M8.2

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry,

But I do recall in last years Leica brochure . Listing the M8 as a reportage camera.

 

PeterP

 

Really ,I never saw it but that is okay. It is to a point until you need the very high ISO's than accept the noise or not and many folks are not happy with the noise over ISO 640. Me I never go past that anyway but i shoot different than journalism. But as you will see there fix to this and what some have been asking for is faster wide angles and this is the main reason for it but this new version of the M8 will not have better noise. I can almost bet on it right now. The real point being made is Leica went after quality images and to do that they need to go CCD without AA filters but there is a noise limit unlike CMOS has a much higher one.

 

And truth be told not many would have bought the M8 with a CMOS sensor in it. i certainly would not and the main reason I did was because it was like the DMR

[marknorton]

That for me, is the ultimate frustration of the M8.

 

It's billed as a reportage camera but ultimately fails in the role due to noise at high ISO. Once you have been spoiled by a Nikon D3, the Leica noise performance at ISO 1250 and up is just unacceptable. Even if the Nikon sharpness is not quite as good as the M8, even if the colour fidelity is not as true, the D3 is the better camera in my hands because more images are free of noise and camera shake.

 

What wouldn't I give to have a Leica FF camera with the D3's noise performance in an M8 (m6/m7 even better) form factor!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[SJP]

Judging from the above most of us agree with Mani

[Guest guy_mancuso]

And slightly the reason some of us are a little bummed out on this proposed release. A lot of folks want high ISO performance . I know i would kill if my MF back was actually cleaner at ISO 800 but I have a CCD sensor and realize the limits.

 

There simply is NO perfect camera that can do it all with the technology today but I will say it is getting better and starting this at least 10 years ago in digital there have major strides for sure. I'm still not wowed yet but there is hope

[sdai]

I agree with Guy, as long as Leica is stuck with Kodak, the D3 kind of noise performance is never gonna happen. When is their friendship due for a renewal?

[Guest DuquesneG]

 

And truth be told not many would have bought the M8 with a CMOS sensor in it.

 

Really? What facts or evidence can you offer to support that statement? My opinion is that most of the people who bought an M8 would have bought it however Leica equipped it.

[PeterP]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Really? What facts or evidence can you offer to support that statement? My opinion is that most of the people who bought an M8 would have bought it however Leica equipped it.

 

Couldn't agree more !!

 

By the way it was 'LeicaWorld News' 02/2006 - announcing Leica's digital lineup. Under M8

applications of use 'Travel/Repotage' 'Low light photography' and 'Fine Art Photography'

 

This newsletter was the fundamental reason for my purchase of the M8.

 

PeterP

[chris_tribble]

Couldn't agree more !!

 

By the way it was 'LeicaWorld News' 02/2006 - announcing Leica's digital lineup. Under M8

applications of use 'Travel/Repotage' 'Low light photography' and 'Fine Art Photography'

 

This newsletter was the fundamental reason for my purchase of the M8.

 

PeterP

 

Interesting to see the direction this has taken (and nice to see Guy around again - I'd wondered where you were ).

 

Points absolutely taken on the CCD / CMOS conflict - and the reasons why Leica went in the direction they've taken. From where I stand though I'm still happy with the CCD direction. The majority of my professional practice is in documentary (a different thing from news reportage) and the M8 has become indispenable on all the assignments that I take on BUT I complement it with a good DSLR (up until now 5D and almost certainly the 5D replacement) with the 85 1.2L and longer glass. Both I and my clients have been delighted with the results that I can get from these combinations.

 

I'm now looking forward to my upgrade M8.1 being around for a long time AND continuing to use my Canon with the 85 and my old, non IS 70-200. And I don't feel that any wool has been pulled over my eyes, and I don't really have too many concerns about Leica M performance above 640 at the expense of IQ. What I do have concerns about is people rubbishing the M series because it's neither a DSLR nor a MF camera. It's not. Can we get over this? What it is (in my experience over the last two years) is a liberating, highly portable, fairly (and soon to be much more) quiet and discrete camera that lets me do a job.

