M8.2 or MP+M9 ?

[efftee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That may be true if you start from scratch, ie don't have a film M. And if you have a lot of money to spend without using the lens to its fullest: you pay a premium for 21mm (3300 Euro) and you get just 28 (1550 Euro).

 

Would you feel cheated if you don't drive your car at the maximum possible speed all the time? I find that if photography - the image itself and the joy of capturing it - was the primary concern, everything else is really not so important anymore. But that's just me.

[cj1]

Really that is just not the case. It may be the case for you at the distances you are use to working at but that doesn't mean you can't get the same shot with the M8 crop factor. Just move in slightly with a 50mm lens or back slightly for a 75mm lens.

And since you say you like to use a 90mm what is wrong with the 99.75mm crop FL of the 75mm lens. Like I said just move back maybe 1-1.5 feet and there goes that other 9.75mm.

 

Post like this tell me one thing. These people that come up with all kinds of excuses for NOT buying a M8 are just kidding themselves. More then likely whatever the M8 would of, could of, been from the start these same people would of found something wrong with it and not bought one. And they would sight those perceived flaws here on this forum.

 

I think the issue with buying the M8 for me is more that fact that it has already been around for 3 years. Given the rapidly evolving features for digital cameras it doesn't make sense for me to spend a lot of money on a camera that may be replaced soon. Of course it may not be replaced this year but there is a higher probability of a replacement sooner rather than later given all the chatter and change at Leica; If you have not bought the M8 at this point why not wait to see?

 

I think Leica will have to make its intentions clear. I have seen files and printed photos from the M8 and have been very impressed with the quality but if you have another camera system and can live without the M8 then why risk spending the money and ending up hacked off when the new one comes out? How many times has that happened in todays world of fast changing technology? Fine if you don't care or have enough money to buy both then go ahead!

 

Personally I would like a camera that performs better in low light.. that used to be the selling point of the analogue M... funny how they seemed to have dropped that one. And I want to use my 35 1.4 as close to a 35 as possible.. even a 1.10 crop factor would be better. If you have a large investment in lenses of a certain focal length then I would imagine it is quite annoying to have to buy more lenses just to get back to where you were.

[Advertisement]

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

[andybarton]

 

Not all photographers think, shoot and want the same things as you do. If you can't accept the fact that some members have opinions and needs that are different than yours, then I think you have much bigger problems than defending what works for *you* about the M8.

 

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

I nearly bought an M8 about 9 months ago. I borrowed one for a long weekend from my dealer and handed it back. I just didn't think it was good enough for the amount of money it would have cost me (I'd just come out of a relationship with a DMR, don't forget)

 

So, subject to what happens in my private life through this year, I am eagerly awaiting the end of the year to see what Santa brings.

 

The M8 is not the answer to all the film users' needs. Maybe the M9 will be. We'll see. But, if current M8 owners are happy with it, then that's fine too, of course.

[scott kirkpatrick]

I agree with the recommendations to try shooting RF independently of the question of digital and digital with magnification factor. But the M2 handles rather like the M8 in terms of lenses supported, etc. The M4 and M6 only bring in the 28mm focal length, and you expressed a preference for 35mm. My M2 (purchased around 1970, probably third-hand by then) has outlasted all other film gear, and is still in frequent use.

 

No TTL, of course, but I keep a GRD2 P&S in my pocket for occasional eye calibration.

 

scott

[jaapv]

I couldn't agree more.

 

I nearly bought an M8 about 9 months ago. I borrowed one for a long weekend from my dealer and handed it back. I just didn't think it was good enough for the amount of money it would have cost me (I'd just come out of a relationship with a DMR, don't forget)

 

So, subject to what happens in my private life through this year, I am eagerly awaiting the end of the year to see what Santa brings.

 

The M8 is not the answer to all the film users' needs. Maybe the M9 will be. We'll see. But, if current M8 owners are happy with it, then that's fine too, of course.

Well, yes. But there is another side: rumourmongering makes people believe some kind of magic camera called the M9 is just around the corner, causing them to make wrong decisions. It is a fine balance.

[plasticman]

Not all photographers think, shoot and want the same things as you do. If you can't accept the fact that some members have opinions and needs that are different than yours, then I think you have much bigger problems than defending what works for *you* about the M8.

 

I think this is one of the wisest and most reasonable things I've ever read on this forum.

 

Mani

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, yes. But there is another side: rumourmongering makes people believe some kind of magic camera called the M9 is just around the corner, causing them to make wrong decisions. It is a fine balance.

