M8 Expectations

[nscali]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am new M8 user and need some guidance as to what to expect from the M8 in terms of image quality. Until now I have been using a 5D, mostly with "L" lenses so this is what I am used to.

I did some comparison shots with the M8 and the 5D yesterday.

On the M8 I use my 50mm summicron and my 28mm elmarit. I compared these shots

with my 5D using the 28-70mm (f2) "L" lens.

Obviously I used equivalent (approx) lens lengths on the 5D and shot in Aperture priority mode to try and match the exposures as close as possible. I shot in raw and when processing, resized the 5D shots downward slightly to match resolution. I did not sharpen while processing.

My finidings were:

 

With close range subjects, and the lens open (f2.8-f4) if found the M8 (with both lenses)

to be sharper, and showing more general detail. I was pleasantly surprised.

 

With landscape (distant) shots,however, focused on buildings at distance (infinity) and the the aperture set to f16-f22 I found the 5D to reveal more detail. After gentle sharpening I got the M8 shots a little closer. I found the 50mm summicron lens to show slightly more detail than the 35mm elamarit but the 5D still showed more detail in both cases. It was a bright day so shutter speeds were high (1/300 and higher).

 

In summary I was disappointed with the M8 in landscape shots. Should I expect better? or are my expectations too high when comparing to the 5D and an "L" lens?

 

Any advice or feedback would be greatly apprecaited.

[robsteve]

In regards to landscape, don't stop the Leica lens down too much. Each of the new Leica designs have an optimum aperture and it is usually only two stops down from wide open. For example, I think the 50mm Summicron peaks at about f5.6. After that the performance drops. I don't know which 28mm Elmait you were using, but the older ones peaked in the f8 area.

 

You introduced diffraction by stopping down too much with the M8. Thus reducing the M8 image quality. Doesn't the 5d have more resolution than 10mp of the M8?

 

Lastly, an often forgetten step with rangefinders is to remeber to focus the landscapes. Sometimes unless the scene is very distant, the focus might actually be a touch off infinity. If set up correctly, the rangefinder will show this, especially with the longer lenses.

[nscali]

Thanks for the advice. That makes a lot of sense. I will try again wider open to see how different it is.

The 5D is 13 mp but I sampled the images down to match the 10.8 from the leica.

Are you suggesting that despite this, a higher resolution camera such as the 5d would render more detail in any case?

Thanks

[robsteve]

Are you suggesting that despite this, a higher resolution camera such as the 5d would render more detail in any case?

Thanks

 

Yes, it would with a good lens. There is more to it than resolution though. The Leica lenses create images with vibrant colour and an almost 3d effect.

[wparsonsgisnet]

I am finding that my Leica lenses show worse images at f8 and higher on the M8. I believe the 1.33 factor causes the COC to become a factor in these cases.

[Julian H]

Hi

 

I am surprised that someone with such an investment in photography is unaware of the effect of diffraction limited resolution. I cannot underestand why you would want to stop down to f16/22 on the Canon L lens or the Leica for any reason other than depth of field. Using the hyperfocal distance technique you should very rarely need f16/22 on a 50mm lens.

 

Julian

[rosuna]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are you suggesting that despite this, a higher resolution camera such as the 5d would render more detail in any case?

Thanks

 

No. Real detail depends on a lot of factors: the subject, resolution of the sensor and the lens, parameters of the shot, filters on the sensor and the lens, processing software, interpolation algorithms for colors, etc.

 

Sometimes more pixels doesn't mean more real detail. There exist an "efficiency coefficient", this is, the percent of the resolutive capacity of the sensor that is really exploited. It is shocking but the true is that a part of the pixel matrix contains... nothing. More pixels mean a bigger image, not more detail.

 

The Leica M8 is a good example of a more efficient camera (thanks to the absense of the low-pass filter). The Foveon sensor is another good example: you get more detail in smaller images (although the files are big).

[Skippy Sanchez]

In summary I was disappointed with the M8 in landscape shots.....Any advice or feedback would be greatly apprecaited.

