M8, where do we go from here?

[guywalder]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

so film is far from dead, I am comfortable with that, however digital is surely the steamtrain that won't be stopped.

If that is the case where do Leica go from here?

Leica 'started' 35mm as a still picture format by selling a camera that gave 'good enough' picture quality in a film format far smaller than was the norm. In large part by designing great lenses. Then everyone else got into 35mm, and Leica didnt compete on features but kept raising the quality bar. Ultimately the result was the R8/9 and the M6/7, great quality from 35mm, but more expensive than medium format which gave even more quality, albeit with less convenience. So Leica were in a small niche, high quality (but less than MF) in a portable size (but feature poor, no AF, no IS etc) at a high price.

Then along came digital.

Leica were/are too small and specialised to be in the vanguard of digital technology, so they are dependent on 3rd party support. 3rd party support is also limited because there are few big players in the digital market. Canon, Sony/Nikon and the turbulent MF market.

So far, so uncertain.

But it seems to me that there is a real opportunity here for Leica. Now the cost gap between legacy 35mm digital systems and MF digital is huge, so there is a real gap in the market for a product that bridges the gap, both in cost and IQ terms.

I know plenty of people on this forum have great faith in the DMR and M8, yet it seems to me that there is a tremendous untapped potential in those products, and even more so for their next iteration. If only Leica would break out of their conservative thinking patterns!!

 

What do I mean?

How about Dynamic Range. The M8 has a great DR, right, but how am I supposed to utilise it? I only have 1/2 stop adjustment of aperture and shutter, and only 1 stop adjustment of ISO!, to add insult to injury the histogram is, err well lets be polite and say it is less informative than other manufacturers offer. Result = lots of lost potential.

How about lens characteristic? If I understand correctly the DMR makes great use of ROM lenses (vignette control), but on the M8? well first you need to pay to update your lens, as well as paying for your IR filter, and the system still doesnt know what aperture your using.... Not so long ago I, as the Leica photographer, was obliged to do everything manually, so why should I not now have the facility to manually input lens data? If that is going to improve the IQ I want to be able to do it! More importanatly I think Leica need to offer it as a facility to help me, the customer, differentiate my expensive but feature poor Leica from the competition.

As a bit of an aside, given the smaller format of the M8, Leica's lens advantage is no longer what it was with 35mm film (just have a look at the results you can get with CV lenses which are orders of magnitude more affordable!). This suggests, to me at least, that Leica need to do all they can to find IQ advantages.....

Or have I got everything completely wrong??

Guy

[stunsworth]

Guy, I'm not sure about the point you are making. All I could really extract from your post is that you'd be able to select the lens manually rather than have to use coded lenses.

 

I feel the reference to half stops is a red herring. That's to do with exposure control rather than dynamic range, or am I missing something?

[guywalder]

Steve, I'll try again, being more succinct!

In the film days: Leica's niche was the best quality available from the 35mm format, as long as you could live without auto this and auto that.

In the digital days, that niche is potentially much larger, because MF digital is so expensive.

But Leica seem to be putting more emphasis on a 'minimalist user interface' than on maximising all the IQ possibilities.

I gave DR and lens coding as examples of this philosophy. My point about DR being that I cannot maximise my use of DR because the exposure control adjustments are too crude (so I cant absolutely optimise for the highlights, in the same way i could with 1/3 stop adjustments, for example)

Guy

[stunsworth]

I don't see the adjustments as crude at all, with half stop adjustments the most you can be 'out' in exposure is a quarter of a stop. I really don't see that as being an issue. As has been mentioned elsewhere the aperture ring can be set to any intermediate setting, not just the convenient clicks so in practice you can have any setting you wish.

 

After using a modern digital SLR a minimalist interface is precisly what a lot of people are looking for <grin>

[guywalder]

Steve,

I have nothing against a simple interface. But is that why people pay Leica prices?

Maybe it is, maybe thats why people buy an M8 and CV lenses?

Aperture rings can be set to intermediate positions, but then you are into estimating (a bit liek trying to interpret an M8 histogram ). Alternatively you could use a Zeiss lens with 1/3 stop indents....... or use A N Other manufacturers camera, and a Zeiss lens and you have a smaller DR, but a much easier histogram and control of Aperture And shutter in 1/3 stops.

I'm not argueing for a feature packed Leica, just one that includes better features to optimise image quality because that seems to me to be Leica's raison d'etre.

