frc Posted September 17, 2006 Share #81 Posted September 17, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Erwin puts it wrong this time. His review based upon an unfinnished camera makes me wonder what happened to him. Whether I agreed with his point of view or not, his reviews although polarised as they sometimes are I've always taken serious. But this, come on. It's a shame to have a college like Sean stating your article is not to be taken seriously. Suppose I'll just wait for real future user informative reviews with pics. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 17, 2006 Posted September 17, 2006 Hi frc, Take a look here Erwin Puts review. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
albertwang Posted September 17, 2006 Share #82 Posted September 17, 2006 So why does Puts get a M8 early when all he is going to do is give a negative review??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frc Posted September 17, 2006 Share #83 Posted September 17, 2006 BTW why isn't Leica displaying any pictures taken with the cam. They've also abolished the links to the leica-using photographers witch I used alot. Has Leica lost its interrest in photography and is now only focusing on gear. They should have given an M8 to Gibson ( yes one with red leather ) to show us what he can do with it. ( Gibson digital!!!!!!!!? ) Or perhaps Iain Parker who expressed his excitement about a digital M on the former forum. Come on Leica, I didn't look at the specs when I decided for an MP, what pictures it took and how is what was of my concern. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 17, 2006 Share #84 Posted September 17, 2006 He didn't give it a negative review IMHO. He included phases such as... "...anyone who owns a suite of Leica lenses would be happy to put them on an M8 and enjoy the fine optical characteristics." and "The overall performance of the M8 (optics, sensor technique and post processing) will be most certainly a match for the best players in the market (the advanced and professional DSLR-models)..." What he got wrong were the sample images. They should not have been included given that he was using a pre-production model. His view that the camera wasn't going to bring droves of SLR users back to the rangefinder fold was also correct IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted September 17, 2006 Share #85 Posted September 17, 2006 BTW why isn't Leica displaying any pictures taken with the cam.They've also abolished the links to the leica-using photographers witch I used alot. Has Leica lost its interrest in photography and is now only focusing on gear. They should have given an M8 to Gibson ( yes one with red leather ) to show us what he can do with it. ( Gibson digital!!!!!!!!? ) Or perhaps Iain Parker who expressed his excitement about a digital M on the former forum. Come on Leica, I didn't look at the specs when I decided for an MP, what pictures it took and how is what was of my concern. For Pete's sake, they said you'd get pix when the final firmware version was done. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
frc Posted September 17, 2006 Share #86 Posted September 17, 2006 In that case they're running out of time. The product has already been announced, didn't you notice. ( just impatient ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 18, 2006 Share #87 Posted September 18, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ruben,Thanks for that website -- that's got some fascinating stuff. A question for you. Some of the language on the website didn't seem to be standard Spanish; some of the verb endings seemed almost more like Latin. Is there some Catlan in there? Michael Reichmann on Luminous Landscape has suggested several times that lenses DO make a difference on high-end cameras, while Puts' review says that sensors are not good enough to exploit the difference, say, between a Leica and a Canon zoom. This website would seem to come down on Reichmann's side of the question, but without any manufacturer partisanship involved. JC Lenses of course make a huge difference and most professional digital photographers know that instinctively now from hands-on experience. Erwin talks about whether or not a digital camera can resolve as much as XYZ lens and so forth but really, that question is a red herring. As I've shown in several articles, lenses have distinctive looks even on the R-D1. "Exploiting" a lens' resolution is an academic exercise that his little to do with real photography. Even on the Canon D30 in 2000, one could see a clear difference between, say, a 20-35L and a lesser lens. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuerst Posted September 18, 2006 Share #88 Posted September 18, 2006 FRC, Leica did get some of the M8s to photographers. Rumor on SportsShooter has it that Ian Berry from Magnum is quite pleased with his. B. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
albertwang Posted September 18, 2006 Share #89 Posted September 18, 2006 D'accord, what is a M8 doing being tested for a sports photographer website? Rangefinder for sports, eh... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted September 18, 2006 Share #90 Posted September 18, 2006 To be useful, it would be a good idea to start with pictures that are in focus in the areas cropped (unless OOF is what's being discussed). I think Erwin Puts was shooting at f/8 or f/11. It is difficult to have out of focus areas in a model, isn't? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_c Posted September 18, 2006 Share #91 Posted September 18, 2006 So why does Puts get a M8 early when all he is going to do is give a negative review??? Are you seuggesting that review machines should only be given to people that are likely to review in a favourabel light? BTW, i'm not saying this in support of Erwin particularly. In fact i'm no big fan of his writing which I find uninteresting to read and for me he gives momentum to the whole leica superiority complex! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted September 18, 2006 Share #92 Posted September 18, 2006 Of course reviewers should be free to voice their opinions but in this case, our Dutch friend was apparently in flagrant breach of his Non-Disclosure Agreement. I say "apparently" because it may be he got his dog to sign it. If you then add in the lack of rigour in his testing, the message which comes across is mis-leading and outright inaccurate. All in all, the rush to publish no matter what shows him to be gratuitously self-indulgent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gareth_c Posted September 18, 2006 Share #93 Posted September 18, 2006 Mark I understand your point and fully back it. That though isn't what I was making reference to in my previous post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest umb Posted September 18, 2006 Share #94 Posted September 18, 2006 I wouldn't put too much stock into this... Erwin has been bought out by the Cannonnauts... Don't worry, perhaps Erwin needs his own disclaimer now eh? how much stock did you put on Erwin when he was bought out by Leica? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted September 18, 2006 Share #95 Posted September 18, 2006 D'accord, what is a M8 doing being tested for a sports photographer website? Rangefinder for sports, eh... Alfie, as a 'professional' I would have expected you to have realised that not all sports photography is done with long lenses. It's quite common in football (i.e. soccer) games for pitch side photographers to have long lenses and also a wide zoom for post goal celebration shots. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MP3 Posted September 18, 2006 Share #96 Posted September 18, 2006 Just wondering what made Mr Puts rushing for a comparative review in such a brief and non-vigorous way. BTW, tests made at f8 - f11 should put my nikon Ti28 and canon 5d to a draw as well...Let see what he offers in part 2. Best Matthew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted September 18, 2006 Share #97 Posted September 18, 2006 Yes the camera was pre-release but the bigger problem with the review was that the images chosen to illustrate comparative quality were a joke. Even a clueless amateur could have done a better job. I find it incredible that he would post those crops of the rope dress and think that he should be taken seriously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 18, 2006 Share #98 Posted September 18, 2006 I think Erwin Puts was shooting at f/8 or f/11. It is difficult to have out of focus areas in a model, isn't? I wasn't there for the shoot so I can't comment on the settings, etc. but his crop of the bodice is of an out of focus area. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 18, 2006 Share #99 Posted September 18, 2006 Mark I understand your point and fully back it. That though isn't what I was making reference to in my previous post. I'll respond to your point. Of course a reviewer should be objective and Leica wouldn't reasonably expect universal praise from all reviewers on all aspects of the camera. But they should expect a fair and professional review and they've every right to expect that a reviewer will stick to the agreements he or she made. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted September 18, 2006 Share #100 Posted September 18, 2006 I wasn't there for the shoot so I can't comment on the settings, etc. but his crop of the bodice is of an out of focus area. Cheers, Sean Or maybe it's just a problem with Canon's notorious edge softness. (Noooooo, don't flame me, it was only a humble joke...) JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.