M8, where do we go from here?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What I would like to see is some quality leap in the 4/3 sensor technology, preferably using a CCD. Not that the D3 is bad, quite the opposite, but it would be nice to get results that usable in conjunction with M8 prints.Now, especially in larger prints, there is a different look that really hits the eye. It would be great to have the abilty to use the M8 and D3 (D4???) side by side, each in its own application. I would love to have something handy and long for wildlife, with a smallish sensor. The DMR is too bulky even if the sensor is close,I suspect the same will go for the R10, I don't like the Leicanons, lenses too large/heavy, totally different look in the images again.

Failing that, maybe a Visoflex IV with a few lenses please?? Please?

[Advertisement]

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

[george +]

For one, I think one half stops are quite adequate. But what do I know - particularly with the meter, good as it is, measuring averages of sort?

 

On the other hand, it is only the clicks that are half stop. The aperture diaphragm is continuous.

[guywalder]

Iron,

'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.'

Thats largely what I am getting at. Not for the M8 neccessarily, but for the future. The M8 is tapping into a great well of pent up demand for a digital M and even with its difficult birth I'm sure its going to be a great success.

After that though I would like to see Leica pushing the envelope.

 

Age of Film => a very small niche for Leica between the convenience of auto everything 35mm and the better IQ of medium format = difficult to make money.

 

Age of Digital => the gap between '35mm' and MF is now much larger, so potentially Leica can make a bigger, more commercially viable, niche for themselves.

 

My concern is that, at least as implimented on the M8, they have given me less control over my 'in camera' image than I get from my DSLR, and in doing so they have (to an extent) squandered some of their potential.

 

I dont really understand why some of you are so determined that you dont want more control? You dont have to use it if you dont want to. Heck my DSLR lets me choose whether I change shutter And aperture in 1/2 or 1/3 stops. It has pages and pages of menus that I hardly ever look at, I set them when it was new, and i never look at them again, But I have the choice!

In order to keep the user interface clean Leica could offer a standard configuration, which is only changeable by hooking the camera to a pc, for example.

By the way, most of the time i am happy shooting fast and loose, but sometimes i want to really optimise my picture, and I can already do that much better with my DSLR (more exposure control = less pulling up of the shadows in post, more tone control, more contrast control, more hue control etc).

If you only ever shot 1 type of film, then this will be a load of hot air for you. If you match your film to your subject, and use filters to correct for light that is not exactly 5200K then you will know what I mean.

 

By the way, my Sekonic light meter gives me an output in 1/10th of a stop....

 

Guy

[xray]

To be very blunt I think Leica designed the M8 for the amateur. Face it leica hasn't pushed the envelope since the M3 / M2's came out. I shoot leicas and really love them but I don't use them because they're cutting edge. I use them because they focus exceptionally well under dim light and they're small and quiet. Leica glass is very good but so is any number of other makers. Even in the lens department Leica is no longer in front but just keeping up with Zeiss. The M8 is no cutting edge machine either. It holds it's own against the Canon 5D at almost double the price but lacking features of the Canon. The 1DsII although more expensive leaves it in the dust and my guess is the new 1DsIII at about the same price as the M8 will seriously leave it behind. Basically it took leica 7 years to introduce a camera that'sold technology, lacking features and marginal in a number of areas such as reliability and IR issues. I'm not trying to put the M8 down and hope the owners get good use out of it but I am a realist and know digital and have been fully digital in my commercial studio for 7 years.

 

I don't believe the 35mm format digital will ever match the performance of the MF digital backs. Even the 17 MP 1DsII is short on quality and there's little chance a 1.33 10mp camera can approach a MF back of 22 to 39 MP. If Leica is really serious they're going to have to reinvent the digital camera. It's going to have to be some major advancement in technology and a full frame sensor of at least 18-22 mp. It's just like film though, every advancement in 35mm sensor technology will advance the MF technology too. 35mm performance will never catch up with MF performance. The thing that wil happen is 35mm digital will someday equate to todays mf technology but not equal the technology of that time.

 

Honestly how many M8 owners push the envelope of their camera. My guess is most shoot JPG's and send the files to the local amateur lab for 4x6 prints. The only way to get the most of the M8 is to shoot raw and really know what you're doing not just make straight conversions. This is what the camera and raw files are about. You have the option and ability to make the image what you want. You are in controll not some engineer in Germany or Japan. The M8 has so much more potential that any images that I've seen. Why not learn the camers and the work flow and make your own look and use the camera to the max and not like a $4750 point and shoot.

[rob_x2004]

Ray you have been spying on peoples exifs again havent you.

[guywalder]

xray, stop beating about the bush and tell us what you really think!

