bayerische Posted April 12, 2008 Share #61 Posted April 12, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica has just gotten too expensive! No, no, Leica has turned luxury. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 12, 2008 Posted April 12, 2008 Hi bayerische, Take a look here M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
bayerische Posted April 12, 2008 Share #62 Posted April 12, 2008 Because people are hanging out for credible upgrades, not just cosmetic, and they are getting frustrated? What would be a "credible" upgrade? The shutter? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Essemmlee Posted April 12, 2008 Share #63 Posted April 12, 2008 if I change my perfectly usable screen to a NASA quality sapphire glass, will it assist me in taking better photographs? Don't know. Only you can answer that question my friend. That'll be a no then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSL Posted April 12, 2008 Share #64 Posted April 12, 2008 Because people are hanging out for credible upgrades, not just cosmetic, and they are getting frustrated? Some of us have been hanging out for a year and a half waiting for Leica either to fix the M8 or come out with a successor that's reliable enough to be used in a shoot where you can't go back and re-shoot. As I've pointed out before, I used Ms for many years beginning in the middle sixties. I loved those cameras and always knew I could depend on them. So, in spite of the problems the M8 appeared to have, I was within a heartbeat of buying one last January, but something made me hold back from clicking that final button on B&H to complete the purchase. Now, a year later I'm soooo... glad I didn't click that button. By now it's become very clear that Leica simply doesn't know how to fix the M8 and that they know they don't know how to fix the M8. Worse yet, their level of incompetence makes it unlikely that Leica will be able to come out with an M9 that's any better than the M8. So now Leica's focus seems to have shifted from producing a working camera with the kind of reliability I knew in the M4 and now know in the D3 and D2X to a camera people can wear as jewelry. With that objective in mind, the sapphire glass accessorization gambit makes perfect sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted April 12, 2008 Share #65 Posted April 12, 2008 Now, a year later I'm soooo... glad I didn't click that button. By now it's become very clear that Leica simply doesn't know how to fix the M8 and that they know they don't know how to fix the M8. Worse yet, their level of incompetence makes it unlikely that Leica will be able to come out with an M9 that's any better than the M8. So now Leica's focus seems to have shifted from producing a working camera with the kind of reliability I knew in the M4 and now know in the D3 and D2X to a camera people can wear as jewelry. With that objective in mind, the sapphire glass accessorization gambit makes perfect sense. You know something, about a year ago I was in the same situation. Except that I did hit the confirm payment button and have been thrilled to death with the camera ever since. Again, with the caveat that I know many people on this forum have had problems that Leica hasn't dealth with in the most professional manner, in my experience the M8 has been as reliable a camera as any I have ever owned. If you say that the Leica don't know how to "fix" the M8, you're implying that the camera is a fundamentally flawed camera which I think is entirely not the case. No doubt there have been quality control issues that continue to appear, which need to be fixed if Leica is to regain its reputation for building nearly indestructable cameras, but after a year of usage I think that to say that the M8 is a broken camera is simply wrong. I admit that if my camera was in Solms (or NJ as the case may be) as long as some people's I might feel differently. However, as it stands, I have no complaints about my M8 as a working tool for producing photographs. That said, I think using saphire glass is overkill. I don't baby my camera by any means and have had no scratches on the exisiting screen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhoutman Posted April 12, 2008 Share #66 Posted April 12, 2008 for me being an amateur photographer it is very difficult to answer the original question: would i buy a M9 ? to be honoust i am very worried about the current situation at leica and perhaps next photokina will show if leica have found the "resources" to come with new products. i.e non panasonic "replica's". i guess there is still a market for a R10 but i also hear that m8 sales are really not booming; sure the m8 is something special but is that feeling common ? before last photokina many m owners were very sceptical about the coming m8 and now the analog m seems almost forgotten. ........i said almost what is very confusing for me is leica's approach to the m8 future. some upgrades are coming but what is next and are people willing to pay vast amounts of money for yet some new features. if leica are really offering a full upgrade patch for the m8 i will stay with the m8 and determine which upgrade to chose. then investing another € 5-7 k in a m9 is for me just a waist of money. just my 2 cents.