M8 review in Digital Photographer(UK) No 62

[Baxter]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I bought this magazine primarily to read what they had to say about the M8.

 

The review doesn't make terribly good reading. Firstly I was completely astonished that the review camera was not supplied with an IR cut filter for the lens. Thus one year on from release of the camera, reviewers are having to write about an issue which has been addressed and thus they were conducting testing on same basis as assessing car cornering capability with low tyre pressure, or a Hi-Fi turntable with fluff on the stylus.

 

Unlike other equipment which is reviewed, there are no DNG or even jpeg files from the M8 on the accompanying CD. Interested readers would have had the oppurtunity to see how good the output from the camera is.

 

The new lenses are shown, the recent major price increase is mentioned - yet overall, it still manages a score of 74%

 

I am left wondering why this situation arose and Leica didn't insist on it being used with IR cut filter and also that actual M8 camera files were to be made available on the CD so that prospective owners, or potential critics could see first hand the capability and quality of the camera.

 

Due to my lack of familiarity with this publication, ought Leica to be encouraged to respond - or might this be something that is handled at reader level? I believe that there is a forum in addition to std readers letters page. Accepting that damage has been done, provision of more accurate data + image files would make the M8 performance more open source.

[MartinL]

You might make some inquiries to the publication on your own. On some scales--perhaps most-- a Chrysler Town and Country Mini Van will score higher than a Bentley Continental GT (better value, more cup-holders). Although the M8 scores a 97% on my personal scale of camera performance, features, and value, I can also understand how most of the other known world would find it lacking.

[marknorton]

Baxter, unfortunately, what you're witnessing is the Leica UK factor which is guaranteed to mess things up. Aside from when I asked for - and was reluctantly supplied with - a replacement red dot for my M6, I cannot think of a single time when they have met my reasonable expectations, still less surpassed them.

 

They're wholly owned by Leica Camera AG (as, I believe, are Leica Camera NJ) and if Andreas Kaufmann is looking to cut costs, he could do a lot worse than wield the redundancy notices at Davy Avenue.

 

Truth is, I expect the camera was probably not supplied with an IR filter because their resident photographer, who I think is called Noddy, couldn't be a.s.d to provide one. As such, Leica got the rating from the magazine they deserve.

 

Leica UK serve no useful purpose and should be put out of their misery...

[stunsworth]

Maybe it depends on how you speak to them Mark. I've found Leica UK to be very helpful - and yes they sent me a replacement red dot without any hassle whatsoever. I've also found Nobby just as helpful, and again he's supplied the small gifts for all of the participants in all of the 'One Challenges', together with a larger prize for the winner, without any pushing at all.

 

One thing to bear in mind is that magazines are advertising driven. The question that ought to be asked is would this magazine risk offending Canon or Nikon, by giving a system from a smaller company a glowing review? I've not read the article, so I don't know if they made reference to the filters, or even if they received them but decided leave them off the camera.

[fotografr]

One thing to bear in mind is that magazines are advertising driven. The question that ought to be asked is would this magazine risk offending Canon or Nikon, by giving a system from a smaller company a glowing review?

 

If that is actually true, then one wouldn't be able to trust ANY magazine review of equipment if the manufacturer advertised in the publication. I often read Shutterbug magazine, which takes ads from nearly every camera maker known, and I've generally found their reviews to be fair and balanced. If something doesn't work right, they will say so.

 

Additionally, I would not think it likely that either Canon or Nikon view Leica as any kind of serious competition for their products. At least, they never did back in the film days. That would be like Guiness being worried about home brewers making their own stout.

[guy]

Leica UK serve no useful purpose and should be put out of their misery...

 

:D

[tbarker13]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The question that ought to be asked is would this magazine risk offending Canon or Nikon, by giving a system from a smaller company a glowing review?

 

 

The answer should be a resounding YES. That is, if this particular magazine has any interest in publishing a credible product worth reading.

[Guest]

In defence of Leica UK.

Over a period of 25 years I have had cause to contact Leica UK many times both for information and advice.In every instance I have been dealt with professionally and efficiently, as I would expect to be treated by a company of their standing.Sometimes things take time to resolve but Leica are only a small company and things sometimes take a while.I did not want to mention names in particular but in defence of Nobby Clark I have always found him very helpfull.It would appear that some of the forum members have had a few problems but from my experiance I am more than satisfied.

Brian

[larry]

One thing to bear in mind is that magazines are advertising driven. The question that ought to be asked is would this magazine risk offending Canon or Nikon, by giving a system from a smaller company a glowing review? I've not read the article, so I don't know if they made reference to the filters, or even if they received them but decided leave them off the camera.

 

Being the editor of a large-circulation magazine (one million) that reviews products from well-known tool manufacturers, I can address this question from my perspective. We always try to publish accurate and fair product reviews. It's also fair to say that advertisers often try to leverage the amount of coverage they receive, but I've never had one try to influence the outcome of a review. I can't comment on what happens at other publications.

