Any M8 users with Nikon D3 or d300 experience?

[ptomsu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Olympus E-3 is "Full Frame" only in the sense that the sensor is as large as the lenses designed for the camera can manage, but that, IMHO is too small and imposes a compromise of resolution against sensistivity and noise.

 

The Nilon D3 is Full Frame too, and has a sensor which is 4 times as large as the Olympus. It continues to surprise and delight in equal measure with support for older fast primes and the stunning new zooms, outstanding noise performance and unmatched build integrity. There will be more and better FX cameras in the future but the D3 is doing fine for now.

 

In time, I hope we will have a FF Leica M which will allow us to take full advantage of those image circles we've paid for so expensively and which are currently being wasted outside the borders of the M8 sensor.

 

Mark,

 

I do agree with that, and sure a FF Kleinbild will always have advantages compared to FT.

 

But it is also the other way round. And having M8, Nikon and E3 I know what I am talking about.

[tom0511]

Mark,

 

I do agree with that, and sure a FF Kleinbild will always have advantages compared to FT.

 

But it is also the other way round. And having M8, Nikon and E3 I know what I am talking about.

 

The main advantage I could see is size. But is the E3 really that much smaller than the D300?

Another advantage could be larger DOF at the same f-stop.

Anything besides these?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ptomsu]

The main advantage I could see is size. But is the E3 really that much smaller than the D300?

Another advantage could be larger DOF at the same f-stop.

Anything besides these?

 

I must admit that both are not coming out as real advantages. The size of the D300 is pretty much the same as the E3 and larger DOF is true, but may not be an advantage, at least I do not see this as an advantage.

 

The advantage of the FT system as such is that it covers absolutely perfect designed lenses for digital photography if you consider the Pro and Top Pro lenses from Olympus. And they either have no counterpart in conventional DSLR systems, or they are considerably smaller if you compare to what would be available in conventional systems.

 

Having said that, for me it is more a philosophy to use the FT system than a rational decision. Not sure if I will be able to keep up doing this given the marvelous developments around like a D300 and D3.

[marknorton]

But is the E3 really that much smaller than the D300?

 

The answer is no.

 

If you take the E3 as being 100% for volume and weight, the D300 is just 0.26% bigger and 1.85% heaver, so basically the same size.

 

The D3 is 77% bigger (12% wider, 35% taller, 17% thicker) and 53% heavier than an E3, though the difference will narrow if either the E3 or the D300 is fitted with a vertical grip.

[ptomsu]

Today I just decided to step out again of the FT system. I did not come clear with the E-3 and all its implemented featured like AF and how it works as well as some other minor issues.

 

End of the day it seemed not to be the system designed for photographic dinosaurs like myself and I decided to go back to Nikon (where I still have all my FF glass) and wait for the D3 to be delivered to me. And now time is still perfect as I am not too heavily invested in Olympus FT for the moment.

 

Again this has nothing to do with the general quality of the E3 and I am sure Olympus will also fix the AF problems they seem to have today pretty soon by a new FW. But simply the E3 did not fit my needs and I feel MUCH more home at Nikon

[marknorton]

Brave decision, Peter, I'm sure you will be more than happy with the D3 and whatever is to follow it.

[ptomsu]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Brave decision, Peter, I'm sure you will be more than happy with the D3 and whatever is to follow it.

 

Yes I am sure

 

Sigh.....

[charlesphoto99]

I think what is the nexus of this argument is the fact that Nikons top of the line zoom costs about the same as Leicas bottom of the line prime. Of course pros are going to jump all over this lens! No its not a walk around lens but that's not an issue when it comes to working. Working is about working an if something as affordable as this comes along it doesn't matter what the MTF charts say - it gets you where you need to get. I currently only have a D200 but I know I'll be renting this lens when I need it.

