Jump to content

M8 body


bono0272

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is this the M8 body?

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

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I saw this image this morning. There are a number of giveaways that it is not the real thing:

 

10.) The top right side seems odd and not ergonomic. It would feel awkward in my hands. I would like to see it slanted like an M7.

 

9.) The back controls seem lacking in functions and appear to be only a partial of lift of those found on the Digital-Module-R.

 

8.) The USB connector door appears out of place. I would think that USB connection would not be given such precedence and placed so non ergonomically close to the camera strap eyelet. I’d like to see it hidden behind a removable bottom plate.

 

7.) The shutter speed dial appears too small the accommodate the extra shutter speeds eluded too.

 

6.) There is no indication that the bottom plate is removable. It would be both an unnecessary design effort and retreat from tradition Leica M design to implement a recessed hinged door(s) for the battery and memory card compartment(s).

 

5.) The right side body protector above the camera strap eyelet seems too short to provide actual protection.

 

4.) The LCD, on the back, appear to small to be the reported 2.5” size.

 

3.) The back flash sync jack is missing.

 

2.) The “8” of the M8 does not match the M in weight or perspective.

 

1.) The blue auto-focus assistant lamp, to the upper left of the Leica emblem, is too close to the edge of the body. Err, folks, there is no auto-focus to begin with.

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

Geoff: while I have my doubts about these images, too:

 

10.) I think it will be MP-like, not M7 - with a control dial for ISO/WB/MOIRE/etc. in place of the rewind knob.

 

9.) Agree

 

8.) Not sure I agree. Means one would have to lay the camera on its back to plug in the USB cord, thus hiding the LCD - which usually provides some info while USB/FW connected (at least on my D2/Sony R1). I'm 50/50 as to whether the connectivity will be through the bottom or side.

 

7.) M7-sized dial - and the M7 dial has lots of looseness between the numbers. I found it very easy to squeeze in the additional 4 shutter speeds (2000-8000 + AUTO) in MY PS design attempt.

 

6.) Hmm - so we have to hold the M8 bottom plate in our teeth while changing cards or batteries? That replicates the M film experience a little TOO accurately. 8^)

 

5.) Perhaps

 

4.) Actually, when I compare my D2 2.5" screen to the back of my M's, this looks about right - although I didn't believe it either until I actually compared the real thing. The D2 screen fits nicely into the leather-covered band of an M. I'm more concerned about the lack of a LOT of controls - if the motor speed and exposure compensation and ISO and WB require digging into the menus, that's gonna be a pain.

 

3.) Perhaps Leica has done away with this excresence? The M is not primarily a studio camera.

 

2.) 50/50

 

1.) Suggestions are that it's either a white-balance sensor (although the blue tint would make for awfully yelow pictures), or a meter cell to compare the scene brightness to the light coming through the lens (thus allowing calculation of the shooting aperture for EXIF data). You're the only one so far who's thought of it as an AF-assist light.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You're the only one so far who's thought of it as an AF-assist light.

 

Well, I never thought of it as an AF-assist lamp. I was just trying to figure out why it seemed strange to me and why someone would erroneously include it in a mockup. However, a white balance sensor makes sense, although I still feel it oddly placed so close to the edge.

 

I could go either way with you on the other points. Basically, I was trying to qualify the renderings as fake.

 

Additionally, a flash sync jack would be really handy for handheld flash work, not just studio use where I would use a wireless adapter anyway. I use a Wein HSHSB adapter on my Digilux 2 but wish I could do without for handheld flash work.

 

As far as the removable bottom plate, I was never that fond of holding it in my teeth either with my M2. However, I like the promise it might bring for attaching a higher capacity battery pack or combo multi memory card pack. Wishful thinking on my part.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well Mark, I have fooled with the images, listened to all the fake-sayers, considered the source and its environment and on my reality meter set at ISO 6 it reads 80% real vs 20% fake.

