A second hand M8 - waste of money?

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you plan to buy M8 for investment, don't buy one.

A better investment than buying stock in 2000 though...

[Lasex]

A better investment than buying stock in 2000 though...

 

Dear jaap, it depends on the stock, you must think positively. In the long run stock markets will go up.

 

"There is no reason for pessimism, it won't help"

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

Thanks About the M8. Just buy the darn thing; it is a better camera than most of us will ever be photographers, obolescence does not enter into it.

[Isabelle Lenatio]

A better investment than buying stock in 2000 though...

 

This depends what stock you chose in 2000 Jaap ....

[KM-25]

eerm.. The M8.2 has the same sensor as the M8. I have no idea why you think the M8 is out-dated (?) It is still the flagship of Leica.

 

Nah, the MP is the flagship.

 

Once the M-digital works as well and as dependably as a film M, then that claim might be true..

[jaapv]

This depends what stock you chose in 2000 Jaap ....

True, Isabelle. Unfortunately high finance is not something I am very good at...

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Nah, the MP is the flagship.

 

Once the M-digital works as well and as dependably as a film M, then that claim might be true..

 

KM-25, do you believe any digicam will work as well and as dependably as their film forebears? The differences are too great for comparison IMO.

 

Flagship or no, the M8 is a great performer and allows me (and many others) to press my talents further than I could with my range of film cameras, which I still revere btw. Either way, the end result is up to me, not the camera.

 

To address the original question: Re: A second hand M8 - waste of money?

Only if it has been abused or you don't know how to take pictures!

[Guest stnami]

you don't know how to take pictures!

.........that not much of a barrier

[hofrench]

The original question deserves a candid response.

If you own an M8, as I have for some time, enjoy it. It's still a pretty good camera and pretty much the only digital platform that will allow you to use your Leica glass.

It's not a good time to be thinking of buying an M8, though, whether new or used. The model itself is already old and is being made to look ever more so all the time.

I'm going to Africa soon and because of this mine will stay behind for the first time on a big trip since I've bought it. I'll carry a 5d Mk II, which I put small lenses on and love, and by a Leica film body.

[Guest malland]

Howard:

 

Agreed, that the original question deserves a serious response; but I considered the same factors you did and came to the opposite conclusion.

 

Yes, the M8 is already "old" but, to me, this meant that the bugs that plagued if for the first two years have been worked out. The fact that it is being made to look older didn't bother me because I didn't consider that important if the camera could satisfy what I want to do with it now; also, it looks like there won't be a new version of the M8 or an M9 for some two years.

 

The question of buying a second-hand one rather than a new one didn't enter the calculation at all because I bought an M8.2 from the UK in January, at which time it was about US$1,400 cheaper than the US price, which meant that I could easily sell with no or little loss if I didn't like. A new M8 would have been an even better deal because in January there was a Leica rebate of GBP 650 on that model, in addition to the relatively low price of buying from the UK.

 

Last year I went to Namibia and shot with the D300 and two excellent lenses, the 70-200mm/f2.8 VR and the 17-35mm/f.28. In April, I'll be going to Botswana and will take the M8.2 and the D300 with only the 70-200mm lens.

 

Incidentally, I bought the M8.2 with the idea of using it only for B&W because that what I have been doing and also because I didn't want to get into IR/UV filters, but found that I like the colour so much that this camera produces that I find myself completing pictures in colour and am now thinking of a project that I may shoot in colour.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Bangkok Noir© Book Project

[Guest Luis D]

The original question deserves a candid response.

If you own an M8, as I have for some time, enjoy it. It's still a pretty good camera and pretty much the only digital platform that will allow you to use your Leica glass.

It's not a good time to be thinking of buying an M8, though, whether new or used. The model itself is already old and is being made to look ever more so all the time.

I'm going to Africa soon and because of this mine will stay behind for the first time on a big trip since I've bought it. I'll carry a 5d Mk II, which I put small lenses on and love, and by a Leica film body.

 

I will use your definition of candid response=my personal opinion, and so offer my own. This may be an excellent time to think of buying an M8. Just as IMO it is now an excellent time to buy a Canon 5D (I, not II) and/or a 1DS-MarkII (not III). During such time they are in production has been produced so many thousands great (technically as well artfully) images with them. I will surprise if many people who insist they are obsolete can produce better with their current-model cameras.

[jaapv]

Those would be good arguments if only they were true. A Canon 5D cost US$3300 when it first appear in 2005. It is 4 years until it was replaced. Still a used 5D is at or above $1000. A 1DS-MarkII what was first appear before the 5D, at $8000, is used now at $2500-2800. This in a time of terrible economy, and most 1-series Canon maybe was used heavily by professionals. When these both models was 2 yrs old, a used ones was going at $2600 and $6000, far more than 50% of new price. The M8 is 2 yrs old when replaced by slight upgraded M8.2. Who paid last year $5500 for an M8 can now take back $2200. And, unlike the Canon's, the M8 is not replaced with a model what has a bigger or better sensor!! So as I see, at least in digital, Leica value drops farther faster than Canon.