[woodda]

Great to see Nikon is at last up there. I have a D70 and have not used it for over year having the M8. When the D3X and or D400 comes out I will certainly go there for action and wildlife. I would lilke if the M8 could use 21k ASA I just cannot get along with it and flash..

[terrycioni]

Today from cameraquest.com I received at 58mm F1.4 Voightlander Nikon mount AiS lens.

 

I have the NOCT NIKKOR 58mm F1.2 so for 379$ I wanted to give the VC lens a comparison try on the D3, although the NOCT is a full stop faster but on the D3 that is not really an issue.

 

Just before Christmas Tom Abrahamson loaned me his VC 40mm F2 AiS lens and I was mighty impressed - certainly better than the 45mm Nikkor Pancake and it has a cool proxar the screws into the lenshood and is full stop faster than now discontiued Nikkor. These are both new lenses that also come in Pentax mount as well. Check-out Stephen Gandy's CameraQuest Home

 

I managed to shoot a few frames with it today - it draws beautifully on the D3 wide open and is easy to focus. I noticed the lens is very well made. If you buy one - something to keep in mind, and Nikon points out somewhere - using evaluative metering can cause exposure issues. I use center-weighted metering with all the manual and non D lenses and it works like a charm.

 

Not sure this is relevant to anything in this thread - other than we all tend to use the odd VC lens on Leica M8s.

 

Cheers. Terry.

[monza]

Anyone have experience with this focusing screen? I have tried my manual focus 50/1.4 Nikkor on my D300 with mixed results...the VC lenses look interesting but focus would also be an issue wide open.

 

Nikon D300 Focusing Screen - Katz Eye Optics

[M_Driscoll]

Dr. Tomsu,

 

I haven't experienced any AF problems with my E3. There are a lot more complaints about D300 and D3 'autofocus' issues on the Nikonians Forum then there are E3 complaints in 'Olympus SLR Talk' on the DPR forum. A lot more Nikon users is probably one reason and the Olympus owners are probably wacky eccentrics anyway.

 

The E3 is as well constructed as the D300. The 4/3 system allows for very fast, relatively inexpensive, and small zoom lenses: "ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 12-60mm f2.8-4.0 SWD; ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 50-200mm f2.8-3.5 SWD; ZUIKO DIGITAL ED 14-35mm f2.0 SWD; and a new ultra-compact, high-performance ZUIKO DIGITAL EC-20 2x Teleconverter".

 

All of the above are brand new designs brought out with the E3 and are a lot smaller then their Nikon equivalents. I have the 12-60mm and the others are on order. the 2x converter makes the 50-200 into a 200-800mm 35mm equivalent lens. That's a lot of 'reach'.

 

I looked at a Nikkor 200-400 mm f/4G (reviewed multiple places as one of the world's great lenses) today. It's 2+ x's as large as the Olympus 50-200mm. I'll probably get the Nikon lens at some point, just because; but, I'll probably use the Olympus more because I can grab it and throw it in the back seat when I leave the house and not have to mount up an expedition. I realize that the image quality is in no way comparable; but I'm not doing this for a living and most of the time the Olympus will be good enough. If it's a nice day, I'll throw the M8 in the back seat instead.

 

Again, I like all three systems for different reasons: #1 M8 - lenses, fast primes, IQ, small rangefinder form factor, simplicity; #2 D300 - lenses, zooms, IQ, SLR format, technology; #3 E3 - IQ OK, lens size, zooms, SLR format, technology, in-body image stabilization.

 

So, any Leica rumors for PMA 2008?

 

Zenfolio | Matt Driscoll

[ptomsu]

@ Matt

 

I had similar thoughts as you - despite my issues with AF of the E3. I could maybe have waited for a FW update to fix my problems or have the camera replaced.

 

Well my main reason was - I want also to come back to DSLR FF and this was a NONO with Canon DSLRs for me. Now reading all the great reports about the D3 I decided to take my E3 issues as the hint to skip the FT system as long as I had not too much invested and stay with M8 and M glass, D3 and my FF capable Nikon glass (although it is no question it is heavier and larger than Oly pendents) and wait for the R10 and the new R AF lenses.

 

So I finally will end up with 3 systems again I fear

[tom0511]

@ Matt

 

I had similar thoughts as you - despite my issues with AF of the E3. I could maybe have waited for a FW update to fix my problems or have the camera replaced.

 

Well my main reason was - I want also to come back to DSLR FF and this was a NONO with Canon DSLRs for me. Now reading all the great reports about the D3 I decided to take my E3 issues as the hint to skip the FT system as long as I had not too much invested and stay with M8 and M glass, D3 and my FF capable Nikon glass (although it is no question it is heavier and larger than Oly pendents) and wait for the R10 and the new R AF lenses.

 

So I finally will end up with 3 systems again I fear

 

Peter,

personally I am just stepping out of the R system. While I still believe that Leica offers many excellent R lenses and they might have a slight advantage in optical quality I decided that two manual focus systems (M and R) are too much for me and the Nikon AF better completes my Leica M system. 3 systems were just too much for me, financially is one thing, mentally the other

I feel much better now and selling my R stuff allows me to get some more nice Nikon lenses, like the Nikon 200/2.0. (Plus I know my DMR is in good hands )

So why would you think about the R10 now if you havent even received the D3?

And if you think the R10 might be the way to go maybe skip the D3?

Frienkly I am not sure if Leica can follow up to Nikon and Canon in regards of an DSLR-AF-System.

In the end I am happy with the M8 - 5 years ago this was my wish and now its reality.

cheers, tom

[ptomsu]

Peter,

personally I am just stepping out of the R system. While I still believe that Leica offers many excellent R lenses and they might have a slight advantage in optical quality I decided that two manual focus systems (M and R) are too much for me and the Nikon AF better completes my Leica M system. 3 systems were just too much for me, financially is one thing, mentally the other

I feel much better now and selling my R stuff allows me to get some more nice Nikon lenses, like the Nikon 200/2.0. (Plus I know my DMR is in good hands )

So why would you think about the R10 now if you havent even received the D3?

And if you think the R10 might be the way to go maybe skip the D3?

Frienkly I am not sure if Leica can follow up to Nikon and Canon in regards of an DSLR-AF-System.

In the end I am happy with the M8 - 5 years ago this was my wish and now its reality.

cheers, tom

 

Tom,

 

you are absolutely right with your thoughts and decisions. I also sold my R system (most galss at least) and my DMR and wanted to bridge the time till R10 or higher res D3 with the E3. The E3 is actually cheap compared to the rest we discuss here. And I was never happy with my D2X, not because of the camera was bad - this is a GREAT camera, but I did not like the crop.

 

So I was hit badly with these AF issues of the E3, especially since I am used to the easy and reliable D2X AF. I hope I did not make my decision to give the E3 back too easy, but all these issues, the great results reported about the D3 and the FF of this camera made me finally do that move.

 

Now waiting for the D3 I am pretty confident that I will be happy much longer with it, because it seems to fulfill lot of my wishes and needs - maily being FF. Also if a D3X is coming with higher resolution I might stay for a while with the D3 because this proves already with 12MP excellent results.

 

Now if Leica manages to bring the R10 with superframe then - I always have said that here - assume this beast will become very expensive, especially the lenses will be. New design, AF etc. But the other issue is also that I am not sure if Leica can make a decent AF as you say.

 

So I most probably will stay with Nikon DSLR only, maybe invest in a higher res model like D3X or D4 later with the money I spare for not buying the R10 gear.

 

Would make great sense: 2 systems only - M (M8 and M9, yes I want FF in the M system also) and D3. And buy lot of the great Nikon lenses I think I need.

 

And it is easier to stay with 2 systems, mainly because of handling and knowing these systems very well.

