M8, where do we go from here?

[ddp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

xray - I enjoy your posts on both RFF and here, especially when it comes to the M8. You provide a refreshing and needed commentary on certain things.

 

jaapv - I'm another pro chiming in here - the Leicas I use are film M's, for digital it's all Nikon. I have stated this much before in other threads - and I was extremely close to buying a DMR for my R system. The M8 is still nascent technology in my eyes for what I am doing - and the reliability factor is also something that concerns me. I simply cannot go out on a shoot and contend with equipment failure, strange SD card occurences, banding etc. These are problems I dealt with in the early generation of the Nikon DSLR line - and it wasn't fun. Explaining to PR people that you had a problem with anything is more than embarassing, it's potentially fatal from a work standpoint.

 

As xray has commented - cameras are tools, at least in my world. There is certainly a cult like obsession among some early M8 adaptors...and I'm simply looking forward to when the dust settles and we can all just show pictures without sparking ludicrous debates. I enjoy a good debate as much as anyone else....but fanboy insanity is a bit too much. This is not a comment directed at anyone in particular, it is merely an observation I have seen from the day this camera hit the shelves.

[Advertisement]

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

[xray]

85% raw is a good start. Raw is the only way the maximum can be extracted from any digital file if it's saved as a TIF or photoshop file. As you know to get the most out of a raw file a properly profiles system is needed and converting a raw is more involved than just opening the file in the converter and cilcking process. I hope the folks shooting raw take the time to learn fine points of image correction and conversion and develope their own look to their work. There's so much potential in the raw file compared to in camera jpg's.

 

I hope i didn't make it sound like jpg files are amateur because they aren't. As you say the journalistic world is almost exclusively jpg oriented and for a good reason, speed and the ability to send files quickly. As you know the newspaper business doesn't require the highest quality file like the commercial world does. I only shoot raw for processing to a final tif and work in 16 bit to preserve data. At the end of the editing process I convert to 8 bit and release these file to the client. I also work in the raw converters curves to establish my own "emulsion" or look to the image. The only time I shoot jpg's are for contact sheets. I shoot both raw and the smallest jpg's and use them to generate contacts in Qimage.

 

ddp I appreciate your comments. I realy try to be unbiased regarding my comments and I really don't care what the name on the front is as long as it meets my needs. I'm in full agreement about issues and the use of the M8 for professional work. One of the fastest ways to loose a client is spend a bunch of time fiddling with equipment that doesn't work wild models and AD's are standing waiting on you. It one thing on personal time but a definate no no on the job. I too look forward to the M? digital settling out if it ever does. Also feel the specs of the camera will have to come more into line with what's expected and needed in my area of commercial work before I buy one. I know some people have thought I'm nuts for the things I would like to dee in the M digital but the features and improvements that I would like to see will only make a better camera. When the needs of the professioanal market are met then the amateur market will gain too. Pushing this technology only makes a better and more usable product for everyone. I too started with Nikon with the original D1 and later went to Canon. The D1 served a purpose in the beginning but professional and amateur demands pushed the limits of technology and look at where we are today, 17mp DSLR with extremely fast write speeds, exceptional battery life and excellent AF and vastly improved flash TTL. The first DSLR that I used was one of the Kodaks with the massive pack on the bottom and was $17,000 and some where around 1.5mp. It was sold to AP and absolutely STUNK. If the owners of these cameras had been satisfied and defended them to the end and accepted anything Kodak threw at them guess where the technology would be today. Kodak didn't reapond but tried to push later cameras like the 14n on the customer stating it was simply the finest DSLR in the world. I distinctly remember them saying this because it was looking at buying one untill I tried it. I needed a full frame sensor for my work with tilt shift lenses and thought the 14n might be the answer. The Kodak story is history now and they no longer make pro cameras or backs. Kodak should be a lesson to leica and every other company that the market isn't totally brain dead. It takes more than a name and a lot of words to make a product a success. Reputation can't carry a company for ever. Kodak was resting on reputation and an ad campaing to save their product. The one thing the 14n had was advanced technology. The problem was they just could'nt make it work with reliability. The Kodak story is proof that the professional customer swings a lot of weight in the market and demands more than words and a name. The good part is it caused the other companies, Nikon and Canon, to work harder and now look at what we have. Whether the M8 survives or Leica fails I can't say but the lesson in Kodak is they better get their act together or they'll be joining Kodak.