 

That's true enough, but rumours are inevitable when camera models now have a limited life. Back in the day, the M6 was basically the same for what, 12 years (I can't remember)?

 

And of course, now we have internet forums, which we never did then. Therefore the opportunity to enter into discussions such as these has created a completely different environment for companies bringing products to the market.

 

I am happy with my decision and my "wait and see" approach. I don't feel that I am missing out on anything.

[bill]

I think this is one of the wisest and most reasonable things I've ever read on this forum.

 

Mani

 

+1.

 

The M8 is not my cup of tea - never has been, never will be, for all the reasons I have previously stated.

 

That doesn't make it a bad camera, or indeed me a bad person. I don't lose sleep over it, and I regard all attempts to "convert" me to the M8 "faith" because I don't "see the light" in the same way that I do doorstep callers trying to "save my soul".

 

So for now I'll get on with life and continue to wait patiently for a FF camera with either a "proper" M form factor or something completely new.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Double Negative]

Crop factor is a big deal for certain types of work.

 

I have a real problem with the current crop factors for photographing people....I really need a perfect FF 75mm and 90mm for placing human subjects correctly within an environment or studio set. Right now, I can only get about 67mm and around 100mm with the current 1.33 crop factor. 67mm is just a bit too wide and 100mm is way too long. The most important focal lengths for my type of work are not unavailable with the current crop factor and it is a major reason that I haven't invested into an M system yet.

 

I hate to say it, but a RF isn't the best camera for use in the studio. An SLR or MF camera is probably a lot better suited for many reasons.

[KM-25]

I think the fact that Leica put out two 1.4 wide angles, a new aspheric Noctilux and a 18 3.8 that cover a full 35mm image circle tell all of us that they are at least trying to reach full frame in a M.

 

It's not really rumoring, it is just a natural progression that out of any user of fine lenses, Leica users truly deserve. The lenses now cost many thousands of dollars, they are exceptional right to the very corners, how nice it would be to use that.

 

Nikon DX users vowed for years that FX was a waste / pipe dream and that the proverbial "Sweet-spot" of lenses was being used so why bother with full frame. Well look at them now, the D3 / D700 are outstanding with many lenses like the 28/2, 105 2.5 and the look, starkly different.

 

All this said, Leica has to be given credit for the M8. They are not computer makers, they are the artisans of fine life long precision instruments of mechanical and optical perfection. In a way, it is kind of sad that Leica had to go digital, the very incarnation of a digital camera it self is subject to SO much scrutiny / measurebation from SO many different directions, it is often sickening.

 

But Leica will prevail, the M8 is just good enough to keep them in the game and hopefully they will sell a few of those awesome looking white ones to not only cut them a healthy profit, but show the world young and old just how cool it is to own and use a Leica.

 

And if the next Leica M digital is not full frame, but has overcome the IR filter need and has much better high ISO quality, it will still sell very well, maybe even one to me.

Edited June 8, 2009 by KM-25

[BerndReini]

In my earlier post, I suggested buying an MP and a Leica lens. I said this because the poster enjoys shooting film, and because a film Leica, when bought used, will hold its value incredibly well. Now that being said, everyone's major concern with the M8 in this post seems to be the crop factor. Let me just say that I think a full frame sensor is important in Leica's future, but the quality of Leica lenses, and the drawing of the different designs and focal lengths does not get lost with the M8. So whichever the poster decides to buy, Leica will not disappoint. Now in a direct comparison, there are a lot more important factors, when you compare a film Nikon with an M8 since the film vs. digital comparison by far outweighs the differences the crop factor introduces. The one thing I can guarantee is that whatever your favorite focal length on the Nikon may be, try out a Leica lens on an MP with the same slide film, and let your slide projector convince you that this camera is a worthy investment.

[artington]

I have the MP and love it. It is beautifully built and feels like it will last forever. Although I have no direct experience, I am not sure the same can be said about the M8. I have read that it does not stand up well to poor weather and is poorly sealed. This may be exaggerated, of course, but there is always a risk in digital cameras of condensation upsetting the internal electronics if weather-sealing is poor.

 

Furthermore, in my view it is laughable that Leica should choose to offer the same model with a .2 suffix for a good GBP1000 more containing upgrades that should have been on the original M8. In particular, (1) the frame lines - after all only ASPH Leica lenses are ideal for really close work so the frame lines should have been optimised for 2 m from the very beginning rather than 0.7m (a totally bizarre decision). (2) the LCD screen is apparently very prone to scuffing and Leica should offer a hard protective screen for £15 like every other camera manufacturer rather than offering the choice of an 8.2 or expensive upgrade. As for the other improvements, who cares whether the shutter noise is extremely slight or infinitessimally slight in today's noisy world? One final quibble - I don't see why Leica cannot supply the 6 digit codes for their lenses in decal form so they can simply be affixed by the user to the lens as an alternative to paying £60 a time.

 

In the eyes of many, myself included, the Leica M (up to the MP) comes into its own as a small, low-light, wide-angle camera system of matchless quality. Until all that can be said about a full frame digital M I shall use my MP and scan if necessary. Sadly, though, I am finding that digital has become pretty indispensable because of all the usual reasons, not least the availability of web hosting and selling sites along with excellent digital printing services from the specialists. Furthermore, FF DSLRs are now coming of age at a sensible price (the excellent Sony a900 can be purchased new for considerably less than the price of a used M8). As for dynamic range, I'm afraid I find the supposed superiority of film questionable for most purposes.

 

It is sad that Leica, great name that it is, has failed to to live up to its reputation in the film to digital transition but, as many have noted, it instead for too long took the easier route of offering dubious collectable editions to those who buy the cameras to keep in cupboards rather than use ( and still does with the white M8.2!). Maybe the answer is for Cosina to take Leica over and develop their own Zeiss / Leica digital M (or just do it on their own - the RD1 was a pretty good start!).

Edited June 8, 2009 by artington

[KM-25]

Now that being said, everyone's major concern with the M8 in this post seems to be the crop factor. Let me just say that I think a full frame sensor is important in Leica's future, but the quality of Leica lenses, and the drawing of the different designs and focal lengths does not get lost with the M8.

 

I don't think that is everyone's major concern, it is just the way these threads evolve sometimes. But as far as the quality of Leica's lenses remaining intact with the M8, I do not agree. They do look great on the M8, but they look different than when on a film M. When I think of the way a lens draws, I think of not only how it draws behind the subject, but into the corners as well. The difference is hardly noticeable when shooting at mid to small apertures but becomes more apparent when at or near wide open. The outlying areas of character literally are cropped out of possibility when using the M8.

 

To most, it is not the end of the world, I certainly had less of an issue with 1.33 than other crops, but it is on my list of things to improve upon.

 

As for getting back on topic, I would suggest the OP take the route I took when first exploring Leica. If film is the route, buy a decent condition M6 and a 35mm Summicron and give it a go. If you are like me and fall head over, then the natural path of progression will set in.

If not, you are out less risk in selling, a lower dollar amount is easier on the brain to deal with in parting with and usually sells quicker.

 

MP's are really nice and wonderful to handle, but they are more than double a M6 and I find I still use my M6TTL as my workhorse most because it is to the point Leica M. But I will admit, I had DAG upgrade the flare prone R/F right away.

 

But after owning the M8 for well over a year and then handling the M8.2 a few weeks ago, I can tell Leica is serious about making a great digital M. The frame lines and shutter on the new digital make it very nice, I would think most would be happy with it.

Edited June 8, 2009 by KM-25

[jaapv]

I have the MP and love it. It is beautifully built and feels like it will last forever.

Although I have no direct experience,

I am not sure the same can be said about the M8. I have read that it does not stand up well to poor weather and is poorly sealed. This may be exaggerated, of course, but there is always a risk in digital cameras of condensation upsetting the internal electronics if weather-sealing is poor.

 

Furthermore, in my view it is laughable that Leica should choose to offer the same model with a .2 suffix for a good GBP1000 more containing upgrades that should have been on the original M8. In particular, (1) the frame lines - after all only ASPH Leica lenses are ideal for really close work so the frame lines should have been optimised for 2 m from the very beginning rather than 0.7m (a totally bizarre decision). (2) the LCD screen is apparently very prone to scuffing and Leica should offer a hard protective screen for £15 like every other camera manufacturer rather than offering the choice of an 8.2 or expensive upgrade. As for the other improvements, who cares whether the shutter noise is extremely slight or infinitessimally slight in today's noisy world? One final quibble - I don't see why Leica cannot supply the 6 digit codes for their lenses in transfer form so they can simply be affixed by the user to the lens as an alternative to paying £60 a time.