Guy

[stunsworth]

Guy, in all my years of photography I have never felt the need to use anything more 'accurate' than half click stops. I've always felt that the precision they give more than adequate. I realise that other people's opinions differ, but I can only express my own experiences in this area.

[bill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Please forgive me for I have only skim-read the OP (life is too short), but here is my view:

 

Simplicity good, complexity bad

Intuitive user interface essential

Maximise the benefit of quality of optics by maximising efficiency of the imaging chain - sensor, firmware, software, etc.

Weathersealed

Reliable

 

I don't care about maintaining the M form-factor if it makes more sense not to do so, as long as it keeps the benefits of the form - portability, discretion, etc.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[earleygallery]

I thought something more radical was being proposed, a new camera format somewhere between '35mm' and MF.

 

Of course that's possible but would mean a whole new range of lenses too. The point of the DMR and M8 is that they accept all of the existing lenses - amazing really that you can buy a new digital camera the readily accepts the same manufacturers lenses from the 30's. How many other manufacturers support their products in that way?

 

Sorry I don't get the arugument over f stops. you can easily set the f stop between full and half, and with AE mode you have entirely stepless shutter speeds in any case (and you can still meter 'manually' by taking an appopriate reading, locking it and then recomposing).

[DavidERuck]

With all due respect, after many years of experience, I agree that quick half-stop aperture controls (recognizing the possibility of between-click stop downs exist) are adequate, as that allows for no more than a one-quarter stop "error", as has been pointed out on this thread. It seems sometimes that much of what we discuss about the long-awaited M8 is of the angel-on-the-head-of-a-pin variety, and we have lost the trees for the forest. The quality of the images that can be produced by the new "system" was previously unavailable in the format, and compare well to MF, from a camera that can be carried in one's (winter coat) pocket. To be sure, processing and IR color shift remain cumbersome but will soon recede in importance as the hardware and software updates come onstream. The one concern that remains about our new tool is indeed the apparent lack of "weatherproofing"; I, for one, have stopped babying the camera and have worked with it in the snow and rain, without problem to date. However, I ain't gonna take it to the beach, yet.

[guywalder]

James,

I'n not suggesting a new format, but I do think Leica could be doing more to get more IQ out of the M8 to help differentiate Leica from the other 35mm legacy systems (I have one so I use that, but I think the ideas also apply to the DMR).

Your right, there are stepless shutter speeds, however not user settable and that is really the point I am trying to make. I dont think Leica are offering enough user controllable IQ options on a system basis.

Maybe I have missed the point, and really people buy Leica's because they are simple, but then why pay the premium?

 

Bill,

I'm talking about your 3rd point. I see that as Leica's raise d'etre, but you only put it as 3rd in your list.

 

Steve,

fair enough, but to get the absolute best out of the lens and the picture finer graduations in exposure help. I dont know if you read Irwin Puts lens reviews? but he always points out that exact exposure is essential to getting all thats possible out of a lens. If you are not worried out getting all thats possible, then why buy Leica?

 

If simplicity as all you want, the CV lenses, and cameras should fit the bill shouldnt they?

 

Guy

[Shootist]

Your f/ stop argument is without merit. There is total control of the exposure. Lenses and shutter speed give you 1/2 stop then you have a menu item that gives you 1/3 stops up and down. 1/3 of 1/2 is 1/6, what more control do you want.

 

Other then that I really don't see any point to your post. Try going out and taking some pictures.

[guywalder]

David,

I guess I havn't put my point very clearly.

I'm not talking about the M8 in comparison to MF film, I'm talking about Leica's strategy given, on one hand, that status of Canon, Nikon et al's 35mm legacy digital and MF Digital on the other.

That the M8 is better than film is irrelevant, Leica were having trouble making money selling only film cameras.

Is the M8 image quality now (or soon with V1.10) far enough ahead of the rest of the digital pack to justify Leica prices?

Put another way: Leica have put a digital sensor in an M body. That is a good start, but they dont appear to have taken on board that the sensor (and software, and RAW developer) are fundamental to IQ, and to maxmise IQ you need to be able to optimise not only the lens, but also exposure And all the other parameters that are, and can be, ajustable.

Guy

[guywalder]

Ed,

exposure compensation does not effect manually set shutter speeds.

what i am talking about is maxmising performance, for me at least, that means making manual settings to get exactly what I want. I can do that in finer graduations on my Nikon. Also on my Nikon all my parameter settings are baked into the RAW file, I can leave them as they are or change them in post. On the M8 I cant even access the parameters in the menu

I am not tring to bash the M8, or Leica. I am just trying to suggest that they have lots of potential to open up their market niche!

