moikle Posted September 17, 2006 Share #21 Posted September 17, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Put me down for the film M. I really like the mechanical operation and the feel of advancing the film and rewinding.... It's like a sacred ritual that I would hate to lose. Admitted that I don't take pictures for a living, and that would no doubt change my priorities here, I'm comfortable with my MP for the foreseeable future. Thanks. Allan I could not agree more. For a while I thought I was on my own. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 17, 2006 Posted September 17, 2006 Hi moikle, Take a look here Cost no object MP/M7 or M8?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
SteveYork Posted September 17, 2006 Share #22 Posted September 17, 2006 Because it was a silent, non obtrusive camera, great for street shooting. After that, it appeared it was also great for people shooting in general and for travelling...So the M8 has all these qualities plus a lot more... What's the shutter lag on the M8? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sinwen Posted September 17, 2006 Share #23 Posted September 17, 2006 Why not having both as cost is excluded ! pesonnally I feel uneasy if I no neg or slides to refer to, it is like I haven't take a picture, the digital file is something virtual to me, I can't visualise it, I hold nothing in my hands. Digital to me is more a consumer's product than a photographic tool..... old man probably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted September 17, 2006 Share #24 Posted September 17, 2006 M8, hands down. (Sold my M7 already in anticipation although I did buy a new Bessa R2M just so I'll always be able to shoot film. I'll keep my Nikon CoolScan V too.) THE deciding factor for me was the rapid decline in the quality of available color film processing. There are only TWO pro labs within 100 miles of where I live and, of course, they are spendy whenever I have used them. To see twenty-somethings whip my precious negatives around their mini-labs is distressing to the max. So many of these eager youngsters have no idea how really fragile a negative is! Yes, there is better image permanence with film, but not enough of a reason to slow down my dollar accumulation in preparation for the M8 buy the instant it's available. Yes, the convenience of digital is also appealing but the factors mentioned above pushed me over the edge. I slammed down a deposit three months ago and remain #1 on their waiting list at my local authorized Leica dealer. My Leica glass will continue to have a life after film! Yes, I believe convenient, local, good processing will go the way of the dinosaur before film disappears. I will probably start developing my own B&W shortly. Ironically, the only reason I started thinking about the M8 as an option was when my local professional lab lost two rolls. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted September 17, 2006 Share #25 Posted September 17, 2006 Put me down for the film M. I really like the mechanical operation and the feel of advancing the film and rewinding.... It's like a sacred ritual that I would hate to lose. Admitted that I don't take pictures for a living, and that would no doubt change my priorities here, I'm comfortable with my MP for the foreseeable future. Thanks. Allan I echo this sentiment. Plus going to the M8 is not a seamless transition. You may have to acquire at least one new lens to account for the crop factor. And although I appreciate Leica keeping things simple and somewhat idiot proof, there be a learning curve for the camera and photoshop, ect. But I'm sure it will be a great little camera that will sell very well. I'm just curious when the back orders will be filled and these cameras appear on store shelves. Probably not to the latter half of 2007. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
avsearle Posted September 17, 2006 Share #26 Posted September 17, 2006 A difficult question.In March I took my M6 (which I hadn't used for a good while since I bought digital SLR) to Krakow and Auschwitz.I agree that the physical feel of advancing the film and composing the shot is a totally different experience.With rare exception, my shots were all keepers because you have to adopt a slower, more thoughtful style with a rangefinder film camera.You tend not to make lots of exposures with digital, thinking you can delete if unsuitable. Mind you I did receive one or two side glances going round Auschwitz with a Leica.Big decision-especially as I would have to sell M6 to afford an M8! Avril Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHAG Posted September 17, 2006 Share #27 Posted September 17, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) A M8.I already have the M7+first rate scanners+everything system and this is a nice tool. Which scanner, Pascal ? I'm looking for one…;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 17, 2006 Share #28 Posted September 17, 2006 I have 2 of them: a Minolta 5400 for B&W and a Nikon LS4000+50 slides batch loader for color. If you are looking for one, I would go for either the Nikon LS50 or the LS5000+loader if you have the budget. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHAG Posted September 17, 2006 Share #29 Posted September 17, 2006 Merci, Pascal I was thinking of a Nikon 9000, as I might have some for a very nice price. Mainly because it has 6 x 6 capability for my Hasselblad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted September 17, 2006 Share #30 Posted September 17, 2006 I echo Allan Brewer's sentiments. Although I enjoy my D2 immensely and have gone well up the learning curve with PS CS2, history suggests that I wait for the M9! Why? My first M was the M3 which I still use. My second M was an M6 which gets a lot of use. So the natural arithmetical progression is the M9, (assuming it offers something new). Perhaps the M9 will have a full frame sensor and yield file sizes large enough for library use. For the forseeable future my scanned M slides give far superior results to most affordable and available digital cameras. OK, scanning does take time but it makes you selective and I find the process quite satisfying. That will rock the boat! David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 17, 2006 Share #31 Posted September 17, 2006 If you have a Blad, a 9000 is a good choice indeed. But getting the best of it can be tricky as far as I know. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHAG Posted September 17, 2006 Share #32 Posted September 17, 2006 Well, I have an alternative with my lab : they scan my films on Imacon for 5 € each in JPEG, or 10 € each in RAW… PS : Why tricky ? To avoid grain ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 17, 2006 Share #33 Posted September 17, 2006 I'm no expert of the 9000 but getting a scan 100% sharp can be difficult: you'll need the special film holders with anti-moire. And there are other issues but I do not remember which ones. I just know it is not as easy as a LS50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHAG Posted September 17, 2006 Share #34 Posted September 17, 2006 But LS50 doesn't accept 6x6, does it ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pascal_meheut Posted September 17, 2006 Share #35 Posted September 17, 2006 No, that is the problem. Scanners for 35mm films only are quick and efficient. Scanner for bigger format are good but slower and harder to use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 18, 2006 Share #36 Posted September 18, 2006 What's the shutter lag on the M8? Whatever it might be, I never noticed shutter lag at all with the M8. It's a non-issue. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted September 18, 2006 Share #37 Posted September 18, 2006 Cost no object? MP3 and Imacon 949 scanner with multi-roll trays. Total, about $26,000. and change. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted September 18, 2006 Share #38 Posted September 18, 2006 Johann, I recently bought the 9000 scanner to scan a large collection of legacy MF slides. First impressions are very favourable. It is not slow, is quieter than my LS5000 and yields stunning images. Do get the glass carrier; it is essential and should have been included as part of the standard package. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChipNovaMac Posted September 18, 2006 Share #39 Posted September 18, 2006 A difficult question.In March I took my M6 (which I hadn't used for a good while since I bought digital SLR) to Krakow and Auschwitz.I agree that the physical feel of advancing the film and composing the shot is a totally different experience.With rare exception, my shots were all keepers because you have to adopt a slower, more thoughtful style with a rangefinder film camera.You tend not to make lots of exposures with digital, thinking you can delete if unsuitable. Mind you I did receive one or two side glances going round Auschwitz with a Leica.Big decision-especially as I would have to sell M6 to afford an M8!Avril I agree with the thoughts here. I was much more selective in my shots with my Bronica ETRsi vs.my M6TTL vs. my DSLR. Which approach is better is open to opinion. I think that the M8 in combo with my M6TTL will be the best of both worlds. No longer will I have to worry about carrying 10 to 20+ rolls of film on a trip, - a few memory cards (and/or maybe my P-2000) and 5 or so rolls of film will do. I took a trip last summer to SF with a Canon Rebel XT and a few lenses for 5 days. I ended up with more than 1100 images. I doubt that I would have carried that much film with me. But because I was shooting digital I was able to test more on ideas I had. Also it allowed me to go back once I saw that a particular night time series had "technical" issues. I see the M8 and having a film M body as the perfect combo for most of us. In many ways I am happy that the new M* will not give up 3 to 5 fps. IMO that is why I made the move to Nikon this year (among other reasons). Add to the debate of the worth of the M8 and RF's in general - since I tend to shoot wide angle, it is easier to shoot via DOF scale on RF lenses than the non-exsistant DOF on SLR's -and even if you happen to remember the DOF tables for certain lenses on DSL's - the differences in the viewfinder view are disconcerting for some of us. I think one of the issues for some us is the overall cost of Leica gear - in particular when traveling. A Leica kit covering 15 to 90 with one body w/a flash is greater than $10KUS replacement cost. My newer Nikon kit with two bodies (one an IR conversion) with a flash and two lenses (the 10.5 and the 18-200VR) is valued at about $3.5KUS. I worry on how a $11KUS vs. $3.5KUS loss would be looked upon by my insurance company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted September 18, 2006 Share #40 Posted September 18, 2006 I worry on how a $11KUS vs. $3.5KUS loss would be looked upon by my insurance company. They assess the risk and charge the premium accordingly don't they? If you're that worried, don't lose it!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.