Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 9, 2007 Share #121 Posted August 9, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is the major bottom line issue it is becuase it was designed for folks like you with M4,5,6 and 7's and NOT for digital only. This is the major basic issue of the M8 , it was designed for film guys making the transition from film to digital because frankly the frame lines are a waste of technology and could have easily been a electronic framing with paralax movement for distance. all the frame line crap could have been completely revamped to the 21st century and not to old flm shooters to make them feel comfortable. Now that was just the framelines . How about the second LCD that could have made it more useful than just battery and frames remaining , if it went by DSLR standards it would have had ISO , EV compensation and other functions in it. That is not the case becuase it was designed for guys like you and not shooters like me that came from DSLR's and 12 years in digital only. it was designed to satisfy film shooters is the bottom line. Why would you complain about it when it is exactly like a film M. That is what leica made pure and simple. yes there are some teething problems. But 95 percent of that has been solved so your point being, what? It does not run film through it, maybe it don't but it is exactly like what your already shooting. BTW what framelines would actually work for a 16,18,21mm lens there are none to begin with. This has nothing to do with framelines and the WATE lens but telling the firmware what you are shooting for corrections Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 9, 2007 Posted August 9, 2007 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here Price increase M8 and WATE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
andybarton Posted August 9, 2007 Share #122 Posted August 9, 2007 Maybe Leica mis-judged the market and expected more M users to jump into the M8 than they did? It seems that they have attracted a whole new set of clientele as well - those who haven't used rangefinders before, and therefore don't care that the M8 is sort of like an M3 Perhaps, once they have got the R10 out of the way (if they do), they should make an M9, which is not a compromise and a nod to the 50s, but should be a balls-out rangefinder for the 21st Century. Keep the M8 as an a-la-carte model for old the fogies. Like me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 9, 2007 Share #123 Posted August 9, 2007 Andy that was sort of my point is really the M8 is a throw back RF digital camera that very much resembles the old look and feel of the M film camera's. This was exactly what they tried to do but in the process picked up new M shooters that i really believe they did not count on , like me. I agree also the M9 will and probably should be back to the 21st century technology of look and feel of the modern DSLR's. It still will have the leica style though just modernized Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 9, 2007 Share #124 Posted August 9, 2007 Here is the major bottom line issue it is becuase it was designed for folks like you with M4,5,6 and 7's and NOT for digital only. Ah, Guy, but like it or not, you have been transmogrified into one of us by Leica.. It must be Anno Domini creeping up:D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 9, 2007 Share #125 Posted August 9, 2007 I wonder if there's a big sign in the design department to cramp their creative style: "Remember the M5!" As soon as we heard the M8 would support goggled lenses and the Visoflex, we knew the basic parameters of the camera layout. There's no pleasing everyone and I expect a radical M9 would produce a furious reaction here. That might, however, be the price of progress, that some accessory you picked up at a yard sale will no longer work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 9, 2007 Share #126 Posted August 9, 2007 If you want the look and feel of an SLR, buy a bloody SLR, there are zillions of them out there. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 9, 2007 Share #127 Posted August 9, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not me i like the M series but would have much prefered a electronic frameline setup but Jaap is right i have been transformed like many others into RF shooting, which i really enjoy but a few more modern setups on it like the framelines IMHO would have made it better. Bring on the M9 but there is no way to rip the M8's out of my hands until the M9 is out and i have this guy to protect my M8's in the meantime. LOL 75mm Lux Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/30321-price-increase-m8-and-wate/?do=findComment&comment=325338'>More sharing options...
TEBnewyork Posted August 9, 2007 Share #128 Posted August 9, 2007 Does his viewfinder work better than the magnifier on my shopping list? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 9, 2007 Share #129 Posted August 9, 2007 ...the M9 will and probably should be back to the 21st century technology of look and feel of the modern DSLR's I'm only speaking for myself, but what I _don't _ want in an M9 that looks and feels like an SLR. Not sure of the relevance of the photograph you've posted Guy, I've taken lots of photographs with my M8, but I don't post them at random in the threads that I contribute to. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 9, 2007 Share #130 Posted August 9, 2007 Steve have a little fun today , it was a joke. It's all about the image remember all this other stuff is meaningless unless you get the image you need. Off to another round of Army stuff than back to vacation on the beach , enjoy the day. I'll be in San Diego at the Del Mar racetrack betting on some ponies. i will be betting on the number 8 horse. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 9, 2007 Share #131 Posted August 9, 2007 Yeah, sounds like I've had a humour bypass operation. Back to work. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted August 9, 2007 Share #132 Posted August 9, 2007 I'm only speaking for myself, but what I _don't _ want in an M9 that looks and feels like an SLR. Right, I agree but I would take a M9 that was a little bigger and had the electronic frame lines, showed ISO in the top LCD panel and inside the veiwfinder, made it easier to change ISO from a button push and a wheel turn (or even a second wheel on the front right side of the camera just under the shutter release), a snap on plastic cover for the LCD screen, a buit in grip (housing the shutter release and second wheel), doors on the bottom for the battery and SD card compartments and MOST OF ALL a built in Diopter adjustment. There is plenty of room to move on the traditional design of the M camera without losing the to much of the classic feel. Since there are M shooters that refuse to do anything digital I really don't think they matter. No matter what Leica does in the digital age they will not be following. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted August 9, 2007 Share #133 Posted August 9, 2007 I'm only speaking for myself, but what I _don't _ want in an M9 that looks and feels like an SLR. I'm speaking for myself too, but I don't think you'll object to this one - I want a M9 designed by Porsche ... now that'll be something for the 21st century. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 9, 2007 Share #134 Posted August 9, 2007 Since there are M shooters that refuse to do anything digital I really don't think they matter. Agreed, and I also agree with quite a bit of what you suggest, but to make the form more like a DSLR is missing the point of what makes the M8 unique in the digital marketplace. Also I'm guessing that the majority of M8 buyers are coming from an M background. This is just a guess on my part, but I've seen no evidence to contradict it. Again this is just my personnel opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edlaurpic Posted August 9, 2007 Share #135 Posted August 9, 2007 In the opinion of a lot of old foggies like me, the last time Porsche made a car we loved was the 356 series. Everything since then has been a compromise of Dr. Porsche's brilliant initial vision. Some enthusiasts also disdain even the later 356's, preferring the pure lines of the cars of the 50s, much as some M users feel that Leica had achieved the pinnacle of camera design with the M3 (I am one of them, but I still love my M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 9, 2007 Share #136 Posted August 9, 2007 I must be the odd man out - I am an M shooter for over 35 years - I have switched fully to digital (except for the odd Kodachrome) I would be very upset by a fundamental design change...But I would not mind a digital-looking DigiCL... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted August 9, 2007 Share #137 Posted August 9, 2007 At first, for quite awhile actually, I was annoyed at the notion of the M8. It cropped my $3,000+ aspheric lenses, had noise with two stops more grain than my 5D. The IR issue was an enormous blunder with huge PR repercussions, only just barely fixed. The 10.3 MP in a $5,000 body in the year 2006 was not overly impressive. I really just put the idea of getting an M8 out to the curb since shooting Kodachrome in an M6 or MP3 is just about the pinnacle of 35mm photography ( that has not changed ). But then I started getting notes and calls from friends that the camera is actually pretty good in real world use. So since I was tired of toting my 5D along with my Leica M's to get digital images moved to editorial outlets while on the road, the M8 started to sound pretty good. I have had mine for a week now. While it is not quite a 5D in terms of image quality and does get pretty noisy above ISO 640, the images are darn nice and the experience of shooting digital with Leica glass is great. It turns out I am turning out good work with the M8, without having to tote around a full Canon kit. It turns out the white balance can be tamed, the crappy shutter release feel can be lived with, the magenta cast can be delt with. Pros are using the M8 because it actually works, just like it does for me. So we are spreading the word, because no one wants to see Leica get in trouble in this truly ugly and techo-nerdy period in photography's history known as digital. Forgive me for sticking my nose into other people's business (after all I don't have an M8) but this is really a good one. Or maybe you just forgot to stick an army of smilies onto that statement, in which case I apologize for the rant. So, L despises kludges and inelegance. Is that so. Well I dare say the whole M8 concept is a kludge to begin with, followed by many lesser kludges to iron out the mushrooming little or not so little problems. Internal switches that respond to the position of the frame preview lever in order to "detect" the focal length - give me a frickin break. And even that doesn't work with WATE. When you discuss such issues at great length, isn't there sometimes that little voice that says "rangefinder and digital simply don't go together that well, so maybe we're asking a bit too much"? I have been working with an M4 for quite a number of years and found myself on the brink of springing for an M8 but eventually opted out. Haven't regretted the decision so far. Time to don the flameproof suit. Have a go! Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 9, 2007 Share #138 Posted August 9, 2007 At first, for quite awhile actually, I was annoyed at the notion of the M8. It cropped my $3,000+ aspheric lenses, had noise with two stops more grain than my 5D. The IR issue was an enormous blunder with huge PR repercussions, only just barely fixed. The 10.3 MP in a $5,000 body in the year 2006 was not overly impressive. I really just put the idea of getting an M8 out to the curb since shooting Kodachrome in an M6 or MP3 is just about the pinnacle of 35mm photography ( that has not changed ). But then I started getting notes and calls from friends that the camera is actually pretty good in real world use. So since I was tired of toting my 5D along with my Leica M's to get digital images moved to editorial outlets while on the road, the M8 started to sound pretty good. I have had mine for a week now. While it is not quite a 5D in terms of image quality and does get pretty noisy above ISO 640, the images are darn nice and the experience of shooting digital with Leica glass is great. It turns out I am turning out good work with the M8, without having to tote around a full Canon kit. It turns out the white balance can be tamed, the crappy shutter release feel can be lived with, the magenta cast can be delt with. Pros are using the M8 because it actually works, just like it does for me. So we are spreading the word, because no one wants to see Leica get in trouble in this truly ugly and techo-nerdy period in photography's history known as digital. First off, I wanted to post this before, I'm glad to see you are here after the M8 run-ins we had last year on RFF And you are right, the M8 concept is one you must experience and grow into. The whole concept is a bit of a dichtomy, marrying twentieth century concepts to twentyfirst century technology. The result is, however, remarkable. :)The word kludge and objections of the poster you are answering can be rebutted by two simple remarks: 1. Nobody is forcing this camera down anybodies throat, so why the indignation? You don't have to buy it, but it might be illuminating to use one for a while... 2. Everything thrown at it may be valid, but the concept and the camera still work with great succes... Gallileo was burnt at the stake, I believe, for insisting on something similar, we early adopters were just fried in flames... It is good to see that the M8-opponents have to don their asbestos tuxedos these days... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 9, 2007 Share #139 Posted August 9, 2007 When I want to go out taking photographs I have the choice of picking up either the Canon 5D or the M8. Since January I've been taking the M8 and haven't taken the Canon once. Both are superb cameras, but I just _enjoy_ using the M8 more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 9, 2007 Share #140 Posted August 9, 2007 I ditto that. I even sold my 5D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.