Very interesting field review of the M8...

[Tony C.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Photojournalist Bruno Stevens has written a very illuminating review of the M8, which he used for two weeks in the field. I can't resist excerpting the following small portion, just to whet (or should I say wet?) your appetite!

 

I couldn’t be happier with the camera, it performed (almost) faultlessy. There was a minor temporary quirk with the lightmeter (the camera continued to work fine) for a couple of hours when I (and the camera) was drenched during a Caspian Sea gale. I mean humidity was 100%, gale force winds and torrential rain poured on the camera for hours, at one point, the light meter stoped working under a certain EV value, just for a couple of hours and then it went back to normal.

 

 

Here's the link:

 

Lightstalkers :: Leica M8 - is it any good?

 

Regards,

 

Tony C.

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest sirvine]

Photojournalist Bruno Stevens has written a very illuminating review of the M8, which he used for two weeks in the field.

 

It's a nice review, but the follow up comments are a little depressing. Setting aside the multiple references to Mike Johnston's incompetent review of the M8, the lightstalkers' crew come off as a group of people seriously confused about digital photography. Everyone's griping about how expensive the camera is, and meanwhile they're shooting film, developing it and scanning it. Of course, many of those probably don't do or pay for their own film or development costs, so the price per print is a less meaningful metric to them.

 

Still, It's amusing to me how anyone who calls themselves a professional photographer can fail to be 100% knowledgeable about the tools of the trade. I'm not talking about knowing the ins and outs of each individual camera body, either---I'm talking about understanding the basic pros and cons of digital photography.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

It is a nice review but here is the bottom line that i see repeatlly after the reviewer and frankly it is so lame . It cost 4800 dollars and that is too much. Okay lets think about this ,how is the quality of the file. Most answers are as good or better than the best DSLR's. You know where I am going

 

1dsMKII 7200

DMR R9 8200

 

Whats left a Canon 5d at 3200

 

So why the bloody blazes is 4800 to much. Interesting split the distance between the 5d and 1dsMKII and that magic number is 5200

 

This will start a war. GET OVER THE COST, it is results were after. And the cost is normal for what you are getting.

 

My rant for the day. I'm sure this will become a flame war

 

Wait i take back the rant for the day. How about the logical answer for the day

[jaapv]

Yeah! Blast you Guy!!! You are too mild!!! :D

[robertwright]

Yeah that guy seems to "get" it. I think you are going to see a few more reviews like this from working professionals, my dealer (fotocare) in NY said they sold near 80 M8's, and they are primarily sellling to working photogs, so 80 rangefinders is a TON of rangefinders, I doubt they sold 80 M7's over the last 6 months. I'm going to be you will be seeing a lot more of them in the ranks.

[terrycioni]

On thing I do get tired of is the 'cameras are tools' and they are only for making money, blah blah bs.

 

A passion for your photograpic tools is just as important to the output as your critical eye - professionals who are successful are passionate about their gear. We do not need to look much further than this forum.The pros here such as Guy and Sean both are passionate about their tools (read their posts). They both respect what the right tools can do, care about how what works for them and their clients and often share that information, and know the absolute workings of said tools - they are engaged. The end result being top notch photography.

 

Refreshing for me, is coming off of DSLR autopilot (F stop and Shutter Speed) and having to think about one frame at a time - not eight or ten. But to each his own. Again having read the blog (wasting time) it is all about the cost of the M8 - my gut tells me if it were somewhat less expensive the respondents would all own one. This has been the Leica whine since I first picked one up in May of 1969. To expensive = not good blah blah blah.

 

You have got to love it.

 

Best. Terry.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Terri you make a excellent point and although guys like Sean and myself and a lot of working pros buy for there needs but these leicas really bring out the passion of owning a fine piece of gear too. When i owned canon i really did not think about the passion of the gear it was just another tool. I view leica camera's differently yes they are a tool and get the job done but they bring something else to the table that brings out the non pro side and is there fun to play with. I won't speak for Sean but i know he feels the same way, this stuff is a blast to shoot with and have not had this much fun in years

[ddp]

Still, It's amusing to me how anyone who calls themselves a professional photographer can fail to be 100% knowledgeable about the tools of the trade. I'm not talking about knowing the ins and outs of each individual camera body, either---I'm talking about understanding the basic pros and cons of digital photography.

 

100%? There are alot of pros out there that can get by on raw TALENT using less sophisticated tools than many of us on this forum. Many simply don’t have the means financially to buy the best gear out there. Plenty of shooters using prosumer Nikons and Canons like the 30D or D200 and getting excellent results….some people cannot justify the cost of getting into the Leica system – regardless of how good the cameras or lenses are.