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSL Posted April 12, 2008 Share #67 Posted April 12, 2008 Advertisement (gone after registration) in my experience the M8 has been as reliable a camera as any I have ever owned. If you say that the Leica don't know how to "fix" the M8, you're implying that the camera is a fundamentally flawed camera which I think is entirely not the case. No doubt there have been quality control issues that continue to appear, which need to be fixed if Leica is to regain its reputation for building nearly indestructable cameras, but after a year of usage I think that to say that the M8 is a broken camera is simply wrong. ...as it stands, I have no complaints about my M8 as a working tool for producing photographs. Matt, I'm glad to hear you haven't had a problem with your M8, and I see others on the forum who can say the same thing. I don't know how much shooting you do, but I have some idea how much Jaap does (quite a lot) and he evidently hasn't had any problems not brought on by operator error -- to which all of us are prone. But that said: No, I'm not "implying" that the M8 is a flawed camera. I'm coming right out and saying it. The M8 is a flawed camera. Leica doesn't have "quality control issues." They have quality control problems. Lots of them. The camera was flawed from the get go, with green bands, purple blacks, sudden death, flawed batteries, an absurd white balance problem, a requirement to "code" short lenses at great expense, a sleep cycle that requires you to wait for it to wake up after you've let it sit for a few minutes, etc., etc., etc. Some of those problem have been fixed, though the filter fix for purple blacks seems questionable at best. The only two things that make the M8 even marginally better than a cheap point-and-shoot are the fact that it'll take Leica's marvelous lenses and doesn't have a problem with shutter lag. Outside of that, most cheap point-and-shoots are more reliable than the M8, and if you have a cheap point-and-shoot that breaks, you don't have to spend a bundle and wait months for the thing to be fixed. You can drop it in the nearest wastebasket and go buy another. Yes, some people have been lucky. But let me ask you this: Even though you "have no complaints about [your] M8 as a working tool for producing photographs," Would you depend on the M8 for an unrepeatable shoot -- say a wedding? I'm not suggesting anyone in his right mind would do that without a backup, but the backup's not the issue. The problem is that suddenly you see the one, absolutely unrepeatable candid shot that's going to be the centerpiece of the job. You lift the camera and shoot -- and -- nothing. The camera just died and you've missed the shot. At that point you can get out the backups and go on shooting, but it's too late. You may end up with a competent result for the shoot, but the one shot that was going to bring you word of mouth business for the next few years is gone forever. Photojournalism is loaded with examples like that one. Suppose that when Elliott Erwitt lifted his Leica to shoot the picture of Nixon poking Kruschiev in the chest the camera experienced "sudden death?" Do you really think Erwitt would have gone on trusting Leica? Don't misunderstand. I'm certainly not gloating over Leica's stupidity. The whole thing is a disaster that's difficult to understand. I love rangefinder cameras. I'd love to have a reliable M. But the way things are now, I'll stick to my Nikons, none of which have ever failed me even once. I know that a few do fail, but you can go look at Nikon forums and you'll have to hunt very hard to find a failure. I really, really, really wish Leica were in the same class. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted April 12, 2008 Share #68 Posted April 12, 2008 By now it's become very clear that Leica simply doesn't know how to fix the M8 and that they know they don't know how to fix the M8. Worse yet, their level of incompetence makes it unlikely that Leica will be able to come out with an M9 that's any better than the M8. So now Leica's focus seems to have shifted from producing a working camera with the kind of reliability I knew in the M4 and now know in the D3 and D2X to a camera people can wear as jewelry. With that objective in mind, the sapphire glass accessorization gambit makes perfect sense. i have to admit that i read these forums way too much...because right after i bought my first m8 i bought a second body...because of all the described problems and flaws...so far i have not had a single flaw appear....nothing...no problems at all...so i am not sure how leica will fix something that works perfectly..... sure it can be improved on....several thing come to mind, but no flaws....i use the m8 for my work and i have to depend on it, i cannot afford jewelry.... i have had everything from canon, nikon, fuji, mamiya, rollei,...MF, DSLR,...you name it....the only brand i had problems with