 

Time will tell:-)

 

PS: I am also interested in the 2/200, so if you have any experience with it let me know

[gwelland]

Anyone have experience with this focusing screen? I have tried my manual focus 50/1.4 Nikkor on my D300 with mixed results...the VC lenses look interesting but focus would also be an issue wide open.

 

Nikon D300 Focusing Screen - Katz Eye Optics

 

I had a couple of custom scribed Katz Eye focussing screens made for my D2X's. They are much brighter than the standard screen and the MF performance is excellent. A little pricey if you have custom screens done but for MF lens use I found them to be very worthwhile.

 

I haven't tried the D300 screen but I'd fully expect it to be just as useful as all the previous Katz screens. Rachel Katz provides excellent support for her product and well worth contacting directly.

[gwelland]

I note a lot of discussion about the D3/14-24 here. A cautionary note for anyone using the 14-24: the hood does a good job protecting the front lens element but it is also somewhat brittle. I managed to knock my hood and about 2cm shattered off the top petal. The good news was that I managed to pick up all the shards and they super-glued back in place but now I need to find an opportunity to send the lens to Melville to get a new hood put on it. I've a yosemite trip at the end of the month so it'll have to live with it's 'ouch' taped up until after then.

 

I'm very relieved that the hood sacrificed itself rather than hitting the front element.

 

I've found that the the live view and 14-24 combination on the D3 is great for framing up super close-up WA shots. The glass performance is nothing short of exceptional - it seems sharper than my WATE and a heck of a lot easier to use too.

 

A potential downside is that you can't fix a polarizer to the lens. I thought that this wouldn't be an issue for me for outdoor work but the reality is that being able to use a polarizer is very useful when shooting foliage, even in overcast conditions. This I'm missing and so I'll probably end up picking up another 17-35/2.8 at some point - another lens classic.

[ptomsu]

I note a lot of discussion about the D3/14-24 here. A cautionary note for anyone using the 14-24: the hood does a good job protecting the front lens element but it is also somewhat brittle. I managed to knock my hood and about 2cm shattered off the top petal. The good news was that I managed to pick up all the shards and they super-glued back in place but now I need to find an opportunity to send the lens to Melville to get a new hood put on it. I've a yosemite trip at the end of the month so it'll have to live with it's 'ouch' taped up until after then.

 

I'm very relieved that the hood sacrificed itself rather than hitting the front element.

 

I've found that the the live view and 14-24 combination on the D3 is great for framing up super close-up WA shots. The glass performance is nothing short of exceptional - it seems sharper than my WATE and a heck of a lot easier to use too.

 

A potential downside is that you can't fix a polarizer to the lens. I thought that this wouldn't be an issue for me for outdoor work but the reality is that being able to use a polarizer is very useful when shooting foliage, even in overcast conditions. This I'm missing and so I'll probably end up picking up another 17-35/2.8 at some point - another lens classic.

 

I only can recommend the 17-35. Although it is already a pretty "old" design it is an amazing sharp and colorful lens and especialy used on FF it is for me kind of a standard lens

 

Interesting that you find the 14-24 outperforming the WATE. I so far cannot tell, because I am waiting for my D3 and the 14-24, but I am pretty sure it is much easier to handle.

[marknorton]

Plus of course, the 14-24mm on a D3 goes much wider than a WATE at 16mm does on an M8 (equivalent to 21mm FF).

 

That front lens element is vulnerable and good to hear the lens hood took the knock. Let us know how much Nikon charge...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[gwelland]

The good news is that it looks like the hood should be easy to replace. From the outside it looks like it's a modular construction secured by the front ring on the lens and I'm sure it's been designed to be easily replaceable by Nikon technicians. My only real concern at this point is spare parts availability although I've got to imagine that given the design of the lens & hood and the fact that it's a pro lens targeted at pro shooters, that Nikon will expecting field damage and be prepared accordingly. I guess I'll find out at some point.