 

actually I think you are being a bit harsh, although thinking in the same direction as me. Leica not pushing the envelope left them in a dangerously small niche in the past, but I think they have a real opportunity to change that now.

I have absolutely no problem with people who want to use their Leica's for 6x4s from quicksave, I just dont want Leica to forget the top end users. It wasnt such an issue with film, it absolutely is the issue with digital.

IMHO of course....

Guy

[Guest stnami]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Donald you will get yourself banned for making sense...............the digital forum will love you........

 

Guy stop making sense someone will eventually understand you

[Guest stnami]

I just dont want Leica to forget the top end users. It wasnt such an issue with film, it absolutely is the issue with digital

... most maufacturers were even able to produce point and shoots for top end users.... not so in digital

Rolling back to film ain't so bad, shot 3 rolls of B&W, processed and scanned (what I needed) on the same day. Back when I had all those negs to scan I gave up...still love my digital

[guywalder]

stnami,

life is too short to scan everything! especially at the speed my LS8000 works

 

'most maufacturers were even able to produce point and shoots for top end users.... not so in digital'

 

case in point, GR1 was a fabulous film camera, GR Digital (when in finally arrived) was not even close to good enough

Guy

[stunsworth]

Many people bought film Ms for reasons other than image quality. Shape and form being one of them. That is true with the M8 - I admit that there's also a certain type of person who collects Leica gear for the snob value, I've been lucky in that I've yet to meet one.

 

I don't worry about having control to 1/3 stop on aperture and speeds because it doesn't make any difference in the real world. It looks good on a spec sheet I'll grant you, and it gives you something that perhaps your main competetor doesn't have, but it provides the photographer - or me at least - with no practical advantage over a 'cruder' solution. In other words if I had this extra control I wouldn't be bothered to use it. I'm not that anal about exposure - which depends on what you are metering from in the first place.

 

When people were shooting slides with an M if the exposure could be seen to be wrong it was grossly wrong - by stops, not a fraction of a stop. I would defy anyone to look at a slide or a digital image and say that it would have been materially improved if the exposure was changed by 1/20th of a stop.

 

This is all my personal opinion, and people are perfectly free to disagree, but I do sometimes think that people worry too much about technical minutae and not enough about photography.

[Guest stnami]

case in point, GR1 was a fabulous film camera, GR Digital (when in finally arrived) was not even close to good enough

.... hey the GRD makes a great spot meter for a film camera with the added bonus of taking some damn fine B&W photos

[jaapv]

Iron,

'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.'

Thats largely what I am getting at. Not for the M8 neccessarily, but for the future. The M8 is tapping into a great well of pent up demand for a digital M and even with its difficult birth I'm sure its going to be a great success.

After that though I would like to see Leica pushing the envelope.

 

Age of Film => a very small niche for Leica between the convenience of auto everything 35mm and the better IQ of medium format = difficult to make money.

 

Age of Digital => the gap between '35mm' and MF is now much larger, so potentially Leica can make a bigger, more commercially viable, niche for themselves.

 

My concern is that, at least as implimented on the M8, they have given me less control over my 'in camera' image than I get from my DSLR, and in doing so they have (to an extent) squandered some of their potential.

 

I dont really understand why some of you are so determined that you dont want more control? You dont have to use it if you dont want to. Heck my DSLR lets me choose whether I change shutter And aperture in 1/2 or 1/3 stops. It has pages and pages of menus that I hardly ever look at, I set them when it was new, and i never look at them again, But I have the choice!

In order to keep the user interface clean Leica could offer a standard configuration, which is only changeable by hooking the camera to a pc, for example.

By the way, most of the time i am happy shooting fast and loose, but sometimes i want to really optimise my picture, and I can already do that much better with my DSLR (more exposure control = less pulling up of the shadows in post, more tone control, more contrast control, more hue control etc).

If you only ever shot 1 type of film, then this will be a load of hot air for you. If you match your film to your subject, and use filters to correct for light that is not exactly 5200K then you will know what I mean.

 

By the way, my Sekonic light meter gives me an output in 1/10th of a stop....

 

Guy

 

Guy, if the DSLR is the better camera for the job at hand, why don't you simply use that tool instead of complaining about other camera's that are less suitable? The maker provides them, the craftsman chooses. It is no use for a streetphotographer to complain that he was beat up by Hells Angels for using a too-obtrusive 1D with white bazooka when he should have used a Leica M. Horses for courses.

[jaapv]

To be very blunt I think Leica designed the M8 for the amateur. Face it leica hasn't pushed the envelope since the M3 / M2's came out. I shoot leicas and really love them but I don't use them because they're cutting edge. I use them because they focus exceptionally well under dim light and they're small and quiet. Leica glass is very good but so is any number of other makers. Even in the lens department Leica is no longer in front but just keeping up with Zeiss. The M8 is no cutting edge machine either. It holds it's own against the Canon 5D at almost double the price but lacking features of the Canon. The 1DsII although more expensive leaves it in the dust and my guess is the new 1DsIII at about the same price as the M8 will seriously leave it behind. Basically it took leica 7 years to introduce a camera that'sold technology, lacking features and marginal in a number of areas such as reliability and IR issues. I'm not trying to put the M8 down and hope the owners get good use out of it but I am a realist and know digital and have been fully digital in my commercial studio for 7 years.

 

I don't believe the 35mm format digital will ever match the performance of the MF digital backs. Even the 17 MP 1DsII is short on quality and there's little chance a 1.33 10mp camera can approach a MF back of 22 to 39 MP. If Leica is really serious they're going to have to reinvent the digital camera. It's going to have to be some major advancement in technology and a full frame sensor of at least 18-22 mp. It's just like film though, every advancement in 35mm sensor technology will advance the MF technology too. 35mm performance will never catch up with MF performance. The thing that wil happen is 35mm digital will someday equate to todays mf technology but not equal the technology of that time.

 

Honestly how many M8 owners push the envelope of their camera. My guess is most shoot JPG's and send the files to the local amateur lab for 4x6 prints. The only way to get the most of the M8 is to shoot raw and really know what you're doing not just make straight conversions. This is what the camera and raw files are about. You have the option and ability to make the image what you want. You are in controll not some engineer in Germany or Japan. The M8 has so much more potential that any images that I've seen. Why not learn the camers and the work flow and make your own look and use the camera to the max and not like a $4750 point and shoot.

 

Did you ever make decent-sized prints from a M8? This amateur has professional 60x40 prints made for display. And is happy with them. I don't think you should turn this into a low-grade-high-level user controversy.

[Guest stnami]

It is no use for a streetphotographer to complain that he was beat up by Hells Angels for using a too-obtrusive 1D with white bazooka when he should have used a Leica M.

... sounds like a very niave statement to me, you point anything in the face of some of my mates from the nomads and your bones will rattle.

[jaapv]

:d

[guywalder]

Steve,

'Many people bought film Ms for reasons other than image quality.'

I hear you, but there are plenty of other options which do the job just as well, Bessa, Zeiss Ikon for example, I am (was) prepared to pay the extra for Leica because I expact animage quality premium.

As for exposure (and it was, after all just 1 example) jsut because you dont need it why shouldnt I have it? At risk of being blunt, I dont care about exposing slide film, I'm talking about a digital camera. An example, 2 days ago I was taking pictures under an elevated motoway. The sky was very bright, the underside of the motorway very dark. It would have been impossible with slide film, no question. With digital I push the sky as far right on the histogram, and then I develop the file twice in post, once for the sky and once for the dark areas. If I cant optimise every bit of exposure then that second file looses quality.

By the way, 1/3rd stops are already industry standard...

 

Jaap,

I have not said that a DSLR is better, neither have I complained that the M8 is less suitable. What I have said, and will repeat here, is that Leica are missing the opportunity to attract more customers to their digital products because they are limiting the possibilities to optimise the image quality. (see also the latest thread on 8bit vs 16bit, oh you already posted there as well!)

 

Just because you dont want it, why deny me? Leica's market has been shinking for years, and here is a chance to change the tide, and you really dont want Leica to do that???

 

There are, of course, more important things in lfe than this discussion!

Guy

[xray]

xray, stop beating about the bush and tell us what you really think!

 

actually I think you are being a bit harsh, although thinking in the same direction as me. Leica not pushing the envelope left them in a dangerously small niche in the past, but I think they have a real opportunity to change that now.

I have absolutely no problem with people who want to use their Leica's for 6x4s from quicksave, I just dont want Leica to forget the top end users. It wasnt such an issue with film, it absolutely is the issue with digital.

IMHO of course....

Guy

 

 

I don't think I'm being harsh but think I'm being arealistic. I fully agree with your other points. Leica needs to be a leadear again. Leica stepping up and opening new doors in technology and quality can only improve the industry and our final product. In my book it's all about the final product.

 

jaapv:

 

There you go again thinking like an amateur. The world doesn't revolve around light jet or epson prints. Some of us actually use our cameras to earn our living. Shame on us! In my world it's about reproduction with 4 color litho printing. There's a big difference in how your epson or lightjet reproduces your file vs how the 4 color press prints it. Remember, as a professional you're no longer just trying to please yourself but ypu're answering to art directors, creative directors and clients down the line that can go anywhere and use anyone they want. My guess is these people that I answer to are going to be a heck of a lot more critical about the finished product then 99% of the M8 owners. The M8 eventually will have a very small place in the pro world but not untill it get straightened out, It might be the M9 or M10 before this happens but it's just not there yet. No matter how much you or ayone else likes their M8 it's just not a workable tool for many of us at this time.

 

Please don't think I'm making a personal attack on you or you M8's, I'm not. There have been a number of questions on a couple of the forums about what the M8 should be or where leica should go and I've responded to that and not tried to make unfair statements about the M8. I think I look at photography in a different way than you. I don't think I'm quite as emotional about the M8 as you are since I don't have a pair of them in my case. I don't have to own one to make statements about what I would like to see or where I would like leica to go. I have 4 decades of pro experience with leica and feel I have a darn good idea of where they've been and where they need to go to stay in the game. We just differ in opinion. You see leica from an amateur perspective and I see it from a professioanl perspective. I've shot enough different equipemnt in 42 years to have a good perspective on what's what and as I mentioned I feel the M8 is really short on performance compared to the rest of the comperable market. Just my professional opinion.

[jaapv]

There you go again thinking like an amateur. The world doesn't revolve around light jet or epson prints. Some of us actually use our cameras to earn our living. Shame on us! In my world it's about reproduction with 4 color litho printing. There's a big difference in how your epson or lightjet reproduces your file vs how the 4 color press prints it. Remember, as a professional you're no longer just trying to please yourself but ypu're answering to art directors, creative directors and clients down the line that can go anywhere and use anyone they want.

.

 

Yes - I am an amateur - and as such I am as a group far more interesting to sell cameras to than the smallish number of pros that work in or for the graphical industry. There are a number of photographers on this forum earning their living with Leica camera's; they should answer you. But I object to the use of the word amateur as a pejorative as you seem to be doing. Not all non-paid photographers spend their time snapping Auntie Priscilla and her poodle, not everybody making a living with his camera produces results that are worth looking at. The division in expertise cannot be drawn along these lines, that is blinkered thinking.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[xray]

Yes - I am an amateur - and as such I am as a group far more interesting to sell cameras to than the smallish number of pros that work in or for the graphical industry. There are a number of photographers on this forum earning their living with Leica camera's; they should answer you. But I object to the use of the word amateur as a pejorative as you seem to be doing. Not all non-paid photographers spend their time snapping Auntie Priscilla and her poodle, not everybody making a living with his camera produces results that are worth looking at. The division in expertise cannot be drawn along these lines, that is blinkered thinking.

 

 

You pointed out to me on RFF that this is a "professional" camera and i'm making a statement as a professional. You can't have it both ways, professional camera one day and amateur the next. Certainly the bulk of the M8 owners are amateurs and i think I pointed out my feelings about the M8 being directed at the amateur. If it's a supposed pro camera then it better come up to the standards of the pro industry.

 

jaapv, if you don't like my response to a question then simply do not respond because the initial response to the question was not directed at you. My response was based on where I think Leica needs to go with their line relative to the technology. I don't know what you shoot and don't really care. Your answers are defensive of a camera I don't have any desire to own in it's present form. If you like your M8's then great enjoy them but let people have their say. You're welcome to put your 2 cents in from your perspective but I can add my 2 cents too from my perspective. My equipment whether my M's or my 8x10 Deardorff or whatever I'm using is nothing more than a tool to capture my thoughts on film or in digital form. I'm not emotionally attached to any camera or brand and could'nt care less if it says Leica, Nikon, Canon, Fed or Westinghouse as long as it does what I want and to my high standards.

[Iron Flatline]

xray, the only comment I have re. your comments was a recent poll (unscientific) that showed something like 85% of M8 users shooting RAW - this only as a response to the JPG comment.

 

....and here in LA, a lot of pro-photogs shoot RAW and JPG because speed matters. If "TomKat" are walking out of the Ivy on Robertson drunk and yelling at each other you don't have the time to process the shot - it needs to get uploaded to the Wire so you can get paid. You can process it later (in case People Magazine wants a nice copy), but hopefully there's enough skill to get a properly exposed shot without having to fix it C1 later :-)

 

JPGs are not proof of amateurism, they're quite sufficient for a good journalistic photographer.

 

The M8 is a very good product for a certain niche of serious amateurs and some professionals. It was built because there was an existing film business, whereby the company had the opportunity to take that existing installed base of lenses and loyalty, and port it into the digital market. Leica is not a digital technology company, all their technology comes from others. I do not believe their current business plan calls for the creation of a major in-house R&D division, so the company must rely on strategic relationships to maximize its lens know-how and brand.