 

OK, hear me out here... this is not a flame reply. The M8 -- or any 35mm camera -- isn't your best choice for landscapes. You want quality, go to a large format camera. It's called "use the right tool for the job." Yes, you can point any camera at a landscape scene and get a photograph of the landscape.

 

But understanding the limitations of ANY camera and lens set-up is a prime key to successful photographs. For instance, you will never get the same results with 35mm (film or digital) that you will get with 8x10 view camera. On the other hand, a 35 mm camera can do things & go places & be more mobile & flexable than an 8x10 camera ever could.

 

The rangefinder is an ideal 'people' camera and 'reportage' camera. The principal advantages of my M8s do not compare to those of my Canon DSLRs, nor visa versa. The M8, however great it is, is not the perfect camera for shooting an NCAA basketball game or replicating an Ansel Adams shot of Big Sur.

 

A carpenter, mechanic or painter has an assortment of saws, wrenches or brushes, depending on the job.

 

A camera is a tool; the challenge is finding the right tool for the job you want to do.

 

If we abandon the Swiss-Army-knife approach to photography (and most other things in life these days, like shampoo/conditioner-in-one) and determine what we want to photograph, how commited we are to excelence and how we should go about doing it, it's pretty easy to determine the necessary tools for the job we want to do. Compromises and cost/benefit analysis usually factor into most of our decisions anyway.

 

Yes, the M8 will shoot landscapes, as will the 5D. And comparing the two is probably a legitamate enough exercise, but it can be an exercise in futility if you expect either to give you large-format quality.

 

Sorry to get off on a tangent here. Just don't expect a Leica to be the perfect all-in-one camera.

 

(I hope I don't get banned from the LUG for climbing on a soap box....)

 

-Skippy

[LichMD]

Skippy, well stated.

 

.

[j. borger]

If you shoot a landscape ar any other scene where you want sharpness throug the scene with a rangefinder wiith a cropfactor.... do not focus with the focus pad but ALWAYS use the scale on the lens to focus and set the infinity sign one stop lower than the aperture you are shooting at. So if you shoot a landsape at f16 ..... put the infinity sign at f 11. If you shoot at f11 ... set the infinity sign at f8 .. etc.

This will make a huge difference .... try it!

[Gilles L.]

The 5D is 13 mp but I sampled the images down to match the 10.8 from the leica.

Are you suggesting that despite this, a higher resolution camera such as the 5d would render more detail in any case?

Thanks

 

I might be totally wrong but since the 5D is a full frame and the M8 has a 1.33 crop, wouldn't the 2MP difference account for the difference between the two frames?

[nscali]

Dear All,

Your replies have been fantastic and extremely useful.

This is what makes this forum so great.

Thanks

Nicky

[reven]

skippy that is one thing. And it surely is true that a P1 45 beats my 1DsMk2, but I still find shooting landscape with 16Mp wonderful. And if you really want to print bigger take two shots and stitch them.

[loretdem]

OK, hear me out here... this is not a flame reply. The M8 -- or any 35mm camera -- isn't your best choice for landscapes. You want quality, go to a large format camera. It's called "use the right tool for the job." Yes, you can point any camera at a landscape scene and get a photograph of the landscape.

 

But understanding the limitations of ANY camera and lens set-up is a prime key to successful photographs. For instance, you will never get the same results with 35mm (film or digital) that you will get with 8x10 view camera. On the other hand, a 35 mm camera can do things & go places & be more mobile & flexable than an 8x10 camera ever could.

 

The rangefinder is an ideal 'people' camera and 'reportage' camera. The principal advantages of my M8s do not compare to those of my Canon DSLRs, nor visa versa. The M8, however great it is, is not the perfect camera for shooting an NCAA basketball game or replicating an Ansel Adams shot of Big Sur.

 

A carpenter, mechanic or painter has an assortment of saws, wrenches or brushes, depending on the job.

 

A camera is a tool; the challenge is finding the right tool for the job you want to do.

