M8 - Anticipated period of ownership

[M'Ate]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When you buy an M8 do you expect to keep it for a long period of time, or are just taking the first step on a series of replacements?

 

Obviously, we have no idea about future developments into FF or wider dynamic range etc...etc, but with what we know today: is it a 10 year purchase or a 3 year purchase ?

 

For myself, I trust that Leica have waited until digital image quality can match the 35mm in the technical aspects (not the look & feel of Tri-X maybe ....) and so the M8 will produce 12x10" prints as good as most of us need. I am definitely purchasing this on the basis of it having real value to me for say 10 years. It might get updated or upgraded, but it will have substantial value at that time.

 

What's more, I expect to get more pleasure/results from using it than I have from any other film or digital camera, other Leica M included.

[Advertisement]

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

[john_r_smith]

M'Ate

 

I would pose a simple question in reply to your post. Do you own (and regularly use) any appliance employing exclusively digital technology that is 10 years old? (no cheating, 1996 or earlier). Computer (PC or Laptop)? Printer? Scanner? CD burner? Windows 3.1?

 

If you do, you already know what owning a 10 year old M8 will be like. Sure, it will still work. Certainly, your M series lenses will still be the best glass around. But the camera will not be something you will want to use anymore. So it goes with digital technology.

 

John

[SteveYork]

If the useful life, in practical terms, of the M8 is only a handful of years, then that really dilutes all the arguments about the M8, and digital in general, being a cost savings over film processing.

[earleygallery]

I have a personal a couple of CD players which are both approx 10 years old - one is more like 15 years, and it works fine.

 

If the M8 produces excellent images now, it will still produce those same images in 10 years time. Of course by then there will be the M9 or maybe even the M10/11/12 who knows? Maybe even something different from digital and using the M8 will be akin to using a betamax video recorder today!

 

For many purchasers the initial cost of the M8 will be recouped within 3 or 4 years, in terms of money saved on film.

[larry]

I'm not sure that computer equipment is a suitable analogy. I think the useful life of the M8 might fall somewhere between computer gear and hi-fi equipment such as amplifiers and speakers (because they're all used for reproduction). I have some stereo components that are more than 20 years old that function perfectly and are as good or better than anything currently being sold. It will be interesting to read other opinions on this topic.

 

Larry

[M'Ate]

John,

I've got a calculator that I bought when I graduated in the mid 70's that still adds up and draws sine curves the way it aways did.

 

I understand your analogy and think it applies to washing machines and microwaves etc, but it's weakened by the low population of 10 year old digital equipment that was manufactured from proven components and advanced knowledge. There's been a big change and todays 'pro' camera kit will last 10 years, (added....) in amateur/low volume user hands and providing it's not being pounded with 2,000 extra images a week. Regular replacement is clearly necessary in those circumstances.

 

A 4 mega pix M8 would not have met the market need to produce a 12x10 quality print. This one will, either immediately, or in the near future following a firmware upgrade and it will continue to produce images of that quality until the components fail and can't be replaced. What more is needed ?

 

However, the question to those who aspire to own one; how long do anticipate keeping it? 24 months, or 240 months ...... ?

 

M'Ate

[john_r_smith]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well

 

I suggest we all make a date to get together on this Forum on 12th October 2016 - if the Forum still exists of course - and do a roll-call to see who is still actively using their M8. Should be interesting

 

By the way - the comparison with CD players is not apt, which is why I didn't use it. Because - the CD standard was fixed at the time of its introduction in 1982 as 16 bit, 44khz sampling rate. And this has never been changed (for domestic CD replay). That's as if digital cameras had always had a fixed standard of 8 bit RGB, 4 Megapixel capture and always would.

 

John

[Guest guy_mancuso]

It is a great question and really have to look at stuff like this as you are buying a system not a M8. They way we buy now is we buy for the lenses that a company has or is going to make. I bought the DMR with full knowledge that someday it will be replaced but what i really bought was 10 lenses until the close the casket cover on me. The bodies will come and go and in digital they actually should to a degree and with emerging technology you may want to get the latest and greatest if it makes sense. But lenses really never change and companies like Leica will make any new body work with existing lenses , you may have to get Rom'd or Coded for future camera's because the may change the data from the lenses to perform differnt camera functions. Like the Rom in the R system that electrical connection on future camera's can send Focus confirmation data to the body, it does not do it today but the future it maybe able too. So i urge folks to think system and not body. Unfortunetly bodies will be upgraded that is the nature of digital. canon does it way too often , nikon also to a degree but leica is slower to come to market also.

 

Let's also remember that just becuase a new one came out does not mean your old one is a dinosaur either, some will jump on the next bandwagon and others will skip a generation. But the M8 has all the best technology now, your not going to beat this sensor and lenses for quite sometime. You may get more functionality but the basics will always be there. for guys like me I bought into 2 systems the M and the R and fully plan to use both daily.

[miami91]

It's tough to separate the "buyers envy" aspect from usability. Given how well Leica Ms are built, I'm sure the camera will be usable in 10 years. And as others have pointed out, the images will be just as good. But if Leica introduces the M9 in 3-5 years time with FF, 15 MP, and other niceties, many of us will be trying to rationalize another large expenditure.

 

Jeff.

[gtmerideth]

Leica equipment carries a somewhat different user attitude. Fifty year old M3's

seem to satisfy many. FF and more MP are available now. And for me they don't

cut it. Sold my 1ds2, sold my 5D. Why? because the DMR produces an image

file that I enjoy more. I don't think the M8 is going to be any less capable than the

DMR regarding image quality and I anticipate both serving me well for many years.

Where else can you get the marriage of glass and technology at this level of quality?

gary

[reddawn]

I'm not sure that computer equipment is a suitable analogy. I think the useful life of the M8 might fall somewhere between computer gear and hi-fi equipment such as amplifiers and speakers (because they're all used for reproduction). I have some stereo components that are more than 20 years old that function perfectly and are as good or better than anything currently being sold. It will be interesting to read other opinions on this topic.

 

Larry

 

The analogy with computer equipment is not suitable cos the price of computer equipment falls rapidly in a shorter number of years.

 

The money I spent on my Mac Powerbook 2 years ago can buy me a bigger, faster and more powerful MacBook Pro today. One feels tempted to sell and upgrade simply cos you are getting more for much less

 

With the M8, however, I seriously doubt the M9 will cost less than the M8. More likely it will cost more. With much less incremental improvement. The Ms got to stay pricey because there's a certain status quo to maintain for Leica - the company, as well as its users, do not want themselves perceived as the "typical" camera company.

 

A large part of that price goes into that certain prestige as well I'm sure. You don't have this "problem" with your everyday electronics.

[Leica(at)Palatinate]

John,

my M6 and all the lenses date back to the 80ies. I still do use them to my great pleasure.

Hermann

[earleygallery]

By the way - the comparison with CD players is not apt, which is why I didn't use it. Because - the CD standard was fixed at the time of its introduction in 1982 as 16 bit, 44khz sampling rate. And this has never been changed (for domestic CD replay). That's as if digital cameras had always had a fixed standard of 8 bit RGB, 4 Megapixel capture and always would.

John

 

Granted but I was thinking of the improvements to D/A conversion in that time, systems such as MASH and the like.

 

In short, the camera will still be useable but by then it will be a back up to the M9/10/11

[fotografr]

Obviously, this is all just sheer speculation, but if I didn't expect to get at least 5 years use from the M8, I wouldn't buy one. I also realize that at the end of the 5 years, the camera will have zero resale value, so I have decided I'm willing to pay $1,000 per year to be able to use my M lenses on a digital body.

[lars_bergquist]

I was into this with the Solms people already when the coming of the Digital M was first announced. My argument was this: Anyone who bought an M3 in 1954 did not only buy a camera body. He bought into coming new lenses -- we all know what that did lead to! -- but also new 35 mm films, such as Kodachrome 64, 400 ISO Tri-X and the modern colour negative films. So, the Digital M should be upgradeable in the sense that the early screw-mount cameras were -- not only with new firmware, but with modular hardware. Back to Solms the camera goes, and it returns home serviced and with the latest doodads. And what was the reply I got?

 

--"This is our thinking too!"

 

That was two years ago of course. But I think that neither with the M nor with the R, Leica Camera AG will manufacture instant scrap. Far from it.

 

The old fossil from the Age of Flashpowder.

[bradreiman]

to say that an m8 will have zero resale value in 5 years is completely ridiculous. my digilux2 which i bought when they came out in 2004 is worth 40% more now, and its really a glorified point and shoot, albeit one of the best ever made. the m8 has a leica rangefinder, viewfinder, 10+mp etc. in five years im willing to bet the m8 will have retained most of its value not to mention still be of the same excellent quality and probably barely a scratch cosmetically. my 3b and 3g and m6 all look like they looked new and i beat the hell out of them. they also still make great pictures and all are worth more now than when they were bought. the possibilty of some sort of modular upgrade makes it reasonable to suggest that the m8 will work for decades....imho.....b

[miami91]

Bradley,

 

If you're saying someone is willing to pay in excess of 2000.00 USD for your D2 (40% more than original price), what are you waiting for? Sell the bloody thing!!! I sold mine on eBay recently (in anticipation of D3 and M8) and got 1200.00 for it, primarily by including several extras (polarizer, UV filter, extra battery). This seems to be going price for this piece of kit.

 

BTW, I do agree with your primary contention: Leicas, even digital offerings, do retain their value quite well. But respectfully, I think you're a bit unrealistic with the valuation you've placed on your D2.

 

Jeff.

[sean_reid]

My own approach is that I buy the tools I need to the extent that I can afford them. Digital cameras do depreciate to varying degrees but I don't buy cameras as investments. Sometimes one loses a lot, sometimes not so much. My 1Ds cost me $7200 in 2002 and sold for $3000 in 2005. One of my R-D1 bodies cost me $3000 in 2004 and I sold its replacement for $2200 just recently. But I don't buy photography equipment with an eye to these calculations. If something is not essential and too expensive, I don't buy it. If it's what I need and I can afford it, I buy it. I would operate in much the same way even if I wasn't a professional photographer.

 

As is true for anyone, I don't even know if I'll be here in three, five or ten years. I may be crossing a street just as a drunk driver goes through a red light. But as I cross that street, I'll probably have an M8 in my right hand.

 

Carpe Diem

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jrc]

Well

 

By the way - the comparison with CD players is not apt, which is why I didn't use it. Because - the CD standard was fixed at the time of its introduction in 1982 as 16 bit, 44khz sampling rate. And this has never been changed (for domestic CD replay). That's as if digital cameras had always had a fixed standard of 8 bit RGB, 4 Megapixel capture and always would.

 

John

 

In a sense, the standard for cameras is also fixed -- for a professional camera, it has to be good enough (more or less) to get a Vanity Fair double-truck out of it, at the highest quality that a high-speed color press can print. The M8 should do that, as the DMR does, and the Nikon D2x and the Canon 1DsII. For high-end magazine work, except the inserts that are jobbed out and custom-printed, you won't achieve much more by going with bigger and more expensive chips, because the limitation is the color press, not the camera file. There are other considerations which make larger chips better for other uses, but most of those are specific niches -- landscape art photography, photography where you plan to make many large prints that will be looked at from short range (advertising photos like those used by Victoria's Secret) and so on. For most professional uses, the M8 will be "good enough" until it wears out; and if a particular pro in a particular niche thinks he needs a better camera for a special use -- perhaps extra-large wedding portraits to serve as the major art on an interior wall -- then he may get a special camera for that, and the M8 becomes a fine backup.

 

Computers are not fixed in the same way, in terms of speed -- in speed, more is better for gamers, people who process large digital or music files, etc., and they drive the market. There is no "good enough" until processing is instantaneous. Consider, if you will, what would have happened to computer chip speed if there was only one function for a computer -- word processing. An 8088 chip will word process, for all practical purposes, as fast as the latest Pentium-whatever; there would have been no pressure at all for faster chips. Cameras are somewhat in that situation: for 99 percent of users, including pros, what we're now getting should be "good enough" for a good long while.

 

JC

[SteveYork]

The fact of the matter is that if 15 or 20 or more become the norm and the sensor size increases, and Leica incorporate these changes into new digital rangefinder models, then very few M8 owners will be happy in sticking with what has become second best technology. That's just the mind frame of many, if not most, Leica users -- they want the latest and best. We've seen it time and time again. And these things will happen, because this is how camera companies stimulate sales.

 

As long as M8 sales are good Leica will be conservative with changes. But as soon as sale start to dip expect to see a M8-2 or M9, ect.

 

I believe it is infinately more healthy to the mind, and the pocket book, if you go into an M8 purchase with the mind frame that it is good enough and, barring failure, won't need to be replaced.

 

There other aspect of useful life is all the electronics in digital cameras. So far, we have no track record for digital cameras because of the heady yearly advances which make old cameras obsolete. Even if you're happy with an M8, will it still be working a decade after heavy use? I don't know, but it's not going to have the sam durability as an M3, obviously.