[Isabelle Lenatio]

Leica has never moved along with the pace of technology, not with their film cameras, nor with their digital' so it seems. Is this a bad thing? ... I don't think so, I still use an m4 where I could of been using a nikon F6 or some electronic rangefinder like the contax or zeiss. I don't use my M4 very often anymore but when I do I still do it with great pleasure.

The same goes for my M8, it does what I want it to do and it keeps on doing it.

 

If it's rapid progression you want, FF 15+ Mp 12.800 Iso speeds you have definitely bought the wrong brand, simple as that.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Interesting to see the direction this has taken (and nice to see Guy around again - I'd wondered where you were ).

 

Points absolutely taken on the CCD / CMOS conflict - and the reasons why Leica went in the direction they've taken. From where I stand though I'm still happy with the CCD direction. The majority of my professional practice is in documentary (a different thing from news reportage) and the M8 has become indispenable on all the assignments that I take on BUT I complement it with a good DSLR (up until now 5D and almost certainly the 5D replacement) with the 85 1.2L and longer glass. Both I and my clients have been delighted with the results that I can get from these combinations.

 

I'm now looking forward to my upgrade M8.1 being around for a long time AND continuing to use my Canon with the 85 and my old, non IS 70-200. And I don't feel that any wool has been pulled over my eyes, and I don't really have too many concerns about Leica M performance above 640 at the expense of IQ. What I do have concerns about is people rubbishing the M series because it's neither a DSLR nor a MF camera. It's not. Can we get over this? What it is (in my experience over the last two years) is a liberating, highly portable, fairly (and soon to be much more) quiet and discrete camera that lets me do a job.

 

 

Well said Chris and really the whole bottom line from the DMR and the M8 was and is about quality. Trust me it is the closet you can get to MF digital quality. I know I own MF now and it is outstanding. Folks should be thrilled they can get that close to it in a Leica digital camera and I agree it is a liberating tool but folks also need to know it's limits and be able to work within those limits and not make it something it is not. But it certainly is a fun tool to have be it as a hobbyist or on a Pro level which i shot the M8 for over a year at the pro level and it did the job.

 

Oh I like to stop by when you guy's are not in the middle of a war zone. LOL Let's see what Photokinia brings and we all will have a lot to chat about. I'm still looking for something big on that, I don't feel this M.2 is it .Something else because my money pocket is starting to tremble. . ROTFLMAO

[markowich]

a friend recently referred to the m8 as 'mini digital back'. true, because of the lack of the antialiasing filter. but then again, i sharpen my D3/D700 files slightly and they equal the m8 files in quality. of course, only at base iso. beyond they beat m8 easily (as everybody agrees).

not to talk about wide balance, auto focus etc. it is hard to trasfer stone age technology into the digital age. m8 mark II is just another one of these desparate attempts.

peter

 

 

Interesting to see the direction this has taken (and nice to see Guy around again - I'd wondered where you were ).

 

Points absolutely taken on the CCD / CMOS conflict - and the reasons why Leica went in the direction they've taken. From where I stand though I'm still happy with the CCD direction. The majority of my professional practice is in documentary (a different thing from news reportage) and the M8 has become indispenable on all the assignments that I take on BUT I complement it with a good DSLR (up until now 5D and almost certainly the 5D replacement) with the 85 1.2L and longer glass. Both I and my clients have been delighted with the results that I can get from these combinations.

 

I'm now looking forward to my upgrade M8.1 being around for a long time AND continuing to use my Canon with the 85 and my old, non IS 70-200. And I don't feel that any wool has been pulled over my eyes, and I don't really have too many concerns about Leica M performance above 640 at the expense of IQ. What I do have concerns about is people rubbishing the M series because it's neither a DSLR nor a MF camera. It's not. Can we get over this? What it is (in my experience over the last two years) is a liberating, highly portable, fairly (and soon to be much more) quiet and discrete camera that lets me do a job.

