Jump to content

M8 Iraq field test - ouch...


thrid

Recommended Posts

Guest stnami

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Whilst he has a point, I honestly don't understand why he just doesn't use a D3 or Get over it's shortcomings and move on!
... he probably has moved on ................ left this mob navel gazing and wishing for a new camera and lenses once again .......he takes photos you guys talk about lenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YouTube - War Photographer

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 376
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Howard,

 

No I was not adressing you in particular & have no axe to grind (at least none I am aware of). If you got that impression my apologies.

 

I agree that a wide angle with high aperture from Leica is what it appears we all want. So we must wait & see till photokina. At least that is what rumor tell us.

 

Leica lens designer Peter Karbe is the first one I know of who pointed out the need of multiplying both aperture and focal length by the crop factor when comparing lenses on different size imaging elements. His presentation was described in LFI 3/2006, pp 43-47.

 

Note that I do not disagree with the general principle if you want to keep constant perspective. But the calculations show that multiplying the aperture with the crop factor is too simple (at least that is what the sums tell me). Is there a online version of this presentation by Peter Karbe?

 

I the case of the 'removed border' interpretation the situation is opposite due to the smaller circle of confusion on digital sensors.

 

If Michael Kamber likes the Canon DoF f/1.4 better fine - I think I can agree with that but it is not an equal test if you compare an f/2.8 with an f/1.4. It is worth noting that the vignetting of the f/1.4 is impressive, partially lens and partially sensor. The latter is exactly what Leica decided was not acceptable when they did not go for full frame (yet).

Link to post
Share on other sites

No I was not adressing you in particular & have no axe to grind (at least none I am aware of). If you got that impression my apologies.

Stephen--

Sorry, just overly sensitive. No reason to assume it was addressed to me, but since you didn't say it wasn't, I figured it might be. (I gotta quit reading this forum.) ;)

 

Note that I do not disagree with the general principle if you want to keep constant perspective. But the calculations show that multiplying the aperture with the crop factor is too simple (at least that is what the sums tell me). Is there a online version of this presentation by Peter Karbe?

Nothing online, but I've send you a PM. A pretty complete and complex read; and a rather slow one since some of the tables presented don't precisely match the data in the article. Olaf Stefanus wrote the article as a summary of a Karbe presentation. See the first LuLa link I gave, "Lens Equivalents" to see the assumption taken as a given.

 

One interesting thing about the Karbe/Stefanus idea is that they derive depth of field in a way I hadn't seen before, though I don't now recall how. (One member of the forum said he rejected Karbe's ideas out of hand because he didn't agree with his derivation of DoF.)

 

I tend to harp on his idea because it breaks through the way we've all thought. We've all seen the DoF formulas, but they apparently don't apply to digital as they did to film, maybe partially because a sensor is flat while film has depth. A really startling example is Gary Ferguson's Digital Focusing Part One.

 

DoF always was a slippery beast since it exists only in our mind and therefore requires so many assumptions and isn't a physical quantity. It seems to me that digital is pushing our definitions even further.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been following this thread and I do not think anyone mentioned Ashley Gilbertson's earlier review of his experience shooting the M8 on assignment as an embedded photographer in Iraq ...like Kamber, he shoots for the NYT & has recently published a book of his photographs from Iraq

here is the link ...beware, there are some pop-ups

 

Extreme Field Test: Leica M8 in Iraq - - PopPhotoMay 2007

 

he generally praised the camera, though he also had a problem with his flak jacket activating some of the buttons on the back ...I have never experience such a difficulty, but I don't wear flak jackets

while I agree that the M8 is not a perfect camera, I think much of the complaints from Kamber were unjustified

having used mine now for 18 months, I cannot imagine another digital camera I would rather take with me on such an assignment

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Ridder Cornelius

I, once posted a thread on the forum complaining about my M8, in kind words and in not so kind words I was asked to post images, which I did, however I continued to express my personal thoughts about the M8 and in kind, and a lot more unkind words I was advised to shove of and get another camera system .... which after some careful deliberation I did as well. 3 months since I've never looked back, sold my M8 and some of my lenses and use my new camera setup on a day to day basis, and happily so. I can now really shoot in extreme low light, make use of good quality 2.8 zoom lenses, and actually cannot see the difference in image quality, but having said that I am referring to inferior image processing equipment as my 30" apple and my R3800 so this might not be the absolute correct reference.

However after having read the field test review I couldn't help myself returning to the M8 forum to see what the impact would be .... nothing much has changed and by this being the first thread I have read in over 3 months I also realized I hadn't missed anything here.

 

So if you're happy with the m8.... continue shooting I would say and don't make such a fuss about it all..... if not happy, go for another setup, I personally do think there are other camera setup worth considering in the market today, check them out I would say, and if you're really into making pictures rather than talking about your equipment I am confident that one or the other suggestions will work out well for you...... posting these discussions on any forum will only attract forumists and posters whose general impressions you're not really interested in anyway, unless some of course whom are just in here for reasons of semantics and proving stupid little points.....

 

I'll be out of here until somebody posts another negative M8 item on the web and only then come back for reasons of amusement only... having said this perhaps some TV reality show producer can do something with the die hard M8 users, for, for most photographers it must be a treat seeing these generally wealthy and wise folk making absolute fools of themselves.....