 

Larry

[andybarton]

In defence of Leica UK.

Over a period of 25 years I have had cause to contact Leica UK many times both for information and advice.In every instance I have been dealt with professionally and efficiently, as I would expect to be treated by a company of their standing.Sometimes things take time to resolve but Leica are only a small company and things sometimes take a while.I did not want to mention names in particular but in defence of Nobby Clark I have always found him very helpfull.It would appear that some of the forum members have had a few problems but from my experiance I am more than satisfied.

Brian

 

Hear, hear.

[Philinflash]

Baxter,

 

I saw that review, too. It is, in a sense, too bad that the writer didn't "get" what the M8 is all about but then most of his readership won't either. I don't mean that in any elitest sense, but the vast camera market does not by and large appreciate the M8.

 

I just spent all day at the pdn PhotoPlus Expo at the Javits Convention Center in New York and Leica is nearly invisible there compared to the volume chaps. One guy (presumably a pro) who was doing a demo of a Nikon something-or-other was reverse-heckling me because he seemed to think my M8 was an Epson; I assume he saw my RF camera and thought only Epson.

 

I am not bothered to be part of this fringe community of M8 appreciators.

 

BTW, I saw the new line of Summarits there and they are really small and discrete. There are pluses and minuses when compared to the existing range of lenses but, if you like small above all else, you will like these. I would think Leica is trying to head off Zeiss with these lenses and that might work. I would want to know how their optics compare if I were making a choice.

 

Philip Kozloff

[sean_reid]

One guy (presumably a pro) who was doing a demo of a Nikon something-or-other was reverse-heckling me because he seemed to think my M8 was an Epson; I assume he saw my RF camera and thought only Epson.

Philip Kozloff

 

How odd that he would do that... Some of the best photography I've seen in the past year was made by a photographer friend who uses an R-D1. The depth of some people's ignorance, and hubris, is really something.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[stunsworth]

Sean, there are some people who forget that a camera is just a camera and mistake it for a religion. It happens all the time on all the internet forums. The Nikon v Canon crowd seem to be the worst. I've never understood it myself, if a camera works for you then that's fine, regardless of the brand. I happen to prefer rangefinders, someone else will prefer an SLR, it's no big deal.

[Baxter]

Thanks for all the posts. It is an emotive subject - yes Sean and Steve fully concur, when I am running workshops, the people making the most noise and having spent more, often have the weakest pictures.

 

To be fair to the anonymous reviewer he/she was advocating that DSLR users 'with wallets deep enough' should try a rangefinder, stating that it was fantastically enjoyable to use. In summing up...'This lacks the features and comfort we're accustomed to. The image quality is stunning, though'

 

Therefore it would have been pertinent to include such output in JPEG and DNG, Quality of B+W option was also praised. AWB wasn't, 'disappointing to say the least' - but we know about that! When is the next 'frequent' firmware issue due......?

 

I have only needed to speak to Leica UK once since buying my M8 in May and they were courteous and helpful. I just wish that they had sent an IR cut filter with the review camera.

[highlander]

I feel compelled to put a word in for Leica UK. Over the years I have had several contacts with Nobby Clark and the other guys on the team.

Each and every time I have had exemplary service and on more than one occasion Nobby has gone the extra mile to give good service.

As for the magazine review I take it with a pinch of salt. The camera gets my personal score of 96, but thats applying my own criteria. If it feels good it is good, works for me.

[AlanG]

I just spent all day at the pdn PhotoPlus Expo at the Javits Convention Center in New York and Leica is nearly invisible there compared to the volume chaps.

 

I attended the show yesterday and stopped by to look at the Leica gear. While their booth was much smaller than the big players', it was in a good location adjacent to Nikon, Canon and Bogen, so most anybody would have seen it. The remarkable thing to me was that the Leica booth was the same size as Kodak's.

[cornbarn]

I must echo the good things said about Leica UK. I've had nothing but excellent service from them.

[earleygallery]

Just a thought, unless the said reviewer was from another planet surely he/she has heard all about the M8 by now and would know about the IR issues and fix.

 

It's amazing - to me - that they published a review that raises issues already well documented and resolved.

 

Sack the reviewer I say, they clearly don't do their research. They should be pointing out the upside of the IR issue in terms of image quality etc., as well as other benefits of the rangefinder system.

 

As for Leica UK, I've only had a couple of exchanges with them and found them very helpful and personable indeed.

[cornbarn]

I fully agree - it struck me that the article read as though it was written some 9 to 12 months ago.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Philinflash]

... The remarkable thing to me was that the Leica booth was the same size as Kodak's.

 

Well, Kodak's was much more centrally located and they guaranteed traffic by giving away 35 mm film and carrier bags to any and all. Leica was giving away nothing.