[sfokevin]

a friend recently referred to the m8 as 'mini digital back'. true, because of the lack of the antialiasing filter. but then again, i sharpen my D3/D700 files slightly and they equal the m8 files in quality. of course, only at base iso. beyond they beat m8 easily (as everybody agrees).

not to talk about wide balance, auto focus etc. it is hard to trasfer stone age technology into the digital age. m8 mark II is just another one of these desparate attempts.

peter

 

Michelangelo could make art with a piece of charcoal....

[Vieri]

...

 

We've come from a product that seemed unfit for purpose and unstable and not capable of producing colours correctly, to one that is absolutely the class leader

 

...

 

Not to be too cynical, but it's easy to be class leader when you are the only one in the class more, most of the time being the only one in the class tends to make one sloppy; it isn't very stimulating; it means lack of competition; all resulting to less will to improve, slow(er) development, etc. etc.

 

Does this sound familiar at all?

[Vieri]

...

 

And truth be told not many would have bought the M8 with a CMOS sensor in it. i certainly would not and the main reason I did was because it was like the DMR

 

I for one would definitely have bought the M8 with CMOS, in fact I would have bought it sooner and all the rest being equal (AA, IR filters, etc) I think IQ would have been up there, with better high ISO performance as a plus.

[jaapv]

I prefer the CCD look to the Cmos look, I think the basic principle needs too much electronic cooking. The reason Canon uses them is not image quality, it is economic; they own the factory and they are cheaper to build. That way they could take the lead in larger sensors without pricing themselves out of the market. And one has to tip one's hat at them for making the inherently more noisy system so smooth.

[ShyTot]

Not to be too cynical, but it's easy to be class leader when you are the only one in the class more, most of the time being the only one in the class tends to make one sloppy; it isn't very stimulating; it means lack of competition; all resulting to less will to improve, slow(er) development, etc. etc.

 

Give me some credit Vieri, it was a reference to the use of a tool for an activity, documentary/street .... photography, rather than another stupid repeat of the statement "it's the best digital rangefinder ..... gooey" around.

 

Some, maybe not you, need to see this as equipment that facilitates an art form, or an activity that would not be pursued if the kit was not user friendly.

 

Once we get over the reliability issues, I don't see it as one box with more ticks than another, but rather, can I take it with me, will it get images that I want ? I never wanted to shoot images in ridiculously low light situations with 12,000iso @ 1/8000s. Some might, and some want a camera with movements, or an underwater capability. Those boxes exist, but they won't fit in your shirt pocket.

[rosuna]

Leica has never moved along with the pace of technology, not with their film cameras, nor with their digital' so it seems. Is this a bad thing? ...

 

It is very dangerous. In the past, you were able to put any film into your Leica. Now the camera manufacturer makes the "film" (sensor). Leica cannot be too far from the competition here. Not too far. And this is the problem.

 

My point is Leica must adapt the products to specific type of clients (tasks), if they want to get back some professional users (and I think this is the idea). If lawyers, doctors, etc. buy those cameras... perfect! But you have to sell to professionals too, and first. You cannot get some generic design and use it on any camera you make (DMR, M8... any).

[jaapv]

There are far more lawyers,doctors, etc. than professional photographers. Often more affluent too ( without any negative implication intended). Leica needs the professionals to lead the pack and to attract the customers, not to buy the cameras. From a marketing and commercial point of view they should sell to professionals at cost or even provide gear free.

[jplomley]

I'll just be happy if Leica can stay afloat long enough to produce an M9. Looks to me like the M8.2 is merely something to hold us over while they are busy cooking up the next generation of M. Personally, I'm very pleased with my M8. I have been able to capture street images that would have been very difficult with my Mamiya 7 given it's slow lenses and large form factor.

 

As an aside, I see so many "photographers" out there with Nikon and Canon straps, it's refreshing to shoot with Leica just to be different from the bloody masses

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Not to be too cynical, but it's easy to be class leader when you are the only one in the class more, most of the time being the only one in the class tends to make one sloppy; it isn't very stimulating; it means lack of competition; all resulting to less will to improve, slow(er) development, etc. etc.

 

Does this sound familiar at all?

Not if the competition (Zeiss) wishes to compete but claims "the technology for the (ff) camera we want to make is not yet there".