Jamie Roberts Posted February 6, 2008 Share #141 Posted February 6, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Jamie, I don't have a dog in this fight. {snipped} Cameron, I know you don't, and I'm sorry to have used your name (but in truth I was responding to Alan's mention of you along with JHH. Nevermind, it was still stupid of me and I apologise). Nevertheless, as I mentioned in the post, I respect your opinion, precisely because you're dealing with details, experience and with a rational position. The difference between the way you state your opinion of the M8 and the way JHH's blog does is, simply, a night and day difference. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 6, 2008 Posted February 6, 2008 Hi Jamie Roberts, Take a look here Another pros view on the upgrade. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
stunsworth Posted February 6, 2008 Share #142 Posted February 6, 2008 First of all, I guessed a very reasonable $3000, not $100 (don't know where my UK pound key is ). Don't worry, I'm still trying to find the 'hash' key on this MacBook keyboard. Perhaps Apple will offer it as an upgrade <grin>. The only point I was making John is that you're asking a hypothetical question. Until Nikon announce such a camera there's no real question and no real answer. As I said, in principle I would possibly buy that camera, after thinking about it overnight I'll firm that up to a probable - provided I could see a good review or test the camera myself. If Leica produced a similar camera at a similar price then I'd be interested in that too. I really like my M8, I haven't enjoyed using any other camera anywhere near as much, but it annoys me when people post ill informed articles. As soon as I saw the word 'jewellery' mentioned at the beginning I knew exactly how the article would progress. I used to say in the film days that if a better (and that means better for _me_) camera came along I'd switch from Leica to that. I still believe that, and it still hasn't happened. I used a canon digital SLR for about three years before getting the M8, much as I like those cameras moving back to Leica with the M8 was like putting on a comfortable pair of old shoes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted February 6, 2008 Share #143 Posted February 6, 2008 Cameron, I know you don't, and I'm sorry to have used your name (but in truth I was responding to Alan's mention of you along with JHH. Nevermind, it was still stupid of me and I apologise)... For the record, this is all that I wrote: I can see that many users are very happy with the performance and reliability of the M8 in their applications. There don't seem to be any "universal truths" regarding the M8, but if Cameron Davidson is not completely happy with his M8s, that is (a) huge red flag for me. Cameron has been my best friend for 30+ years and I've known and respected John Harrington for a long time too. I think the personal statements about John and his motives are way out of line. __________________ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KM-25 Posted February 7, 2008 Share #144 Posted February 7, 2008 I'm sorry, but as much as I like the M8, it has trickled down somewhat into the realm of "recreation" rather than pro use for me. So with that said, I have to agree with what the jist of this blog says. At this point, even though the high ISO noise is worse than most digital cameras costing a few hundred dollars, at least the AWB is much better. I paid $4,800 for mine, so I'll keep it and use it for what I got it for. Low key documentary work, some light hiking trips and other low risk stuff. The LCD screen and shutter should have been in it in the first place, still not going to pay the price of a good clean M6 and 35 Summicron for this marginal so called upgrade. This time around, I think Leica is insane.. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted February 7, 2008 Share #145 Posted February 7, 2008 {snipped}The LCD screen and shutter should have been in it in the first place, still not going to pay the price of a good clean M6 and 35 Summicron for this marginal so called upgrade. This time around, I think Leica is insane.. I appreciate your perspective, but the screen, at least has never been done by anyone before. Whether or not you feel it's worth it is another question. And the shutter is functional, and except in extreme cases, quite quiet from 5 or 10 feet away. As has been mentioned in other posts, the alternatives for making the M8 even quieter are actually more expensive than the price of the shutter upgrade. I still fail to see what the problem is with offering an optional upgrade to those who want it. When Canon changed the LCD on the 1d2N from the 1d2, I don't remember 1d2 owners gnashing their teeth saying Canon was insane. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted February 7, 2008 Share #146 Posted February 7, 2008 Surely what we need to do is to look at what Leica has on offer as individuals and decide if the package is what we want? If it is, then we buy it, if it isn't, well, we don't. Personally this particular upgrade doesn't give me anything I feel I particularly need. But hey, we're individuals, what one person wants isn't necessarily the same as another. If I was shooting weddings in an environment with low ambient noise, then I'd probably think the update was pretty essential. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CliPar Posted February 7, 2008 Share #147 Posted February 7, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) When Canon changed the LCD on the 1d2N from the 1d2, I don't remember 1d2 owners gnashing their teeth saying Canon was insane. Perhaps had Canon offered 1d2 owners the option of paying 1200 euros for that new LCD and an obligatory new shutter with slower top speed and flash sync, the word "insanity" might've crept up in conversation Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted February 7, 2008 Share #148 Posted February 7, 2008 Perhaps had Canon offered 1d2 owners the option of paying 1200 euros for that new LCD and an obligatory new shutter with slower top speed and flash sync, the word "insanity" might've crept up in conversation True instead they just changed the LCD and charged another $5K. Not insane at all Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CliPar Posted February 7, 2008 Share #149 Posted February 7, 2008 True instead they just changed the LCD and charged another $5K. Not insane at all Not if you look at their sales records Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted February 7, 2008 