 

But bottomline, should one ask is a camera for investment or taking photos?

 

Ummm.. You are a bit confused here, as you are mixing up $, Yen and € exchange rates with used prices. I think one should stick with the bottom line (sorry Isabelle;)) and just conclude that the M8 (as the 5D etc.) still makes as excellent images as it did the day it left the factory.

[hofrench]

I will use your definition of candid response=my personal opinion, and so offer my own. This may be an excellent time to think of buying an M8. Just as IMO it is now an excellent time to buy a Canon 5D (I, not II) and/or a 1DS-MarkII (not III). During such time they are in production has been produced so many thousands great (technically as well artfully) images with them. I will surprise if many people who insist they are obsolete can produce better with their current-model cameras.

 

By candid response, I was speaking in reaction to the many tongue in cheek and otherwise whimsical answers I've read in this thread. Obviously my response is my opinion.

 

There is clearly a high degree of subjectivity involved in this conversation. If you want to buy recently replaced, formerly high-end equipment because you believe that's the best price point for you in the planned obsolescence process that affects all digital equipment, I'll tip my hat to your logic, which I understand very well, even if I cannot automatically embrace it.

 

I've never insisted my M8 is obsolete and I still enjoy using it, albeit much less than before, but under most conditions I can definitely produce better work with my new 5D Mk II. The quality difference is readily apparent, and can be expressed in a variety of ways (resolution, print quality, consistency and accuracy, from framing to white balance to exposure, to high ISO performance to lag time from dormant state to shoot readiness to battery life, and I could really go on and on. These, by the way, are mostly objective criteria.).

 

I worked alongside pros using the original 5D in China for two years and feeling that for the most part, my M8 held its own, even though the 5D also beats the M8 in many of the areas listed above. The new 5D creams it, as do the latest offerings from Nikon and Sony, and for my money, it represented a compelling price/quality equation straight out of the gate.

 

I speak not as a Leica basher, but as someone who believes that its past time for Leica to raise its game in digital technology, and the 8.2 is not what I have in mind. If you're in digital you should be all the way in, especially when you're charging the Leica premium. There's a lot of Leica boosterism here, unsurprisingly. Here's for telling Leica candidly that the M8, seriously flawed to begin with, is way long in tooth.

[PeterP]

By candid response, I was speaking in reaction to the many tongue in cheek and otherwise whimsical answers I've read in this thread. Obviously my response is my opinion.

 

There is clearly a high degree of subjectivity involved in this conversation. If you want to buy recently replaced, formerly high-end equipment because you believe that's the best price point for you in the planned obsolescence process that affects all digital equipment, I'll tip my hat to your logic, which I understand very well, even if I cannot automatically embrace it.

 

I've never insisted my M8 is obsolete and I still enjoy using it, albeit much less than before, but under most conditions I can definitely produce better work with my new 5D Mk II. The quality difference is readily apparent, and can be expressed in a variety of ways (resolution, print quality, consistency and accuracy, from framing to white balance to exposure, to high ISO performance to lag time from dormant state to shoot readiness to battery life, and I could really go on and on. These, by the way, are mostly objective criteria.).

 

I worked alongside pros using the original 5D in China for two years and feeling that for the most part, my M8 held its own, even though the 5D also beats the M8 in many of the areas listed above. The new 5D creams it, as do the latest offerings from Nikon and Sony, and for my money, it represented a compelling price/quality equation straight out of the gate.

 

I speak not as a Leica basher, but as someone who believes that its past time for Leica to raise its game in digital technology, and the 8.2 is not what I have in mind. If you're in digital you should be all the way in, especially when you're charging the Leica premium. There's a lot of Leica boosterism here, unsurprisingly. Here's for telling Leica candidly that the M8, seriously flawed to begin with, is way long in tooth.

 

Howard,

Very nice work and an intelligent posting

[anupmc]

While I can't disagree with Howard's post in specifics, I do believe in general, there's so much more to life than chasing "latest & greatest" in camera technical merits or usability.

 

If one focuses on capturing the emotions of a moment in time, the technical aspects of that capture becomes somewhat irrelevant, and very personal.

 

To the original poster, unless your question focused on specific technical aspects of the M8 (which perhaps is what you intended), no one can tell you if its worth buying a 2nd hand M8, only you can decide that for yourself.

[lct]

A new M8 is now listed at 3198 euros incl. tax (at leicashop in Vienna, for example). Thus I wonder whether buying a second hand M8 is any good idea anymore, because they still seem to go for over 2200 euros on the "fleabay" even though some of them are nearly 2 years old, warranty is almost out...

It's a no-brainer if this s/h body is almost out of warranty as a new M8 can be had for 3,000 EUR in Europe, including VAT and a 2 years warranty.