 

I’ve had discussion with pros that were full of knowledge, and some that knew very little….I’ve learned from some and been able to share what I know with others. Honestly, the lightstalker post is a fairly decent exchange on the M8 – seems far more civil than some of the other drivel I’ve seen out there on the subject.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Speaking about flaming, I got a lot of adverse comments when I posted that this camera was so good that it would be required for pro's within 2 years.

 

I saw my first M, an M4 with a DR lens, in 1970. At the time, used, it cost me more than a new Nikon F would have.

 

It was so intuitive and straightforward -- need I mentions the quiet thing? -- that I never looked back.

 

I still think the pro's will have to be using this camera. These reviews are just the tip of the iceberg.

 

And it's not expensive. It's a pro camera; I would have said it's in the ballpark with the Canon pro cameras until Guy explained how they cost even more; it does everything except autofocus and long lenses; and the images knock the socks off everything else.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

What many fail to realize is many Canon shooters turn to Leica r lenses for there wide angles , macros and other focal lengths. Now i was part of that history and it is far more than a few folks doing this and really has turned into a cottage industry now with AF confirmation adapters and such. There is a reason for this and that is leica glass which i still contend is the best in overall system wide out there both in R and M . Yes there are some fine Zeiss and CV lenses no question. Canon and Nikon do make several very excellent lenses but system wide and overall score factor , Leica has them all beat. i don't say this because i own leica glass either but more from buying and testing this stuff out and seeing what the results can be from them is just flat out outstanding, yea there expensive but they should last a lifetime and we all know those 50 year old lenses still have magic in them. People look at costs and run or just chalk it up to my 600 dollar lens is better and never try it. Reason we see so many sideways comments out there

[larry]

Yes, the M8 is expensive, but it's only too expensive for those who don't recognize its value. Leica isn't obligated to provide low-cost equipment to those who wish to impose their egalitarian socio/political expectations of life on camera manufacturers. It's a business, and one of the goals of business is to make money. If Leica needs to charge what it does to stay afloat and provide jobs for its employees, and great photo gear for those willing to buy it; then the whiners need to understand that's just the way it works and purchase the equipment they can afford.

 

On a personal note, five grand for a camera was a big commitment for me, but it was my choice and I have no regrets.

 

Larry

[jaapv]

Old Leica hands are very used to the "too expensive"whine. If you have to whine you can't afford it...

[sean_reid]

My Canons are wonderfully competent and I still use them a lot but I don't love them the way I love the M8 (and that goes double for the giant clumsy plasticky lenses vs. the rangefinder lens jewels). The only other digital camera that gets my heart pumping is the R-D1.

 

This review, by Charlie Gray, brought up some important points. One, the camera seems to be holding up pretty well in the rain. I'm also hearing that same report from some other photographers and I'm very pleased to hear it. Two, the file quality is not run of the mill at all and Gray seemed to note some of the reasons why that is the case. There are some weaknesses Gray didn't mention but we know them already.

 

I said this yesterday but I think a lot of people don't realize how many pros are using this camera.

 

Mike Johnston and I have decided that we must agree to disagree about the M8. He did acknowledge recently that the shutter lag may be much shorter than he thought. The shutter feel and sound have confused other people on that point as well. I've asked him to talk with David Adamson (whom we both know) about the file quality but its not my place to change *Mike's* opinions in *his* reviews. I tried to post a comment about file quality in the follow-up thread (Mike's review) but it didn't make it in. I like Mike very much and I'm not going to argue with him about this any more.

 

It is notable that Gray used the camera, apparently heavily, for six weeks and that gives him a different perspective from one who only has the opportunity to use the camera casually for a few days.

 

History will sort these various reviews out and assign them their place, for better or worse. That will include, of course, myself and other reviewers who missed the IR problem at first. <G> As I said in September, for my purposes, the M8 is the best digital camera I've used to date.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Photojournalist Bruno Stevens has written a very illuminating review of the M8, which he used for two weeks in the field.

 

I believe it was 6 weeks.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Old Leica hands are very used to the "too expensive"whine. If you have to whine you can't afford it...

 

Well...lots of people have bought these cameras even though they did need to pause and think about the price.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[ddp]

Old Leica hands are very used to the "too expensive"whine. If you have to whine you can't afford it...

 

I hope that comment was in jest. There are plenty of young (and less affluent) photographers that would love to be able to use Leica gear - but they simply cannot afford the cost. M8, 50, 28 and 90. Run the numbers...it took me long time to get to where I am in the M system.

[jaapv]

I hope that comment was in jest. There are plenty of young (and less affluent) photographers that would love to be able to use Leica gear - but they simply cannot afford the cost. M8, 50, 28 and 90. Run the numbers...it took me long time to get to where I am in the M system.

It took me more than 30 years. The photographers you refer to don't whine - they know the value of the equipment - That is why they want it.

