M8 review in Digital Photographer(UK) No 62

[Philinflash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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

 

I was not denigrating the R-D1, rather this supposed pro's inability to distinguish.

[Mark Pope]

I stopped taking Digital Photographer about a year ago as it seemed to be obsessed with pixel and feature count. The articles weren't particularly well-written either.

I saw Practical Photography did a review of the M8 recently - it didn't do very well - mainly due to "poor value for money", which I took to mean feature count per £.

If you compare a camera like the M8 with its nearest price equivalent, which I think is the Canon 1Dmk2/3, the Canon will win hands down every time. It's got every gizmo under the sun and can shoot at goodness knows how many frames per second. These seem to be the criteria that most reviewers use.

To take a hi-fi analogy, the 'best' hi-fi usually has very few controls - often just a volume control on an amplifier - but many people see graphic displays, shiny bits and controls as adding value so it's deemed to be 'better' when what matters is the end result.

At the end of the day, I think the sort of person who buys a camera like a Leica rangefinder, either analogue or digital, is likely to know what they want. So the results of these kind of so-called in depth reviews is of no real relevance and in all probability won't unduly affect sales of Leica's products.

[Mark Pope]

Oh, and another thing - I've had no issues with the quality of customer service from Leica UK either. Perhaps you were unlucky or caught them on a bad day Mark?

[DES]

I stopped taking Digital Photographer about a year ago as it seemed to be obsessed with pixel and feature count. The articles weren't particularly well-written either.

I saw Practical Photography did a review of the M8 recently - it didn't do very well - mainly due to "poor value for money", which I took to mean feature count per £.

If you compare a camera like the M8 with its nearest price equivalent, which I think is the Canon 1Dmk2/3, the Canon will win hands down every time. It's got every gizmo under the sun and can shoot at goodness knows how many frames per second. These seem to be the criteria that most reviewers use.

To take a hi-fi analogy, the 'best' hi-fi usually has very few controls - often just a volume control on an amplifier - but many people see graphic displays, shiny bits and controls as adding value so it's deemed to be 'better' when what matters is the end result.

At the end of the day, I think the sort of person who buys a camera like a Leica rangefinder, either analogue or digital, is likely to know what they want. So the results of these kind of so-called in depth reviews is of no real relevance and in all probability won't unduly affect sales of Leica's products.

 

I couldn't agree more...As well as being a Leica fan, for the past 27 years I have been HiFi mad. In 1980 I bought apair of Quad Esl 63 Electrostatic loudspeakers the cost then was £1000 which was a fortune to me then (and still is)These deliver neutral un coloured sound that I loved then and still do know. Even at that time hifi systems had flashing lights and thousands of controls to adjust a plain audio signal through to a false coloured sound that had massive bass and muffled detail and ........people loved it!!!! Some people just love that kind of thing:(

 

Now I could sell these speakers for the same money I paid for them 27 years ago having given me years and years of enjoyment not to mention the joy of ownership years after all those trendy systems have been replaced with others.and why? because they are fantastic quality. ( the new ones now costing £7500 ish) and people "in the know " KNOW this.

 

Now I put my M8 into the same category. It is a quality item that delivers the end result ..photographs....in a way that I just love. I dont need whistles bangs and pops.

[stunsworth]

In 1980 I bought apair of Quad Esl 63 Electrostatic loudspeakers...

 

Ah, another ESL 63 user <grin>

[ptruman]

A real problem with reviews, often because of a methodology that tries to measure cameras equally, is that they are designed to test the features against a very broad set of expectations. This will mean nothing to a photographer who specialises in sports, landscapes or just about any other area. Different characteristics are required for each specialism but a review will usually attempt to cover all bases.

 

If the review was asking "what is the M8 like for street photography?" it would probably deliver a very high score, but against "what is the M8 like for long range sports photography?" it would look very poor. Spot on and no surprises. But if asked "what's it like for all types of photography?" then the score will be mediocre, but that's not to say its a mediocre camera! As the many users of M8 know, it's just great for many things, but it certainly has limitations in macro or sports photography.

 

I have little time for such general reviews but they can be useful in spotting particular issues with the camera or whatever they are reviewing. I personally prefer user experience articles - and the vast majority of those on the M8 are glowing, which to me is a much better measure as those users are much closer to the type of work I do and therefore the review will be much more meaningful.

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I always wanted a pair of EL 63 speakers but did not have enough room.The closest approach to the original sound. Fond memories.

Brian

[Guest]

A problem with a magazine revue is that the the person testing the equipment usually has it for a limited period and uses that snapshot in time to give hopefully a honest opinion.

To get the best out of a piece of equipment you usually have to work at it for a period of time to exploit its full potential.A revue or test of a piece of equipment is just one persons opinion and is probably best regarded as such.My other hobby is clay pidgeon shooting and the gun and cartridge tests are just the same.One persons opinion.

Brian