A more fun question would be, if it is real can you live with what you can see at present. To me it seems that they have tried to prserve the "M" experience....set the camera up (load film, set meter) shut the LCD off and take pictures. The only outward physical change in that might be the viewfinder eyepiece, which just may be more eyeglass friendly or require new diopter correction lenses (which I use). If it is real, then we are seeing the field testors' refinements to the ergonomics & controls. Do they look like they make sense? Will they make more sense when you have one in your hands?

Rangefinders can be really strange to those who have never used them and I'm sure we'll hear about that, too....

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is clearly a fake to me, just looking at the image: the shadows does not match in the different parts of the image (look at the direction on the bodym and then on the lens), the pixel sizes aren't righ (so big on the leica logo and then so resolved in the bottom shadow??), and the perspective... well it just seems a little be odd to me: Fake.

 

Anyone taking bets? 8^)

 

Maybe a little bit off this thread... but I have a question regarding the M8. Having smaller sensor size, does it mean that the performance of the Noctilux would get better in terms of vigneting? after all, the edges of the sensor are not as far away from the center of the lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think, this might be a mockup based on the knowledge of someone who saw a real M8 at field testing. This would explain the "blue lamp". Anyway, preservation of the MP/M7 look is an important feature of the M8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is clearly a fake to me, just looking at the image: the shadows does not match in the different parts of the image (look at the direction on the bodym and then on the lens), the pixel sizes aren't righ (so big on the leica logo and then so resolved in the bottom shadow??), and the perspective... well it just seems a little be odd to me: Fake.

 

Anyone taking bets? 8^)

 

Maybe a little bit off this thread... but I have a question regarding the M8. Having smaller sensor size, does it mean that the performance of the Noctilux would get better in terms of vigneting? after all, the edges of the sensor are not as far away from the center of the lens.

Studio product shots are often done on light tables using large format cameras employing tilts, shifts and swings and with lots of lights. What you see as fake lighting is easily done in professional studios. The artifacts are strange in some areas, but considering the path the image has traveled, not unexpected. Large format negative/transparency, scanned, resized for a PDF document, screen captured, E-mailed, resized for web display:eek: ...it is surprising that it is as good as it is. Jorge's source seems to be authentic and he has posted pictures of the new Tri-Elmar and viewfinder over at RFF.

The crop of the sensor takes off the outer 12.5% of a 35mm frame, but the sensor fall off might affect the new edges in some way, too. Something else to take bets on....:D

Bob

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the comments noting the lack of the side locking lug along with a couple of other points:

 

Obviously this will not be a film camera. As such there is no need for the bottom cover to register on one side, then be 'folded' over to the locking position. The fluid motion provided in that activity allows the hinged back plate to be engaged more easily and fully, and assures that both the film canister in all Ms and LTMs is seated correctly.

 

From the M4 onward, it also assured the leader was engaged properly. Try to imagine bottom cover engagement on any film LTM or M without it. It would be more difficult than it is now.

 

None of that should be necessary now with no film or container to contend with. After all, on the film cameras one has to perform this activity every 36 (or if you're careful and cheap like me, 38) exposures. Hard to imagine battery or card replacement will need to occur anywhere near this often on the M8. Unless you're naked (and running) there is always some place to put the bottom cover.

 

I suspect Leica recognized this and started with a clean sheet regarding the bottom cover. Probably a simple placement with a 90 degree locking twist in the center. (With a concession to the purists of using the locking mechanism from the current parts bin.) The end would be lesser machining and assembly expense. Note that would not make the end product 'cheaper' in quality.

 

Heck, if the shutter and cell are enclosed in a light tight 'box', one could expose without a bottom cover as I'm certain the battery and card are 'snap fit' and wouldn't fall out.

 

I can also imagine that the rear eye piece WILL be larger. Certainly makes sense as doubtless there will be more information to be presented in there than in the M7. Didn't Nikon do this about 25 years ago with the F3HP? That would explain why more vertical space is provided for the top cover; simply to not have the eyepiece intrude upon the vulcanite (or whatever covering).