Share #150 Posted February 7, 2008 Not if you look at their sales records I completely agree Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 7, 2008 Share #151 Posted February 7, 2008 So, Clive, how much would it have cost a 1DII owner to get a bigger screen (and "picture styles", and a new warranty) - by selling their almost new II to buy a IIn? My guess is at least $1000, and likely more, based on the price differential between the models at KEH. Leica and Canon are both crazy - like foxes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share #152 Posted February 7, 2008 HI Jamie The id mk11 and mk 11n are vastly different cameras the n is much smoother a bigger raw buffer and yes in the worlds of journalism and sports it does make a difference. The autofocus on the n is much better.the 11n had less noise then the 11 as well I tried going back to the mk11 after getting a couple of 11n s and mk 111s I hated it . I shoot prosports for part of my living and I know what I am talking about. The difference in upgrading was bout 15000 bucks . So let us review I got a bigger screen, better autofocus less noise a smoother camera, better raw buffer. A brand new body. A bit more then the Leica is doing for less money . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted February 7, 2008 Share #153 Posted February 7, 2008 I shoot prosports for part of my living and I know what I am talking about :D :D Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 7, 2008 Share #154 Posted February 7, 2008 Hey, David, thanks for that info (I'll assume $1500 rather than what you typoed - wink!) So sports shooters could pay that - net - and get something useful to them. And Leica-M owners can pay a bit more than that ('twas ever thus!) and get something useful to THEM (quieter shutter - a significant part of RF shooting). Query - how many 1D shooters griped and moaned that the bigger LCD and better AF "should have been put in the 1D to begin with!!"? Let alone the 8Mpixels vs. the first 1D's 4? In digital - upgrades happen! BTW - not that it helps much - I AM sickened by the fact that you gave up your 35 'lux Aspherical (not ASPH) due to bad information from someone at Leica prior to the M8 launch. Really sorry - would have felt just like you if I'd been "advised" into an unnecessary mistake like that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share #155 Posted February 7, 2008 Back in the day 4 megs was considered great. The difference to me is for the canons I got better autofocus, image quality lower noise ,better shooting capability bigger buffer and a brand new body for 1500. For 1800 with the leica I get a quieter shutter that I should have had in the first place and a screen I do not care about. There is no lower noise at the upper isos and no frame line improvement, the 2 worst things about the camera. Mind you I do love it at 160 and 320 can live at 640 after I will not use it. Leica should make the shutter available to dag and all the great independent repair places and get it to us at a reasonable price. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephengilbert Posted February 7, 2008 Share #156 Posted February 7, 2008 This is becoming pathological. Do any of you consider this thread to be a discussion in which anyone's mind will be changed? There are some people who post here whose opinions I respect, others who I think are fools, and many who I don't know. As time goes by, some members of the the last group migrate to one of the others. But I don't see the need to argue with people once it becomes clear that there is nothing to be gained by it. Is it fun? Sorry. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
photogdave Posted February 7, 2008 Share #157 Posted February 7, 2008 Back in the day 4 megs was considered great. The difference to me is for the canons I got better autofocus, image quality lower noise ,better shooting capability bigger buffer and a brand new body for 1500. For 1800 with the leica I get a quieter shutter that I should have had in the first place and a screen I do not care about. There is no lower noise at the upper isos and no frame line improvement, the 2 worst things about the camera. Mind you I do love it at 160 and 320 can live at 640 after I will not use it. Leica should make the shutter available to dag and all the great independent repair places and get it to us at a reasonable price. David Canon should have given you the better autofocus, lower noise and bigger buffer in the first place! I can't believe you had to spend $1500 on upgrades that should have been in the camera when it was released. Canon is nothing but a money-grabbing evil corporation that puts profit above customer satisfaction! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted February 7, 2008 Share #158 Posted February 7, 2008 Despite the pathology, I agree with Andy: David, I'm sorry someone steered you wrong on the 35 Lux. That was terrible. Dave, As for the 1d2n vs 1d2, from a wedding photographers viewpoint, there was nothing in the upgrade worth $1500 It's all perspective, seriously. As for whether the shutter "should have been in the current M8" that's where we part ways. The road to hell is paved with should haves All I know is no-one bought the M8 without knowing what the shutter sounded like. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted February 7, 2008 Author Share #159 Posted February 7, 2008 Hi Actually living in the sticks I did not know what the camera sounded like. I incorrectly assumed it would be quiet.For me the worst noise is the noise after the shutter. It only makes sense to me a leica should sound like a leica quiet. The 1d mk 111 or 1ds mk111 on the quiet mode is much quieter then a m8. Not that I would want to use the mk 111 either model, I do have both, in place of when I want to use a leica but even a big hunk of a camera can be quieter then the m8 . I appreciate all that is saying leica's conduct with my 35 aspherical was wrong. I continue the conversation because I believe like Bill Pierce that leica is headed down a bad road and the more dialogue we generate the better the company will be. One more thing I would never think of the 1d mk 11 or or 11n intended market was ever the wedding market, maybe the 1ds models def the 5d and smaller cameras 20 d 30 d .maybe I am wrong, and no offense is intended, about wedding photography. David Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuckcars Posted February 8, 2008 Share #160 Posted February 8, 2008 Leica has it right. I will upgrade every time. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.