 

In the eyes of many, myself included, the Leica M (up to the MP) comes into its own as a small, low-light, wide-angle camera system of matchless quality. Until all that can be said about a full frame digital M I shall use my MP and scan if necessary. Sadly, though, I am finding that digital has become pretty indispensable because of all the usual reasons, not least the availability of web hosting and selling sites along with excellent digital printing services from the specialists. Furthermore, FF DSLRs are now coming of age at a sensible price (the excellent Sony a900 can be purchased new for considerably less than the price of a used M8). As for dynamic range, I'm afraid I find the supposed superiority of film questionable for most purposes.

 

It is sad that Leica, great name that it is, has failed to to live up to its reputation in the film to digital transition but, as many have noted, it instead for too long took the easier route of offering dubious collectable editions to those who buy the cameras to keep in cupboards rather than use ( and still does with the white M8.2!). Maybe the answer is for Cosina to take Leica over and develop their own Zeiss / Leica digital M (or just do it on their own - the RD1 was a pretty good start!).

And it shows... The screen does not scuff easily, mine is still fine after 11.000 shots and Leica sends screen protectors with every returned camera, why should Leica have offewred the 2 m set of framelines? Either choice is valid. There have never been so many special editions as with the M6 range. I have a standard M8 and an upgraded one, and the price difference is well worth it - if one is interested in the upgrades, that is. Cosina did not make the RD1, the bodies were supplied to Epson, a straight buisness deal. Cosina has no interest in digital rangefinders.

Edited June 8, 2009 by jaapv

[artington]

And it shows... The screen does not scuff easily, mine is still fine after 11.000 shots and Leica sends screen protectors with every returned camera

 

 

Unnecessary sniping at a serious posting by a long time Leica user. If the M8, and the M8 screen, are so good, why do the cameras have to be returned to get their screen protectors? And how long does it take before they are returned? Judging by this and other forums it can be three months or more!

Edited June 8, 2009 by artington

[andybarton]

Do you have an M8, artington, or are you speaking from second hand knowledge and Internet rumours?

 

I have seen jaap's M8s, and certainly this time last year, there was nothing untoward in the LCD department.

[artington]

Do you have an M8, artington, or are you speaking from second hand knowledge and Internet rumours?

 

I have seen jaap's M8s, and certainly this time last year, there was nothing untoward in the LCD department.

 

I thought my original comment made it perfectly clear that I am an MP owner, and not an M8 owner. I have considered but rejected the idea of moving up to an M8 (but not a FF M9 should this appear) partly by trying one out and partly by reading comments on internet fora such as these - and there are enough of them. Of course, if these comments are "rumours" it would suggest that they are of little use. However, I understood the general idea of these talk-shops is to inform. I accept that my comments about the LCD screen are based on those I have read which were made by owners but the remainder of my post is, in my view, perfectly reasonable. Of course, if this forum is merely to act as an apologist for Leica, there is no more to be said. I have to say that I am greatly puzzled why you, as a moderator, have chosen to intervene at this juncture.

[andybarton]

I am not intervening as a moderator, but as a forum member

 

I was curious, that's all

[SJP]

The Leica MP is a work of art but would never exist without the horribly flawed M3 and M2. The M2 is the most beautiful Leica M of them all, despite its minor failings like no exposure meter, max. 1/1000 shutter time, no weather sealing, 1/60 flash sync. (or whatever - never use the thing with flash). That was the film age.

 

Enter the M8 - they needed to start somewhere. I find it most remarkable that Leica's first digital M is still happily alive and kicking after nearly 3 years since it's first introduction. Same applies to the DMR, that has been out of production for some time and still is second to none.

 

Note, small factoid, I treat my equipment with minimal respect and M8 LCD is still free from any blemishes, it is not especially scratch sensitive in my experience.

 

Buy one if you want one, otherwise not.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[charlesphoto99]

I thought my original comment made it perfectly clear that I am an MP owner, and not an M8 owner. I have considered but rejected the idea of moving up to an M8 (but not a FF M9 should this appear) partly by trying one out and partly by reading comments on internet fora such as these - and there are enough of them. Of course, if these comments are "rumours" it would suggest that they are of little use. However, I understood the general idea of these talk-shops is to inform. I accept that my comments about the LCD screen are based on those I have read which were made by owners but the remainder of my post is, in my view, perfectly reasonable. Of course, if this forum is merely to act as an apologist for Leica, there is no more to be said. I have to say that I am greatly puzzled why you, as a moderator, have chosen to intervene at this juncture.

 

And I suppose an unscratched LCD screen makes your images that much better? Just sayin....