Guest flatfour Posted August 11, 2006 Share #1 Posted August 11, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) There has been a lot of discussion and comparisons on this forum of the Canons and Nikons versus the supposed specification of the M8. This is rather pointless. I want an M8 that is handy and small. I don't want tons of pixels and supersonic burst rates. What I do want is the highest quaity lenses with the very highest quality colour and black and white rendition. I should like an optical viewfinder, and large capacity card. But above all the camera must be handy - a bit more handy than the Digilux 2. What do others think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 11, 2006 Posted August 11, 2006 Hi Guest flatfour, Take a look here M8 size matters. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
alex_kraus Posted August 11, 2006 Share #2 Posted August 11, 2006 There has been a lot of discussion and comparisons on this forum of the Canons and Nikons versus the supposed specification of the M8. This is rather pointless. I want an M8 that is handy and small. I don't want tons of pixels and supersonic burst rates. What I do want is the highest quaity lenses with the very highest quality colour and black and white rendition. I should like an optical viewfinder, and large capacity card. But above all the camera must be handy - a bit more handy than the Digilux 2. What do others think. The main specifiations of the new M8 have been annouced quite a while ago: Size of an classic Leica M Resolution: 11 Mpixel Crop-factor: 1.33 There is not too much left to speculate about Best regards Alex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 11, 2006 Share #3 Posted August 11, 2006 Flatfour - agreed! Size is a 'feature' of a camera just as much as AF or multiple exposures or megapixels. There are many decent and even great digital SLRs out there - but they all lack two 'features" that I won't do without in my primary camera: split-image manual focusing... and weighing less than 30 ounces with a lens mounted. Without those 'features' - they may as well not exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Share #4 Posted August 11, 2006 30 ounces, what's that in real money, 850 grams, I think it will be tight - M7: 610g, 35mm Summilux: 250g, 860g total! You might as well cancel your order, Andy. There's a huge amount we do not know about this camera (and the word viewfinder never crossed my lips) and my hope is that because it's been so well hidden from view that there's something in it that's going to really blow our socks off. Personally, I'm hoping for 30fps movie capability. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alex_kraus Posted August 11, 2006 Share #5 Posted August 11, 2006 30 ounces, what's that in real money, 850 grams, I think it will be tight - M7: 610g, 35mm Summilux: 250g, 860g total! You might as well cancel your order, Andy. There's a huge amount we do not know about this camera (and the word viewfinder never crossed my lips) and my hope is that because it's been so well hidden from view that there's something in it that's going to really blow our socks off. Personally, I'm hoping for 30fps movie capability. It will be a Leica M. A Leica M with an R9 shutter and a chip instead of a film -not more and not less! It will have the same old-fashioned viewfinder and it will neither have live preview nor video filming capabilities. Stop dreaming or you will be dissapointed in september... Regards Alexander, the prophet Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 11, 2006 Share #6 Posted August 11, 2006 Personally, I'm hoping for 30fps movie capability. Presumably some kind of sick joke? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Share #7 Posted August 11, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Of course, there is sadly no emoticon for "tongue in cheek"... Alexander: Es war ein kleiner Witz! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted August 11, 2006 Share #8 Posted August 11, 2006 Personally, I'm hoping for 30fps movie capability. ..........and a built in Mp3 player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted August 11, 2006 Share #9 Posted August 11, 2006 They could always add a mobile phone. It would be novel to have a camera with a built in mobile phone rather than the other way around. Actually in the 60s an uncle of mine used to have a radio with a built in camera - or was it a camera with a built in radio? I was never sure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 11, 2006 Share #10 Posted August 11, 2006 ..........and a built in Mp3 player. I would prefer a built-in coffee machine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest flatfour Posted August 15, 2006 Share #11 Posted August 15, 2006 Mark - Surely a metal shutter would be appreciably lighter than a cloth shutter not forgetting the winding mechanism and lever ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 15, 2006 Share #12 Posted August 15, 2006 I don't know for sure, but I doubt any difference between the shutter weights will have much bearing on the overall weight - shutters by their nature have to be extremely light to achieve the accelerations needed with the forces available - good old Newton's Laws of Motion come into play here. Things like the battery, shutter wind motor, electronics, LCD display would all add weight to the M8 by comparison to the M7, so unless they've put the case on a diet, I expect the M8 to be fractionally heavier than the M7. The M7 is 610g, the R-D1 590g. I'd put money (though not very much) on 650 - 700g. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.