[Guest malland]

...I've never insisted my M8 is obsolete and I still enjoy using it, albeit much less than before, but under most conditions I can definitely produce better work with my new 5D Mk II. The quality difference is readily apparent, and can be expressed in a variety of ways (resolution, print quality, consistency and accuracy, from framing to white balance to exposure, to high ISO performance to lag time from dormant state to shoot readiness to battery life, and I could really go on and on. These, by the way, are mostly objective criteria.).

 

I worked alongside pros using the original 5D in China for two years and feeling that for the most part, my M8 held its own, even though the 5D also beats the M8 in many of the areas listed above. The new 5D creams it, as do the latest offerings from Nikon and Sony, and for my money, it represented a compelling price/quality equation straight out of the gate.

 

I speak not as a Leica basher, but as someone who believes that its past time for Leica to raise its game in digital technology, and the 8.2 is not what I have in mind. If you're in digital you should be all the way in, especially when you're charging the Leica premium. There's a lot of Leica boosterism here, unsurprisingly. Here's for telling Leica candidly that the M8, seriously flawed to begin with, is way long in tooth.

Howard:

 

Although I bought the M8.2 in January because, as I wrote above, the UK price was so much less than the US price and because I didn't think a new version would come out for at least two years, I agree entirely with what you write. In another thread, I suggested the following imrpovements that, from my point of view, are necessary or desirable:

 

1. Manual ISO setting along the lines of the EV adjutment.

 

2. Option for display of the ISO, aperture and shutter speed in the viewfinder.

 

3. Matrix metering facility.

 

4. "Electronic spirit level" as on the Ricoh GRD2.

 

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

 

6. Better image quality at ISO 2500, which now is hit-or-miss.

 

While I understand the Leica boosterism here I find puzzling the degree of antagonism my suggestions drew from many people here, despite the fact that these improvements, such as matrix metering or lens identification in firmware, would be options that users would not have to use if they didn't want to. As Imants has written elsewhere, some of the M-system controls generally work better for a film camera than a digital camera, and there is no reason that the M8 or a future M9 should not have, at least as an option the excellent facilities available on top-end digital cameras.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Wiang Pa Pao - a set on Flickr

[plasticman]

Howard:

 

Although I bought the M8.2 in January because, as I wrote above, the UK price was so much less than the US price and because I didn't think a new version would come out for at least two years, I agree entirely with what you write. In another thread, I suggested the following imrpovements that, from my point of view, are necessary or desirable:

 

1. Manual ISO setting along the lines of the EV adjutment.

 

2. Option for display of the ISO, aperture and shutter speed in the viewfinder.

 

3. Matrix metering facility.

 

4. "Electronic spirit level" as on the Ricoh GRD2.

 

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

 

6. Better image quality at ISO 2500, which now is hit-or-miss.

 

While I understand the Leica boosterism here I find puzzling the degree of antagonism my suggestions drew from many people here, despite the fact that these improvements, such as matrix metering or lens identification in firmware, would be options that users would not have to use if they didn't want to. As Imants has written elsewhere, some of the M-system controls generally work better for a film camera than a digital camera, and there is no reason that the M8 or a future M9 should not have, at least as an option the excellent facilities available on top-end digital cameras.

 

—Mitch/Potomac, MD

Wiang Pa Pao - a set on Flickr

 

Malland - I'm not a 'Leica-boosterist' but I (like many others) simply don't want the same improvements you do. Better image quality, reliability and a full-frame sensor would be fine by me.

 

I have no idea why you think your very own particular 'improvements' are precisely those that would make some future M8/9 the 'perfect' camera for everyone.

[Guest Luis D]

Ummm.. You are a bit confused here, as you are mixing up $, Yen and € exchange rates with used prices. I think one should stick with the bottom line (sorry Isabelle;)) and just conclude that the M8 (as the 5D etc.) still makes as excellent images as it did the day it left the factory.

 

This discussion is about the cost of used cameras in relations to what they was cost new. Maybe it is interesting to know the economic reasons why used prices are what they are, but that is a separate discussion. Exchange rates does not change facts that today I can sell a last-generation used Canon for as much or more of its original price as can I sell my Leica M8.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[RSL]

...just conclude that the M8 (as the 5D etc.) still makes as excellent images as it did the day it left the factory.

 

Quite right, Jaap. And if you've maintained it well, a Model T will make a cross-country trip today just as well as it did the day it left the factory. But if you want to know how well that is, I'll tell you about my parents' Michigan to California and back again Model T trip in the mid twenties. The fact is that equipment eventually becomes outdated. With digital equipment you can leave out the "eventually." I'd say that my M4, which I no longer own, probably is less outdated now than the M8. No doubt the M8 makes fine images, but Nikon makes equipment that'll do most imaging jobs better with less work, and, certainly, a whole lot more reliably.