[hankg]

There's a big difference in how your epson or lightjet reproduces your file vs how the 4 color press prints it.

Yes, the color gamut of a CMYK press is a lot smaller. A web press of the sort used to print magazines can reproduce about 1600 colors. Coated 200 line screen sheetfed is in the low 2,000's. Although some art directors might demand MF backs and some stock agencies 12+ MP uninterpolated files the fact is that a properly exposed and processed file from the M8 or for that matter from the 11MP 1Ds (which some fashion shooters continue to favor over the MKII and even medium format) once its squashed down to the gamut and resolution of screened and printed offset will match anything out there quality wise for most subjects up to perhaps full page size.

 

What many clients demand has as much to do with perception and 'the common wisdom' as with actual fact.

[xray]

Yes, the color gamut of a CMYK press is a lot smaller. A web press of the sort used to print magazines can reproduce about 1600 colors. Coated 200 line screen sheetfed is in the low 2,000's. Although some art directors might demand MF backs and some stock agencies 12+ MP uninterpolated files the fact is that a properly exposed and processed file from the M8 or for that matter from the 11MP 1Ds (which some fashion shooters continue to favor over the MKII and even medium format) once its squashed down to the gamut and resolution of screened and printed offset will match anything out there quality wise for most subjects up to perhaps full page size.

 

What many clients demand has as much to do with perception and 'the common wisdom' as with actual fact.

 

Hank I agree 100%. You're throwing so much of the information away when the ink hits the paper. It makes me sick knowing what I give them on disc and then see what comes out of the press but that's the best we have for most applications.

 

One rule I live by is never argue with the client. If they want 8x10 chrome, and I have some from time to time, you don't argue if you want to keep a client. My policy is let them believe what they want and let them pay the bills.Most people that aren't regular clients that call up want to know what I'm shooting on and how many MP. They're paying the bill so let them have what they want. I don't mind trying to give them a little education if they're receptive but I never force something on them they don't want. This has kept me in business since 1971.

[hankg]

One rule I live by is never argue with the client. If they want 8x10 chrome, and I have some from time to time, you don't argue if you want to keep a client. My policy is let them believe what they want and let them pay the bills.Most people that aren't regular clients that call up want to know what I'm shooting on and how many MP. They're paying the bill so let them have what they want. I don't mind trying to give them a little education if they're receptive but I never force something on them they don't want. This has kept me in business since 1971.

 

Well said.

[guywalder]

hmm, dont recall an impatient art director ever asking for either:

a) good enough

or

a simple user interface

 

how about coming at this from a different angle.

Lets say Leica give me what I want, why would that reduce the appeal of their products to guys like Jaap or Steve?

As an example, 1/3rd stop exposure adjustment, its already in the menu, but at the moment I cant use it in manual mode. If on the M9 I Could use it in manual mode, what is the downside?

Another example, an option to save files in full 16bit. An option, not a factory fixed function. Whats the downside?

The only possible disadvantage I can see is aditions to the user interface, but hey it would be childs play to include an option 'minimalist user interface' / 'all options user interface'.

 

Just to reiterate, I'm not criticising the M8, but I am disapointed in Leica's product stategy. The things I want to see are not new technology, for the most part they are not even new features. I just want the option to optimise, in camera, as far as I can for those occasions when sweating the details really matters.

Oh yes, and if you think the additional development cost would be a disadvantage, well thats only going to be the case if Leica sell too few cameras, which will only be the case if their products aren't attractive enough, which brings us right back to where we started

Guy

[xray]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree Guy. Why not put them in the menue like Canon does custom functions. Use them or ignore them, your choice. Set your preferences once and forget. I like the 1/3 stops on my Zeiss glass vs 1/2 stops. It's not a critical feature but one I would select. I use the 1/3 stops in speed and aperture on my Canons. Also I shoot raw and convert my raw to 16 bit tif for editing then convert to 8 bit for the clients. This preserves more of the information in the file during editing. My thoughts are why throw information away when you don't have to. Give the client the best image you can. It is my impression Leica calls the M8 a professional camera. Why not put professional features in it?

[jaapv]

Lets say Leica give me what I want, why would that reduce the appeal of their products to guys like Jaap or Steve?

 

Guy

 

It wouldn't, because when all is said and done we want the same thing you guys want: optimum quality and usability. But the price might go stratospheric., which would be a problem for us all.

[guywalder]

@ Jaap,

'It wouldn't,' Hurrah!!

'But the price might go stratospheric'

err you quoted my previous post, and deleted my comments about cost !?

a) your speculating here, and being pessimistic

as you have been following me from the start you know that all I am asking for is better access to the capability thats already inside the camera. That does not make the product a single cent more expensive to make, it might add development time (but regarding bit depth it may have reduced development time...) but that as you no doubt know is actually quite easy to amortise over the production volume, and since I am suggesting an improvement to the product you can expect the production volume to go up anyway!

c) If giving me better access to whats already inside the camera is astronomically expensive, then who will be able to afford an M9 with a bigger sensor, more Mp etc etc Sounds like the only customers who will be able to afford that are going to be NASA and the US Army...

 

@xray,

I agree as well

Guy

[Guest stnami]

Begs the question is it really worth the effort by Leica or are they better off catering for the last generation of Henri Cartier-Bresson romantics............. a major movement on LUF that lobbies keenly for the old nostalic ways..............

[hankg]

I think if there is nothing in the hardware preventing 16bit or at least 14bit output that you will see it in a future firmware release. The new management team at Leica seem very responsive to users. I think they should also add user selectable lens profiles (rather then exclusive dependence on the 6-bit coding). Once they get past the 1.10 release you are likely to see future firmware adjustments including user input/experience.

 

This is the first time in decades I'm optimistic about Leica's future. As a result of the halo effect of the M8 they are selling more lenses (and film cameras) and M8's are still moving off the shelves at a pace that Leica has not experienced in decades. The current M8 may not meet everyone's needs or expectations of a digital M, but it was good enough to get me back using Leica for the first time in years and it seems from M8 sales there are quite a few like me.

 

Unlike the R-D1 for Epson, the Kodak DSLR line or even the Leica R, the M8 is at the core of Leica's business. Leica and RF phototography are synonimous, it is the DNA of the Leica brand and the companies reason for being. So I think there is no doubt about their commitment to the digital M platform and it's continuing improvement.

 

We are not so far off (maybe 6-8 years?) from the point where all top of the line digital cameras will be able to produce a spectacular 2 page spread. At that point it will be form factor, ergonomics and the lens line that move buying decisions. If Canon launches a 22MP DSLR that's going to suck a lot of oxygen out of the MF back space. Sure a 30MP back has more resolution but it will not give you any quality edge in 90% of real world applications.

 

I'm looking forward to the time when we get back to a situation where the focus shifts back to the ergonomics of the camera and the quality of the lens line rather then MP, firmware and noise levels.

[guywalder]

Hank,

Amen to all you wrote!

My only concern is that Leica may interpret the inevitable success of the M8 as meaning that they hit the bullseye.

The M8 has plenty to commend it, but IMHO there were a number of product engineering decisions which have reduced its appeal. If Leica dont recognise that, then they may be in trouble once the M8 has soaked up the latent demand for a digital M.

Put another way, the M9 may end up selling only to wealthy hobbists. Nothing particularly wrong in that, except that it may not be a viable business model (on a personal note it would be a tragedy to see Leica completely loose touch with the pro market)

Guy

[hankg]

Hank,

My only concern is that Leica may interpret the inevitable success of the M8 as meaning that they hit the bullseye.

I am not privy to Leica's management thinking but considering the 'hiccups' surrounding the M8 introduction and the difficulties in getting a viable DRF seveloped at all I would think that Leica management should feel that the difference between success and failure is totering on a razor's edge. More like dodged the bullet then hit the bullseye. The M8 has probably bought them some time and much needed resources which will give the new management the space they need to move forward.

 

All in all they have accomplished a lot. Which makes me hopeful for the future. Not because I have some emotional tie to Leica but it would suck if the only choice in our digital future would be Canon ( a great company but sometimes you want another flavor besides Vanilla). I hope there is room for boutique players who provide options very different from the mainstream + I just love the ergonomics and form factor of the M. I'm thrilled that its been brought into the digital realm pretty much intact.

[xray]

Hankg and Guy I think both of you are on the mark.

 

In January I registered a new MP with Leica US. I received a call from a lady with Leica about a week ago needing additional information. She said she was about 3 months behind in responding to registrations due to the increased sales. From her conversation I gathered it was not only M8's but M7's, MP's and lenses. I think the new $500 rebate and discount on lenses for new M8 buyers has stimulated many new sales. Good for Leica and I hope they learn something about marketing from this.

[hankg]

One thing Leica might consider with the next iteration of the digital M which I expect is still 3 years off is to have 2 lines. One weather sealed, a-la-carte 'pro' line made in Germany and supplied with a 'pro' service warranty. Loaners and super quick turn around priority service. Service and support have their own pro service concierge. Priced at the level of Canon's top of the line 1 series.

Another line, same electronic guts, viewfinder and image quality made in Asia (Cosina?) with the regular warranty/service and some bits and pieces tuned to cut costs but not compromise on IQ or the viewfinder (in other words still head and shoulders above the average digital plastic wonder). Maybe a 30% price differential like 5800 v 3800 or whatever the equivalent will be in 2010 digicam pricing.

 

I put 'pro' in quotes because plenty of pros would choose the cheaper body for budget reasons or to be able to have a less expensive back-up, while many well-healed amatuers will choose the 'pro' line because they want the 'best' camera and the added level of service. Same development track, same tooling, just different sourcing for different markets that place different value on different features and levels of service. I suspect profit margins would be greater on the cheaper body but the high end line would burnish the brand and provide a credible pro offering.

[xray]

As a professional repair service is critical. Both Canon and Nikon have professional loan and repair services exclusively for the frofessional customer. I was a member of NPS for many years and since going Canon I've been a member of CPS for the past 4 or 5 years. Nikon doesn't run their service as well as canon but Canon takes no more than 3 days on the average repair and if it goes longer thsy give a free loaner untill it's completed. My 200 f1.8 L was in for calibration and general cla and took 3 days inclusing shipping. I had a problem with my 24-70 L and it only took 3 days including shipping. You fedex overnight the item with the appropriate form and the service is done the day it arrives and then fedexed back overnight. if it's under warranty then there's no charge and they pay return fedex. My 1DsII was in for lens / body AFcalibration and this took a week. Canon fedexed another body to me at no charge. Also if you need a specific lens like a 400 2.8 or 600 f4 for a job but don't frequently use one CPS or NPS will fedex a loaner at no charge other than shipping. Leica needs to get into the mode of thinking pro service if they want pro customers. Weeks of waiting for repairs just won't cut it for the pro. One thing about pro service, you must prove you're a full time pro. You have ot have printed (magazines, ads, etc.) samples and letters from clients. I don't remember but you might have to provide a state tax number also.

 

Leica could learn a great deal form Canon and Nikon. Competition is tougher than it was in the 30's, 40's and 50's and leica hasn't come to grips with this. It takes more than a cutting edge product to capture the pro market.

[mwilliamsphotography]

Using a M8 is a force fit for a lot of modern commercial activity, not because it isn't a "professional camera", but because professional demands have evolved. In fact, I'd hazard a guess that Leica Ms were never a professional camera to the degree some think they were.