Guy

[stunsworth]

Guy, as I mentioned earlier the _most_ that the camera can be out in exposure is a quarter stop. In practice it's likely to be even less as this represents the maximum error. It really is a non issue in practice IMHO and begs the question what does 'correct exposure' mean to you? How accurate do you need to be, and how are you deciding the exposure in the first place (highlights, midtones, shadows, averaged spot readings)?

[Iron Flatline]

I think I get what you're saying: if Leica is going to commit to digital, then it is time to step above emulating film and stretch the boundaries. The problem is that the market isn't there for that right now, esp. for Leica users. I mean that with all respect. The primary buyer of an M8 is someone wanting to port years of film fun and experience over into the digital realm.

 

The changes you're looking for make sense - but Leica would do well from a marketing point of view to introduce new technologies on another camera first - use the Digilux to set themselves apart. If the users demand it, that kind of technology (extreme dynamic range, for instance) can be added to the M8 later.

[ddp]

I'll approach this from a slightly different POV - the M8 was developed for the minions of M users with tasty glass that wanted, no DEMANDED a digital solution. What has happened - and we've seen it on this board - is that the M8 has drawn interest from those who have never owned an M body before, or had no M glass. Do these users see the need to take the M8 a step beyond?

 

I see where you're going with this - but Leica bodies have always demanded a premium above the others. What makes the R9 different from a Nikon F6? Or an MP different from the Zeiss Ikon? A $5000 M8 is right in line with other professional offerings - it's up to the photographer to use the tools at hand, and those great lenses.

[earleygallery]

How about a stepless shutter speed dial that operates like a volume control? You could make minute adjustments of shutter speed in addition to half/quarter an f stop. That would be even better that the shutter dial of the M5! (William L?).

 

From my albeit limited experience with digital, however, I thought that you can make pretty significant adjustments to the RAW file in terms of exposure, unlike say slide film which has to be right first time.

 

As Steve has said this really is a non issue in practical terms, cosidering latitude and elements within the image.

 

As an aside how many of us have taken photographs which we really like, but have been totally off in terms of correct exposure? I know I have. Technically correct is not always best.

 

As for lenses, the law of diminishing returns apply. The CV lenses are indeed very very good. But Leica are the very very best.

[tom0511]

I dont see how 1/2 steps or dr or lens-coding (which other brand you can use 50 year old lenses?) is a problem.

 

If you ask: where do we go from here?

My dream is a full frame sensor for the M - in combo with the excellent lenses it could give even more resolution.

 

Another idea: A "thicker" sensor which allows to influence the DOF-appearance

Kind of 3D-image recording

Another thing I see room for improvement is tomake the camera sealed and weatherproof.

Other than that I thnk we have reached a level of digital photography whixh is quit satisfying.

 

Frienkly I do not miss much in the M8.

cheers,tom

[jaapv]

Steve,

I have nothing against a simple interface. But is that why people pay Leica prices?

Maybe it is, maybe thats why people buy an M8 and CV lenses?

Aperture rings can be set to intermediate positions, but then you are into estimating (a bit liek trying to interpret an M8 histogram ). Alternatively you could use a Zeiss lens with 1/3 stop indents....... or use A N Other manufacturers camera, and a Zeiss lens and you have a smaller DR, but a much easier histogram and control of Aperture And shutter in 1/3 stops.

I'm not argueing for a feature packed Leica, just one that includes better features to optimise image quality because that seems to me to be Leica's raison d'etre.

Guy

 

 

Why should one be estimating? The internal exposure meter is extremely accurate. Just follow the little arrows. The clicks are not very interesting.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[DavidERuck]

Guy:

Thanks for your response, and I do have your point. I disagree with a criticism that holds that there is insufficient exposure control; I agree that processing software is extremely important to us - perhaps roughly analogous to keeping the working temps of the chems within spec - and that it is insufficiently developed at this point in time (no pun intended). As to the justification for paying premium prices? That calls for an understanding of psychology I don't possess. But I have been working with the summilux 75 recently and it is worth a multiple of what I paid. The M8, even at this still relatively underdeveloped state, has provided me with new joys in my photography, and, I daresay, some darn good images as a result. It has quickly become an extension of my eye. Although my eye is still blind to IR .