 

If we abandon the Swiss-Army-knife approach to photography (and most other things in life these days, like shampoo/conditioner-in-one) and determine what we want to photograph, how commited we are to excelence and how we should go about doing it, it's pretty easy to determine the necessary tools for the job we want to do. Compromises and cost/benefit analysis usually factor into most of our decisions anyway.

 

Yes, the M8 will shoot landscapes, as will the 5D. And comparing the two is probably a legitamate enough exercise, but it can be an exercise in futility if you expect either to give you large-format quality.

 

Sorry to get off on a tangent here. Just don't expect a Leica to be the perfect all-in-one camera.

 

(I hope I don't get banned from the LUG for climbing on a soap box....)

 

-Skippy

Even though I use a large format view camera for landscape and other work, Skippy's comments are more applicable to film-based photography. With digital, this point of view often does not apply and is rather antiquated. The M8 is a perfect example of a camera with a famous classic heritage that is being redefined in the brave(?) new world of digital photography. In fact, the M8 is an excellent companion to a 4X5 view camera. It is obvious that all tools are different and are capable of different tasks, but the old definitions are obsolete and photographers are constantly coming up with new ways to use their tools, particularly new groundbreaking tools like the M8. I for one often take landscape-type photos with my DMR/R9 and also use my 4X5 handheld on the street. I exhibit my digital and film-generated C-prints together and even though you can perceive a difference, that difference is not image quality. It's just a different "look". And one certainly does not need an 8X10 view camera to do landscape work. Unless that's how one wants to work.

 

The old rules are changing. No offense, no flame.

[Skippy Sanchez]

And one certainly does not need an 8X10 view camera to do landscape work. Unless that's how one wants to work.

 

The old rules are changing. No offense, no flame.

 

Indeed.

Definately no offense taken. I am constantly amazed at how digital imaging has evolved in such a short period of time. I am sold on it and absolutely love my M8s (& Canons). And my intent wasn't to imply that 8x10 was the 'ideal' format for landscape, only that different tools result in different images. I believe an astute observer can usually tell the difference between large format and 35mm digital, regardless of the quality of the print (assuming both are of equal craftsmanship).

 

That being said, I have seen some digital prints that are unbelieveable in their quality & resolution. Frankly, I find it very exciting to witness this era as digital imaging comes into its own.

 

Thanks for your comment.

-Skippy

[sean_reid]

The key thing, as mentioned above, is to stay away from those very small apertures. Any lens that's very well-corrected wide open will degrade in performance at smaller apertures. With the M8, I try to use most lenses with F/8 as the smallest aperture - F/11 if needed.

 

The M8 can be an excellent landscape camera.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[ustein]

>I cannot underestand why you would want to stop down to f16/22 on the Canon L lens or the Leica for any reason other than depth of field.

 

Sorry, I find this funny. Yes people use higher f-stops for more DOF. Try to use a 70-200mm lens (we do a lot) and DOF is always challenging.

 

Uwe

[wilfredo]

I agree with Sean, the M8 can be an excellent landscape camera. I think it is only a matter of time until the myth that only a large format camera can give you excellent results will be debunked.

 

Cheers,

Wilfredo

Benitez-Rivera Photography

[nscali]

Please excuse my inexperience with rangefinders but I have struggled with the manual focus technique. I am, however learning and loving the M8 experience.

I tried the same landscape shots wider open and definitely noticed an increase in detail up to f8. It just went downhill from there.

My new question is, as someone earlier suggested, do you leave the ring set at infinity

or do you move the infinity marker in line with one stop lower than your set aperture?

I only ask this because if, say, you shoot at f8, you are shifting the focus ring a long way from infinity, if you move the infinity marker to line up with the f5.6 marker?

Thanks,

Nicky

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[robsteve]

Nicky:

 

Using the rangefinder, focus on what you want in focus. When pixel peeping it will become obvious even at f8 that DOF will not put your main subject into sharp focus unless you focus on it.

 

You will also need to experiment a bit to see what infinity is for each lens. Sometimes the best focus can be just before infinity unless your main subject is a kilometer or more away. This is the main probem when new to rangefinders, remembering to focus.