was hasselblad, lenses, bodies...and compared to the H1 system, the m8 at its worst is a well oiled machine....then there is the canon AF focus issue and should we mention a certain kodak DSLR? ever since the medium switched to digital, there seems to be an enormous pressure to bring the latest out..yesterday....the instant information exchange does not help this at all....a product that is announced in spring to come out in fall is discussed and critiqued to death and by summer is old news...months before it hits the streets.... and then there are threads like this one with zero actual information but filled with wishes, dreams and all of a sudden it all seems real!.... i mean nikon and canon have full frame! so the m8 should be able to have it as well! never mind that it is half as thick and that certain laws of physics still prevail....but maybe if we keep posting those will fade as well... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psss Posted April 12, 2008 Share #69 Posted April 12, 2008 Matt, a requirement to "code" short lenses at great expense, Would you depend on the M8 for an unrepeatable shoot -- say a wedding? I'm not suggesting anyone in his right mind would do that without a backup, but the backup's not the issue. The problem is that suddenly you see the one, absolutely unrepeatable candid shot that's going to be the centerpiece of the job. You lift the camera and shoot -- and -- nothing. The camera just died and you've missed the shot. At that point you can get out the backups and go on shooting, but it's too late.. the coding issue is an issue with the kodak CCD...you have obviously never worked with a phase back (or other kodak CCD based backs)...the angle of the gathered light hitting the "wells" of the sensor creates that problem which has to be dealt with in software....leica choose to give us DNGs which can be used in any converter, that is why the lenses have to be coded to adjust for the problem right as the picture is taken....all the others make you use proprietory software to correct for this...... yes..again i do depend on the m8 and i would never work without a back up (well i actually had to...2 MF backs are a little too expensive).....the situation you describe is as old as photography....any camera can and will fail...or the card is full or the roll is finished.....or (my favorite) the lab screwed up the ENTIRE shoot! the assistant opened up the box with the EXPOSED 4x5 film.....mistakes and accidents and equipment failure will happen..... i have my car serviced religously.....and i still have a flat when i am in a rush.....actually only when i am in a rush.....and no i do not have a bike in the back as a back-up.... i would really understand i YOU had any problems with the m8...if you would have clicked the button and experienced all the desasters you are referring to.... if you feel so relieved, why hang out here and post how happy you are that you DON'T have the camera this entire sub forum is named after? buy one and bi..h about it when it fails you....maybe someone will take you seriously....you obviously still have some kind of a nagging itch anyway....why would you come here otherwise.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted April 12, 2008 Share #70 Posted April 12, 2008 Yes, some people have been lucky. But let me ask you this: Even though you "have no complaints about [your] M8 as a working tool for producing photographs," Would you depend on the M8 for an unrepeatable shoot -- say a wedding? I'm not suggesting anyone in his right mind would do that without a backup, but the backup's not the issue. The problem is that suddenly you see the one, absolutely unrepeatable candid shot that's going to be the centerpiece of the job. You lift the camera and shoot -- and -- nothing. The camera just died and you've missed the shot. At that point you can get out the backups and go on shooting, but it's too late. You may end up with a competent result for the shoot, but the one shot that was going to bring you word of mouth business for the next few years is gone forever. Photojournalism is loaded with examples like that one. Suppose that when Elliott Erwitt lifted his Leica to shoot the picture of Nixon poking Kruschiev in the chest the camera experienced "sudden death?" Do you really think Erwitt would have gone on trusting Leica? Don't misunderstand. I'm certainly not gloating over Leica's stupidity. The whole thing is a disaster that's difficult to understand. I love rangefinder cameras. I'd love to have a reliable M. But the way things are now, I'll stick to my Nikons, none of which have ever failed me even once. I know that a few do fail, but you can go look at Nikon forums and you'll have to hunt very hard to find a failure. I really, really, really wish Leica were in the same class. Yes, I would trust my M8 in all of those circumstances you described. I have no more reason to suspect that my M8 is going to fail at that given second due to a technical problem than it will at any other. While plenty of people here have had their M8 act up, as far as I can remember there's been only one