 

(btw. the only thing I miss about the M8 is the size and weight)

 

hehehe

 

until the next negative info on the M8

 

I missed my little french friend in all these discussions .... choked on a frogsleg has he?

Link to post
Share on other sites

... for most photographers it must be a treat seeing these generally wealthy and wise folk making absolute fools of themselves.....

 

That state of affairs can be found anywhere. I can think of politicians, company CEO's, the military and other circus folks..... It is called: "The Human Condition"

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The Leica M3 of the 1950’s was an instant success, not because Leica held to quaint design and outdated technology (i.e. the M8’s removable bottom plate) in a misplaced effort to attract classicists, but because they used new technology to build a camera that was on the cutting edge of its time. The M8, in contrast, is years behind other cameras—a photojournalist’s tool that cannot white balance, consistently expose a picture or deliver reasonable low-light performance--and one which has poorly designed controls.

 

As I said earlier, I do not write this because I dislike Leica, quite the opposite. I have used their cameras for 23 years and invested tens of thousands of dollars in their products. When working in war zones, however, my first rule is to eradicate all the uncertainties from my kit. There are enough uncertainties when the shooting starts. The M8 introduces numerous uncertainties into the photography equation. For a working photojournalist in a combat situation, I would judge the Leica M8 to be unusable."

 

My experience as well. I shoot a lot with my two M8´s last year. Now I got back to Canon. The M8 is just a marketing gag, living from past Leica reputations. To be honest, it is just a marvelous expensive toy...

 

Nothing else to be said....

Link to post
Share on other sites

...for most photographers it must be a treat seeing these generally wealthy and wise folk making absolute fools of themselves.....

 

 

That chip on your shoulder is so big you'd be walking with a tilt--that is, if you didn't have your big DSLR and zoom lens on the other side as a counterbalance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M8 is just a marketing gag, living from past Leica reputations. To be honest, it is just a marvelous expensive toy

 

Have to disagree, I get better results from my M8 that I do from my Canon 5D with either Canon or Leica glass.

 

Just as a single example, I had to sharpen every image with the Canon before I posted it to the net, with the M8 I no longer have to do that unless the original shot is soft.

 

I was printing some A3 prints at the weekend - with an Epson 3800 and Harman paper - and they look gorgeous, certainly not 'toy like'.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M8 is just a marketing gag, living from past Leica reputations. To be honest, it is just a marvelous expensive toy...

 

Nothing else to be said....

 

It is just unbelieveable how people keep generalizing. The camera doesn't work for you in a war zone. Fine. Leave it at that. Why must you insist on concluding that based on your singular experience the M8 is worthless to everyone else? You lose all credibility with a statement like that because it is well known that there are quite a few people on this forum who are making a living using the M8. But you and a few others don't want to hear that, so on you will go shouting about how the M8 is a useless piece of junk. Meanwhile, a lot of pros will be laughing all the way to the bank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Have to disagree, I get better results from my M8 that I do from my Canon 5D with either Canon or Leica glass.

 

Just as a single example, I had to sharpen every image with the Canon before I posted it to the net, with the M8 I no longer have to do that unless the original shot is soft.

 

I was printing some A3 prints at the weekend - with an Epson 3800 and Harman paper - and they look gorgeous, certainly not 'toy like'.

 

Steve, you are talking nonsense;). It had an important shoot in Atlantis and my M8 just stopped without warning, causing me to loose the shot of my life. With my Nikonos that would never have happened and that proves the M8 is an absolute piece of junk. Oh -and the few shots I got were also worthless, as AWB was off by a mile. They were all blue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this helps any of you, but at any rate here is a DOF calculator.

Depth of Field and Hyperfocal distance - Calculator and Explanation

Peter

 

Thanks for the DOF calculator. I use my own in Excel + background info here.

You can fill in focal length, aperture, CoC (I use 20 micron M8, 31 micron FF/35mm) and the focus distance (the other cells are 'locked'. The column 'combined focus depth' gives the foreward and back points that are 'in focus'.

 

The results are similar to what your DOF calculator gives - but I also include the diffraction. This becomes worthwhile for apertures f/8 and smaller.

 

Anyway all of this is only numbers - still a high speed wide angle is what we would like to see. Hopefully such a lens is in the making.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks! He wrote his review for other war photographers! I'm sure if he was skipping around cobblestone streets of ye olde Europe in a fancy photo vest he might have an entirely different experience (though he did have a case of the "grays" in Barcelona - and for the umpteenth time it isn't the card!!).

 

Anyway, I think his Pulitzer Prize trumps owning a Noctilux in a cigar box any day..... and if his word is buzzing around the "internets" then maybe Leica will actually sit up and take some notice.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyway, I think his Pulitzer Prize trumps owning a Noctilux in a cigar box any day..... and if his word is buzzing around the "internets" then maybe Leica will actually sit up and take some notice.

 

I agree the cigar box noctilux thingy does not do Leica's reputation any favours among 'photographers' (pro or amateur) although it might help their cash flow. Lets hope they dont have cause to repeat this excercise.

 

However the comments going around now seem to me to have escalated into gleeful 'hate' without any vestige of reason. It has all got completely over the top.

 

Jeff

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Anyway, I think his Pulitzer Prize trumps owning a Noctilux in a cigar box any day..... and if his word is buzzing around the "internets" then maybe Leica will actually sit up and take some notice.

 

 

Just a minor correction: He didn't win a Pulitzer. He was nominated three times.

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...