 

As far as the lack of a PC jack goes, who really uses one anymore? Wouldn't be surprised if someone, probably Metz, already has a wireless/slave arrangement for the hot shoe and their flash already in their warehouse boxed and ready to ship for those who do.

 

The M7 size dial will work fine in terms of space. The purported 1/2000-4000 speeds are all that need be added. Space for them will be made available by deleting the red arrow for the flash setting at 1/50, and the additional spacing that is currently given for the manual 1/60 and 1/125 M7 settings. Remember this will be an ALL electric camera.

 

Not enough buttons by the LCD? Don't think so. Since their is no intergal flash on the M8, no need for a button there as on my D2. The rest of the functions could be handled via the menu/multi purpose wheel. Suspect they've learned a little since the DMR of two years ago in laying these things out.

 

The blue light? Don't have a clue. But I'm sure, at 4500 to 5 grand, it sure doesn't stand for a K Mart Blue light special.

 

Are the pics real? Don't have a clue there either. But I'll bet they are damned close.

 

One thing I haven't seen discussed is metering modes. I've got 3 on my D2. What's the arrangement/choices on the Rs with the DMR?

 

Best,

 

Jerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Unless you're naked (and running) there is always some place to put the bottom cover."

 

Perfect job description for us photojournalists - 8^)

 

1/8000, Jerry, 1/8000.

 

R8/R9 cameras have center-weight, spot, and multi-area pattern metering options, with or without the DMR. The SLR mirror/box allow room for the meter to see the whole image area and then pick and choose the region to actually meter.

 

No one yet has figured out a way to have a variable metering pattern in a narrow RF body (Cf. Leica, Contax G, Hexar RF, Bessas). Doesn't mean Leica could not come up with something.

 

I do know that when the M6 was introduced, they originally used a much brighter white spot - and had problems with flare and stray light affecting the part of the film exposed first, while the white dot was still sliding out of sight, because it reflected enough light to have an effect. That's why the metering dot is now grayish.

 

This may mean it would be tricky to paint the whole shutter white, so that the meter cell could pick and choose between multi-area, CW and spot patterns. I suspect we'll get plain ol' vanilla center-weighted M7 metering (or a rough approximation of same via one gray shutter blade, as in the cameras mentioned above).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was surprised to read that (about the flare off the white dot) too and was musing whether the M8 will use the same option. The R-D1 solution - grey shutter blades and a white centre one - does seem a bit crude though. That got me thinking about the M5 and the CL with their cells on swing arms...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andy/Mark,

 

I to was surprised that the white dot on my M6, purchased used about 10 years ago, was not a bright white. My concern at the time was that its relative dullness would represent over exposed images.

 

Was told not to worry and in practice the meter did its job. At the time I suspected that each meter was 'tuned' to the shutters individual spot at the factory during assembly .

 

Re: A swing arm arrangement for the meter. I guess that would be a possibility. However, given the high(er) shutter speeds envisioned, would that not slow down the total exposure response times? Long a forte of the M series.

 

Notwithstanding the introduction of another mechanical component raises a potential for failure down the road.

 

In that I understand you can't meter off of the digital chips (hence no true TTL flash capability) perhaps Leica was forced into some original thinking here.

 

Best,

 

Jerry

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we'll get a swing arm for one minute - on the M5, it used to swing into position when you cocked the shutter and then flip out of the way just before the shutter opened. In the M8, with it's motorised shutter, it would be moving like the mirror on an SLR with implications for vibration and noise, not to mention reliability as you say.

 

I guess I feel painting one of the blades white is a bit of a bodge/kludge; in the M8, I'd prefer the shutter blades to be black with the whte/grey circle as we have now. As least that indicates some thought had gone into it!

 

Jerry.I'm sure you're right about the M6 shutter; if you ever needed to have the shutter curtains replaced, they would have to re-calibrate the meter, because the density/reflectivity of the white blob must sure vary from sample to sample and over time.

 

Your point about TTL flash metering is interesting. I wonder how they are going to do that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...