post of a camera failing exactly at the decisive moment (someone posted about photographing the Space Shuttle launch and the camera went down). I may worry about the camera having a fault at some point (either electronic or mechanical), which is why I have a back-up camera, but to my logic to worry about it failing at a hypothetical decisive moment isn't worth the mental energy-- the odds are too small. Incidentally, the only time a camera has failed me in the past ten years (that wasn't due to a user error involving a tripod, my foot and a rocky stream) was a Nikon, but I still use it and don't worry about it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted April 12, 2008 Share #71 Posted April 12, 2008 Without the M8 there would be no Leica now, thats my instinct. I dont care that my lenses have an ir cut filter on them, my two M8s have never failed over the last year, I dont need custom functions, fourteen different shooting modes etc etc. I thoroughly enjoy the camera the lenses and the digital rangefinder experience. Actually just did a small job with my Canon 5d, needed to manually focus, forgotten and surprised how bad it is on a camera/lens designed for auto focus. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSL Posted April 12, 2008 Share #72 Posted April 12, 2008 Well, I knew I'd catch a lot of flak from the true believers. the coding issue is an issue with the kodak CCD...you have obviously never worked with a phase back (or other kodak CCD based backs)...the angle of the gathered light hitting the "wells" of the sensor creates that problem which has to be dealt with in software....leica choose to give us DNGs which can be used in any converter, that is why the lenses have to be coded to adjust for the problem right as the picture is taken....all the others make you use proprietory software to correct for this...... Which is precisely why there won't be a full-frame M for a long time to come. But I agree, it was wise of Leica to use .DNG as their default raw file. any camera can and will fail... Quite right. The question is: how often will a camera fail? The M8 has proved it's right up there near, if not at, the top of the failure pyramid. Yes, I would trust my M8 in all of those circumstances you described. Well, that's pretty trusting, but I'd never hire you to do a wedding or as a photojournalist. While plenty of people here have had their M8 act up, as far as I can remember there's been only one post of a camera failing exactly at the decisive moment I wouldn't expect any camera to fail always at the "decisive moment," but when it fails fairly often I'd really wonder if it was worth trying it at a "decisive moment." the only time a camera has failed me in the past ten years (that wasn't due to a user error involving a tripod, my foot and a rocky stream) was a Nikon, but I still use it and don't worry about it. Well, as I said, Nikons do fail, but their latest DSLRs don't fail very often, and when they do you can expect the fix to take a week or so instead of months, and you can expect the camera actually to be fixed when you get it back. You didn't say what kind of Nikon it was that failed you, but I doubt it was a D2X or a D3. You also haven't mentioned how much shooting you've done with your unfailing M8. Actually just did a small job with my Canon 5d, needed to manually focus, forgotten and surprised how bad it is on a camera/lens designed for auto focus. Sorry to hear about your bad Canon experience, though I'm not sure what it has to do with the faulty engineering in the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 13, 2008 Share #73 Posted April 13, 2008 The M8 has proved it's right up there near, if not at, the top of the failure pyramid Has it? How do you know? What is the actual percentage failure rate of M8s compared to Canon or Nikon cameras? No, better still give me the failure rates of each brand - that's the actual failure rate by the way, not the number of failures reported on an internet forum. My guess is that you don't know any of these figure. If you do I would be very interested in knowing the percentages and your source for them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 13, 2008 Share #74 Posted April 13, 2008 Well, as I said, Nikons do fail, but their latest DSLRs don't fail very often... Again give me a figure. How often do they fail? What percentage of DSLRs that Nikon sell fail? No opinions please, I'd prefer to know facts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 13, 2008 Share #75 Posted April 13, 2008 You also haven't mentioned how much shooting you've done with your unfailing M8 Personally it's 13.000+ frames over a 15 month period without a major problem. And yes, that's statistically unimportant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted April 13, 2008 Share #76 Posted April 13, 2008 I wouldn't expect any camera to fail always at the "decisive moment," but when it fails fairly often I'd really wonder if it was worth trying it at a "decisive moment." What's often? Once. twice. 