 

If you think about it, how did Leica come into being? A wizard made a box to hold an existing media made by someone else (motion picture film), and utilized existing optical knowhow of a microscope company. The result was a camera easily placed in the pocket for spontaneous application.

 

In the interim years as film became faster and Leica lenses got speedier, it became a good low light camera because of the range-finder viewfinder.

 

Fast Forward to today. Leica has made a box to hold an existing media (digital sensor), and has applied it's existing optical excellence, and maintained it's viewfinder characteristics.

 

IMO, there are only a few things I would place on a wish list for future digital Ms:

 

Decrease the size a bit ... perhaps a tad smaller than a MP

 

Full frame so the wonderful Leica wide angles can be fully utilized. Sensor design is evolving rapidly and it should be possible in future. Firmware and software can be designed to handle any remaining anomalies like vignetting.

 

Eliminate the IR filters ... IR filters are a fixed solution, therefore firmware/software should be able to compensate for IR.

 

A finer array of ISO choices, and by hook or crook jack up the max ISO, and have it perform well while up there. Leica Ms are available light machines, but low light performance is now being redefined by other makers.

 

Oh yeah, a choice to have just the histogram on the screen would be nice ... maybe superimposed over the preview on the LCD like the DMR ... and revert to analog buttons for exposure compensation please.

 

That's it for me. I want less buttons and/or menu choices, not more. I don't care if the exif info tells me what aperture I used. I didn't even want a motor winder in this digital M.

 

Frankly, to sum it up ... I don't want a M camera designed by DSLR lovers trying to force fit the camera into being a "Jack of all Trades". It's a freaking Range-Finder : -)

[jaapv]

@ Jaap,

'It wouldn't,' Hurrah!!

'But the price might go stratospheric'

err you quoted my previous post, and deleted my comments about cost !?

a) your speculating here, and being pessimistic

as you have been following me from the start you know that all I am asking for is better access to the capability thats already inside the camera. That does not make the product a single cent more expensive to make, it might add development time (but regarding bit depth it may have reduced development time...) but that as you no doubt know is actually quite easy to amortise over the production volume, and since I am suggesting an improvement to the product you can expect the production volume to go up anyway!

c) If giving me better access to whats already inside the camera is astronomically expensive, then who will be able to afford an M9 with a bigger sensor, more Mp etc etc Sounds like the only customers who will be able to afford that are going to be NASA and the US Army...

 

@xray,

I agree as well

Guy

 

Production volume - that would be difficult for Leica. Many don't realise how small Leica really is. It would be a major struggle to increase volume substantially. As it is, the success of the M8 caused them to contemplate moving the production facility to Wetzlar, as there is no room for expansion in Solms. Not even thinking about the problems one has in Germany in finding trained workers. And even more difficult- getting them out again should production drop again.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[mwilliamsphotography]

Production volume - that would be difficult for Leica. Many don't realise how small Leica really is. It would be a major struggle to increase volume substantially. As it is, the success of the M8 caused them to contemplate moving the production facility to Wetzlar, as there is no room for expansion in Solms. Not even thinking about the problems one has in Germany in finding trained workers. And even more difficult- getting them out again should production drop again.

 

 

All the more reason to keep it simple. A simple, well built, reliable, no brainer digital camera with as few do-dads as possible ... just a digital box to hang those excellent lenses on. Leave the driving to us.

 

I'll bet we're not that far away from swappable sensors ... send in the camera and they swap sensors for upgraded ones. Keep innovating lenses ... maybe produce a Digitar line.

 

They can press forward with the other Leicasonic digital cameras featuring all the bells & whistles of a video game. Leave the M to what it is and always has been.

[sdai]

Swappable sensor will never happen IMO, Marc ... sensor spec changes, then all peripheral electronics change. To reduce manufacturing costs, all companies will go for highly integrated solutions - not sure if you have heard about the idea "camera on chip" - that's exactly where the big players are heading.