[AlanG]

...

Whats left a Canon 5d at 3200

 

So why the bloody blazes is 4800 to much. Interesting split the distance between the 5d and 1dsMKII and that magic number is 5200

 

This will start a war. GET OVER THE COST, it is results were after. And the cost is normal for what you are getting.

 

 

Costs are a big factor for many even here. Otherwise more photographers would be shooting on an H3 or with some other 39 megapixel back. It is just a question of degree.

 

Guy, your comparison left out some factors that make Leica so much less of an ideal solution to many. I'll list the 3 that I can think of off the top of my head.

 

1. You left out the cost of the lenses. One M8 body and a wide, normal and tele will set a buyer back more than $10,000-$12,000. And this may just cover the range of a 5D with 24-105 ($3645 at B&H). A basic system of just 4 or 5 lenses and 2 bodies, extra batteries, IR filters, etc. will easily run $20,000-$25,000. A photographer could have a 5D and and XTi as a back-up, along with a few zoom lenses and probably still be under $6000-$7000. And this would be a more versatile system. (Even if some don't think it will be "better.")

 

2. No entry level models or lenses to bring people into the system or for a cheaper back-up.

 

3. Lack of versatility of the M8 system. So virtually all pro owners will still need another system. My situation is that I wouldn't mind owning the M8, can afford it, but I simply can't justify it as the best solution for much of the kind of work I do. (Precise edge framing, a grid screen, and lack of parralax are extremely important to me. And then there is extreme wide angle, fisheye, tele, and perspective control, DxO and C-1 tethered support, etc.) I keep reading about the M8, look at the users' images and I haven't been convinced I need one. I've become happy working with one system and don't want to complicate my life.

 

Additionally many photographers do not need the quality or features of the Canon or Nikon pro models or even the 5D. Plenty of the lesser models provide all they need at much lower prices.

 

I am not saying that one shouldn't get an M8. And if they already own Leica lenses, it becomes an easier choice. I'm just trying to explain that the perspective of some individuals cannot be applied broadly to the needs of others. But surely everyone here knows this. The M8 is not a mainstream camera. It is for those who appreciate what it does, don't mind paying for it, and that is about it. Not many will be pursuaded to buy a Leica on a cost vs value basis argument.

 

As to comments about an M8 letting one get back to thinking about f stops and shutter speeds, working on one image at a time instead of ten. Maybe for some, I can't say. But when did the camera change this? I don''t think I've shot on auto exposure or program very much on any camera (not counting p&s models) more than a handful of times. All of the cameras I've owned have had a manual mode and I used it. You can put any camera on a tripod and take your time.

 

When it comes to cameras there is no one size fits all solution.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}History will sort these various reviews out and assign them their place, for better or worse. As I said in September, for my purposes, the M8 is the best digital camera I've used to date.

 

Sean and I do similar sorts of things, photographically, in our approach and use (in other words, weddings, portraits and such).

 

I completely agree with Sean's evaluation. Even with all the minor annoyances, the fact that I even compare it to my 5d means Leica knocked this out of the park.

 

But beyond that, the simple fact is the image quality and lens choices are both superb, and beyond what I can do easily / quickly with a 5d, no matter how much I spend there in terms of $$.

 

Given enough post production time with digital, and perfect capture environments, the camera, to me, matters less and less and less.

 

But if you can't get what you need to begin with, or don't have all the time in the world, the M8 is a spectacular tool.

 

So to me it's on those terms the camera needs to be evaluated. It's a special-purpose tool in the days of autofocusing cellphones.

 

Heck, you could just as easily compare a Phase MF back to a Canon XTI. For a lot of people, for a lot of purposes, the Phase is a curiousity at best. A lot of photographers I know have never even shot a RAW file...

 

So for the pros and serious amateurs here that understand--yes--the joys of using the M8 compared with other more generic cameras, it's just too bad that Mike seems to be so thoroughly (and to a lot of us, quite absurdly) dismissive of the M8.

 

I don't know him at all, and I've always enjoyed his site. But it seems for the sake of controversy (which is always good on that sort of blog) he's missed the mark, IMO.

 

And sorry for the caffeinated comments here, but his remarks really do seem to me like he's comparing an automatic coffee maker (the XTI) with a great espresso machine (the M8), and then complaining that the espresso machine makes terrible drip coffee

[sean_reid]

I hope that comment was in jest. There are plenty of young (and less affluent) photographers that would love to be able to use Leica gear - but they simply cannot afford the cost. M8, 50, 28 and 90. Run the numbers...it took me long time to get to where I am in the M system.

 

I think about that point often and I think about it every time I look to see how well the less expensive CV and Zeiss lenses perform. Now that John is making these adapters, its easier for one to afford the camera and good lenses.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean