenched in digital, and at some point, sensor performance will be on par with the glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanetomlane Posted February 12, 2012 Share #54 Posted February 12, 2012 Had Nikon or Canon produced a piece of digital junk like the M8, it would have no resale value. I'm still using my piece of digital junk to produce what I consider to be terrific black & white prints. Used without the IR filter the detail and tones are superb. Cheers, Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 2, 2012 Share #55 Posted March 2, 2012 I see that Canon have announced today the 5D Mk.3. I wonder if their marketing strategy people have got it right. It certainly has far less bragging rights on pixels than the Nikon D800. It is also substantially more expensive at £600 more than the standard D800 and £300 more than the uprated D800E. It will be interesting to look at DP Review's comparative images when their detailed review comes out. In the end, I suppose it comes down to whether you have a bag of Nikon or Canon lenses, as both these cameras are going to be very good. Leica is going to have to be at its best for the M10 to match them in IQ and ISO performance. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 2, 2012 Share #56 Posted March 2, 2012 Having just looked at the Canon 5Dmk3 samples Nikon is ahead in leaps and bounds. The 5D samples lack completely in detail and are soft. This really is a golden moment for Nikon. They've done something truly incredible with those cameras. The 800 is going to sell like mad. Nikon has even caught up with the 3 year old Leica M9 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter H Posted March 2, 2012 Author Share #57 Posted March 2, 2012 Having just looked at the Canon 5Dmk3 samples Nikon is ahead in leaps and bounds. The 5D samples lack completely in detail and are soft. This really is a golden moment for Nikon. They've done something truly incredible with those cameras. The 800 is going to sell like mad. Nikon has even caught up with the 3 year old Leica M9 It would appear that Canon is concentrating on the video market which seems to be huge and growing, while Nikon is behind in video but getting ahead in stills. I prefer my little M9 to the larger Nikons though, and I can't see anything that's likely to change that, realistically. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted March 2, 2012 Share #58 Posted March 2, 2012 I agree Peter, my recent move to Leica has been quite cathartic and I'm really very excited about what the system offers which is truly unique and a look no other system has. I've been testing the camera quite heavily in the last month of owning it and I'm ready to trust it to jobs. I think it's going to substitute my work with Blad and P65+ for quite a lot of my work. We shall see. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mmradman Posted March 2, 2012 Share #59 Posted March 2, 2012 It is glass stupid. For every three M lenses there is one R lens in existence. In my experience D700 is producing subjectively better images with R glass than with Nikon or even Zeiss, no doubt if I was a Canon user statement would be the same. There is enormous potential in D800/E to be used capturing superlative images and thanks to Leica million fabulous lenses are now orphaned – i doubt I would be able to afford them otherwise. How about shooting M lenses in macro mode on D700 via Leitaxed Visoflex M to R lens adapter 14167 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted March 8, 2012 Share #60 Posted March 8, 2012 I was just looking at the super high ISO examples on DP Review taken with the 5DMk3. Very impressive, especially as they were with pre-production firmware. I wonder if this is what we will have to look forward to with the M10? I certainly hope so. Being able to take good usable photos at 25000 and 50000 ISO with the fast Leica lenses is a very enticing prospect. Pictures by the new moon and starlight plus dark interiors without flash. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.