10 times? The only Leica I've ever had fail was an M6 on the very first day of a holiday in France. Does that mean that I have no confidence in the drand? Of course not. Shit happens, you learn to cope. I had a backup. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted April 13, 2008 Share #77 Posted April 13, 2008 According to their website, LHSA.org, the LHSA's annual convention was last fall, not last weekend, and the next one won't be until next fall, except for something they call a "Spring Shoot", which will be next month. So what are you trying to pull? At best, that information is six months old and a lot has changed since then. david_choy58's post is a re-post of David Young's report from last fall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildlightphoto Posted April 13, 2008 Share #78 Posted April 13, 2008 ... I'd take just a good old piece of tempered glass like the unscratchable one in the Nikon for less $.... Tempered glass will scratch just as easily as untempered glass. What tempering does is put compressive forces on the outer surfaces of the glass so that the pane of glass is less likely to fracture when struck, unless the pane has a deep scratch. A deep scratch that cuts through the compressive layer will expose the inner layer under tension making it more likely that this scratched tempered glass will break. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted April 13, 2008 Share #79 Posted April 13, 2008 Quite right. The question is: how often will a camera fail? The M8 has proved it's right up there near, if not at, the top of the failure pyramid. This isn't about firing alot of flak at you, but frankly I don't think you have any concrete evidence to back that statement up. Not to say that I have evidence to the contrary, but only to say that none of us here on this forum (or any other) have the statistics to say that with anything approaching confidence. All I ever meant to post was that, in my somewhere in the middle usage (+10,000 frames--I never thought I'd ever have to justify how much I used a camera as a judge of mr credibility), that I have not had any problems worth mentioning. Well, that's pretty trusting, but I'd never hire you to do a wedding or as a photojournalist. In the ten years I have been paid to do photography or cinematography no one has _ever_ questioned my ability to do a job based on the equipment I thought appropriate to do it and if anyone chose to hire me based on my vision then found out that I wanted to use a piece of equipment they didnt't like (based entirely on other people's experiences and not their own), and then didn't want to hire me, well, I don't need their money. I wouldn't expect any camera to fail always at the "decisive moment," but when it fails fairly often I'd really wonder if it was worth trying it at a "decisive moment." Again, any camera has an equal chance of failing whilst taking a picture of the cat as it will while taking a once in a lifetime picture. Trust me, when I switch that lever from off to S I never once have worried whether the whole thing is going to work. In my life I have missed far more interesting images because my mind wasn't ready than because my camera wasn't ready. Well, as I said, Nikons do fail, but their latest DSLRs don't fail very often, and when they do you can expect the fix to take a week or so instead of months, and you can expect the camera actually to be fixed when you get it back. You didn't say what kind of Nikon it was that failed you, but I doubt it was a D2X or a D3. It was not one of the most recent models, I admit. And I also freely admit (though I haven't had to deal with it) that Leica's service times seem to need improvement. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted April 13, 2008 Share #80 Posted April 13, 2008 Again give me a figure. How often do they fail? What percentage of DSLRs that Nikon sell fail? No opinions please, I'd prefer to know facts. This whole thing has been hashed over way too much, but if you want a figure, I'll give it to you. Of the first batch, ALL of them failed. They all had to be sent back for a fix. *All* is statistically significant, is it not? Even after they were sent back, ALL M8s still have an IR problem which was not revealed by Leica until well after hundreds and perhaps thousands of them were sold. Again, I would argue that "all" is statistically significant. These problems, of course, are not what you're getting at -- what you're asking is, after the first or second batch, and not counting the IR problem (which was only resolved with what is effectively a kludge, and at the buyer's expense), how many failed? Well, we don't know, because Leica, of course, won't release those numbers. But I personally have shot Nikons for a very long time, and follow Nikon forums; and there are other people here who have shot Canons and follow Canon forums; and while some of these cameras did have problems when pushed to extremes, judging from commentary on internet sites, NONE have ever had anything like the problems of the Leica. Not even the Kodak DSLRs. Is "worst" statistically significant? JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts