Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest malland

Some thoughts on the M8.2 after 2-1/2 weeks

Recommended Posts

Mitch, I think you just keep trying to get a feel for working with this new creature and eventually you'll know if it works for you or if the GR2 just suits you better. Who knows..?

 

My advice to Mitch would be to concentrate on what the camera is, rather than what it isn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stnami

Mitch many here are camera centric and view photography from the viewpoint of what the camera(leica) does and how, they love the camera more than the image produced plus there is a reluctance to change and that is obvious.

If one goes out with deliberate intent and the experience to back it up in most situations a rangefinder is a terrific tool as long as you nail your exposure and focusing. Sadly the m8 is not in the same class all of which has been discussed et here a lot, it may or may not get there but will be a different beast to cater for technology.

 

Using the Ricohs etc was a bit easier with the wide DOF focusing close up has never been a problem, the same goes for the 2/3(D2) and 4/3 sensor cameras, get the light right and all you do is concentrate on getting the image. Here a lot chase that shallow DOF and the bloke called Bokeh thus make it hard for themselves in the faster moving streets as they dither around waiting for "the shot". Life was a lot slower 50 years ago out in the streets and the photographed subjects more accomodating than now.The early war photographers had their cameras set up to go, out of focus and stuffed readings were the norm but when they nailed it the images were spot on brilliantly executed and they knew how to communicate visually and organise a image. Brilliant craftmen that brought their ideas of image making into every day life.

 

A faster and more accurate camera taking some aspects of sports shooting cameras as well as what fuji Digital Camera Resource Page News: Fuji introduces FinePix F200EXR with new SuperCCD EXR sensor are offering this could lead to that camera you want but it won't be a rangefinder. To me this doesn't matter to the so called purists that can sleep at night despite what advances happen it's all a step in the wrong direction.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Easiest camera to use in good light out in the streets .......the Digilux 2 f5.6, 1.4 meters exposure -1 but it's not a rangefinder and dies at dusk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
My advice to Mitch would be to concentrate on what the camera is, rather than what it isn't.
That's exactly what I'm doing, Steve; and you may address me directly, as I won't be offended: the M8 is a digital camera and some of the things I'm talking about are easily implemented in the firmware. There is no reason to limit it to what an M6 could do; the object as Imants is suggesting is to facilitate photography, not to keep a retro experience alive. From what I've seen of your photography, you are not facing the timing and other issues that I'm facing and, therefore, these things are of no interest to you — and that's not any aspersion on your photography; but you need to realise that other people may have other needs.

 

The M8 has very important properties, such as file quality at lower ISOs and the lenses available, among others; but there is no need to shackle the camera to an out-of-date gestalt for the sake of tradition. After all, you can always shoot film with a Leica-M if you want the purity of the experience.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
...Mitch, I think you just keep trying to get a feel for working with this new creature and eventually you'll know if it works for you or if the GR2 just suits you better. Who knows..
Sean, I'm not worried about that at this stage, as there is no reason why I should not use both cameras, although I would prefer to use one camera.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
but there is no need to shackle the camera to an out-of-date gestalt for the sake of tradition.

 

Well in that case I'd say you were mistaking the reason (at least some of us) choose the M-system to shoot with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stnami

Mani as you know the M-system is still better suited to film than digital in its present state and needs changes to make it a top notch digital tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mani as you know the M-system is still better suited to film than digital in its present state and needs changes to make it a top notch digital tool.

 

No doubt about it imants. But I decided to give up fighting it, and decided to make the best of what we've got.

 

As for what I said to Mitch above - before I go to bed I thought I'd just expand quickly on it, as it's so easy to appear to be on the 'wrong-headed', 'old-fashioned' side when arguing against greater computerization and automation of the M-system.

 

For many of us, using M cameras - film or digital (and now I even include the RD1s) - the beauty and energy of the process is the feeling of being at one with the subject.

 

I get this from looking through the unencumbered glass of the viewfinder. Just my eye looking through the glass; my hand holding the solidity of the body; the fingers of the other hand gently focussing the lens; the pressing of the shutter when I feel the moment is right.

 

The tool that you seem to want isn't that camera: it has flashing icons and guidelines and matrix meters that doubtless confirm readings with high-pitched pips. It overloads you with information. It reminds you that it's a computer, even when you don't want to be reminded. Maybe it has live-view to remove you one step further from the world you could otherwise see through the simple window of a viewfinder.

 

That's how I feel about the camera. And the sadness is, it's the only choice that's left. I'd appreciate it if it wasn't taken away from me, transformed into a clone of all the other cameras you could choose instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
Let's not fall out Mitch - I've seen and liked your images for a long time, and believe me, I'm no knee-jerk apologist for the M8 (some happy souls have blocked me for the opposite reason), but it seems to me, precisely as you say, that possibly your style is more suited to other types of cameras?

Incidentally, I only recently bought and then returned an M8 - only to have second thoughts again, and ordered one more time. Using other camera lead me to a firmer realization of why I love the M-system, and why I cherish its uniqueness...

Peace, Mani. No, don't get me wrong either, so far, I like the M8 a lot, but I'm struggling with certain issues and see no reason that some of the things that could be done in firmware should not be done. As for the other things, such as matrix metering, they may have to wait for an M9, should such a camera ever see the light of day, which I hope it will — as I like the basic paradigm of the M cameras and their lenses, but I am interested anything that will facilitate my photography.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stnami

Obviously my needs from a M-system are different as the image is of prime concern. Not a dramas Mani you choose camera over image, so be it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... what is of concern to me, as I've stated in a post above, is that I've made great strides in my street photography since using the GRD/GRD2 and am trying to see, in adopting the M8, how not to lose the "looseness and fluidity" of style that I have gained. Sure, I can estimate exposure or meter the way that I did with the M6 but, for my type of street photography, which is often at very close distances, 0.8-1.0 meters, the M8 metering has so far proved too cumbersome — there simply isn't time to meter to the right or left or above or below the subject, half-press the shutter and bring it back on the subject and trip the shutter. In most cases with the GRD2 I had no such problem.

 

Mitch,

 

the M8 will never be a Ricoh -- period. You will never ever, no matter how hard you try, get that fluidity with the M. they each have their strengths and i think you have to accept them for what they are. you also need to think your "I only want to shoot with one camera" way of thinking. i believe the M8 and the GRD complement each other nicely. they each do what the other can not.

 

and i think you'll be in for a rude surprise when you go back to the Ricoh files after using the M8. i feel that way and i'm only using the 6MP Epson (btw, Imants, i adore you!).

 

as a matter of fact, i use Spot metering on the GRDII. it gives a different sort of light that i've always found more pleasing. how much "street" work have you actually been able to do? i really think you're being impatient here.

 

and i have never turned the electronic level on. i would be more than disgusted if it ever showed up on the M, whichever version. you're asking for P&S type bells and whistles that defeat the purpose of a rangefinder.

 

i know you are a more than competent photographer (i've seen your work with the M6), so technical ability is not an issue. has using the Ricohs made you lazy as well as loose? i really don't think you're being fair to the M8 and need more time to get back into the whole rangefinder way. like i said, it will never be a GRD. you're not going to be loosey-goosey and you will never be able to shove the M under somebody's nose like you can with the Ricoh. Play on the strengths rather than dwelling on the negatives. you'll adapt -- you always have and you always will, and, oh my! those files....

 

cam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5. Lens identification in firmware, through a menu, similar to that on top-end Nikon cameras, as an alternative to lens coding.

 

That would be relatively easy to do with an RFID chip. One could be potted into a recess in the lens mount and would not even require the placement precision or real estate that the current "bit pits" need. The technology is currently in use by higher-end electric toothbrushes that can sense which type of brush head is attached.

 

The upside is that much more specific lens coding information is possible.

 

The downside is that such a move would make it less likely that a third-party developer would be willing to tool up and offer the chips to users of other lenses. We can grouse about the 6-bit coding Leica decided on, but RFID technology was available when the M8 was being designed...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
Well in that case I'd say you were mistaking the reason (at least some of us) choose the M-system to shoot with.
Mani, in my view it's not an either-or propositon: these facilities can be implemented in the context of alternatives that the user can chose, such as lens coding vs lens identification entered by the user or matrix vs other ways of focusing. Hence, the camera can be kept to work the way it does now for people who want it that way.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The tool that you seem to want isn't that camera: it has flashing icons and guidelines and matrix meters that doubtless confirm readings with high-pitched pips. It overloads you with information. It reminds you that it's a computer, even when you don't want to be reminded. Maybe it has live-view to remove you one step further from the world you could otherwise see through the simple window of a viewfinder.

 

.

 

 

If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck the probability will be very high that it is a duck!

 

The M8 is after all a Digital Camera, thrives on electric current and has nothing to do what so ever with film.... it produces digital images.... so you are currently shooting with a digital camera, not an analog with some electrical features in it.

 

I don't see any reason against incorporating "all things handy and electronic" into a camera which is already electronic/digital. After all the M8 will never become a film camera no matter how much "modern" stuff one tends to leave out. And although I won't miss it, Matrix metering would be a great idea.... plus an "off-switch" for the die-hard 18% grey metering system fanatics, or however Leica has chosen to name this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest malland
...and i think you'll be in for a rude surprise when you go back to the Ricoh files after using the M8.

 

Cam:

 

Agreed. I can see that on the basis of the M8 files that I've processed

 

 

...and i have never turned the electronic level on. i would be more than disgusted if it ever showed up on the M, whichever version. you're asking for P&S type bells and whistles that defeat the purpose of a rangefinder...

 

And I've never used the electronic level on the GRD2 because I generally wasn't shooting landscapes at the seaside, and for the few that I did I framed with the LCD, with which it's easier to frame without leaning the camera than with en external super-wide angle viewfinder. But I cannot agree that having an electronic level, which of course needs Live View, would defeat the purpose of a rangefinder — it's not something that one would use all the time.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
; but there is no need to shackle the camera to an out-of-date gestalt for the sake of tradition. After all, you can always shoot film with a Leica-M if you want the purity of the experience.

 

—Mitch/Turks & Caicos

Flickr: Mitch Alland's Photostream

 

I'm not sure which elements make up the "out of date gestalt". Tell me more.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mani as you know the M-system is still better suited to film than digital in its present state and needs changes to make it a top notch digital tool.

 

It needs improvements - yes- but I like the M even better as a digital camera than I do as a film camera. I wouldn't call it unsuited at all but it still has kinks to be worked out.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×