Shootist Posted July 11, 2009 Share #141 Posted July 11, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I do think all this talk about an imminent M9 is wishful thinking. Stefan Daniel's last comments were to the effect that they are making progress but that it's a difficult problem and there's no date for the camera.I also expect it to be substantially more expensive than an M8.2. That will be the death of the M line. Unless Leica is not looking for new customer and plans on making enough money off the few, in relative terms, they sell to those that MUST have one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 11, 2009 Posted July 11, 2009 Hi Shootist, Take a look here M8 Competition?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted July 11, 2009 Share #142 Posted July 11, 2009 I doubt it, Ed. Price has never been a decisive factor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 12, 2009 Share #143 Posted July 12, 2009 What about credibility? At some point you have to question, even when you can afford it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 12, 2009 Share #144 Posted July 12, 2009 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17 mm f/2.8 review - Introduction - Lenstip.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 13, 2009 Share #145 Posted July 13, 2009 I'll bet that right now Leica is kicking itself that it didn't create a camera like the EP-1 and generate the sales revenue that the EP-1 is generating for Oly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted July 13, 2009 Author Share #146 Posted July 13, 2009 The kit 14-42mm lens does do a bit of hunting for focus at times. But it's actually a pretty darn sharp lens with minimal distortion, so I forgive it. Plus, it's easy enough to quickly manually focus. (And it's auto-focus is still much faster than my M lenses.) Ken, Do you find the auto magnification the lens does during manual focus annoying? In order to keep it from doing that you have to hold down the OK button which becomes a bit of a pain. I was trying to do some indoor shooting today and the auto focus confusion just would not allow me to focus where I wanted to. I find this is a real problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 13, 2009 Share #147 Posted July 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) This is a bit of a worry .......... Fixed focal length lenses giving an angle of view around 65 degrees have showed distortion, in our tests, at the level of -1.5%. This was the case with 35 mm class Sony, Canon or Nikon lenses tested on full frame. This was also the case of tested on a small APS-C sensor Sigma 1.8/24. Unfortunately we don't have good news for 4/3 system users. Using such a small sensor requires small focal lengths if you want a wide angle of view. And small focal lengths often cause large distortion. In the case of M. Zuiko 17 mm f/2.8 it’s particularly onerous, as it reaches as much as -5.45%, which is a dishonorable record for this class of appliance. Another thing is worth mentioning here. E-P1 users may not even notice this aberration, as it’s automatically removed from JPEG files. You can see it only after developing RAW files. What’s more, E-P1 removes it somewhat on the run, showing image already free of distortions on the LCD. In a lens test, however, it’s not our job to show what a camera or a computer can do to a picture, but how the optics works. And the optics of M. Zuiko 17 mm is burdened with very large distortion and the lens deserves criticism for that. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/89830-m8-competition/?do=findComment&comment=960849'>More sharing options...
tomasis7 Posted July 13, 2009 Share #148 Posted July 13, 2009 Olympus M.Zuiko Digital 17 mm f/2.8 review - Introduction - Lenstip.com frankly, i think d-lux 4 is better than olympus imo.. though I cannot see any true competitor to m8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted July 13, 2009 Share #149 Posted July 13, 2009 so you tried out both cameras?.........or is it just the usual blanket statement hearsay.............. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecaton Posted July 13, 2009 Share #150 Posted July 13, 2009 frankly, i think d-lux 4 is better than olympus imo.. though I cannot see any true competitor to m8 Because.........???? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted July 13, 2009 Share #151 Posted July 13, 2009 Hi Wilfredo Take a look at this post over on theonlinephotographer. People are already using M-mount lenses on the EP1, although I haven't seen so many example images yet. I agree that this is more of a complement than a threat to the M8. However, I don't understand Leica's unwillingness to embrace the m4/3 idea with a lower-cost digital CL: they've stated explicitly that they're not interested, and this may be due to their lack of success with the Digilux3, but they're in danger of missing yet another promising boat imho. Others may step into what could otherwise be a nice revenue stream for the company.. I have no idea why Leica said they didn't want to join in the m4/3 thing, but it could be related to performance/image quality. I don't have experience with the EP-1, but the similarly sensored Panasonic G1 does not work well with lenses wider than 50mm. 35mm is so-so, and the Summicron 28 does not work well at all. Serious smearing of detail as you get away from the center shows why Leica and Kodak went to some effort with the angled micro lenses, and why the 4/3 push has been toward designing more telecentric lenses. I wish it were otherwise, but I've ordered the 7-14 Panasonic lens because the wide Leica lenses just don't work well on the m4/3 sensor. I was so hoping the 21 Summilux would work well. I did try the EP-1 for a bit in a store in comparison to the Pany G-1, and I wouldn't trade. Styling wise the EP-1 wins, but functionally the G1 is well ahead. Electronic viewfinder, swiveling LCD and faster autofocus place it well ahead. I think the only way I could see using the EP-1 is with the coming 17/2.8 or Pany 20/1.7 with optical viewfinder in the hot shoe. As for an M8 competitor; I don't think so. The G1 replaces my cropped format Canons as a lighter and smaller alternative to the full frame Canons. Image quality overall seems very similar to the cropped format Canons except that the G1 has maybe a bit better capability as far as detail capture is concerned and the Canons have a bit more dynamic range and of course a stop or more better high ISO performance. Henning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted July 13, 2009 Share #152 Posted July 13, 2009 Because.........???? These are three totally different cameras maybe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfokevin Posted July 13, 2009 Share #153 Posted July 13, 2009 frankly, i think d-lux 4 is better than olympus imo.. though I cannot see any true competitor to m8 But you would have to admit that a D-Lux 4 with interchangeable lenses like the Oly Pen would be a killer camera!... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted July 13, 2009 Share #154 Posted July 13, 2009 But you would have to admit that a D-Lux 4 with interchangeable lenses like the Oly Pen would be a killer camera!... May I second that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrycioni Posted July 13, 2009 Share #155 Posted July 13, 2009 I did try the EP-1 for a bit in a store in comparison to the Pany G-1, and I wouldn't trade. Styling wise the EP-1 wins, but functionally the G1 is well ahead. Electronic viewfinder, swiveling LCD and faster autofocus place it well ahead. Henning I totally disagree Henning and I have both and have shot extensively with both including using the Panasonic 7-14/45-200. That said you are certainly entitled to your point of view. ---------------------------------------- In response to another post here - the D-LUX 4 (in my opinion and I own two of them) on the IQ side of things is no match for the E-P1 or G1 nor should it be. The M4/3 sensor is considerably larger. Functionality will be a matter of debate with the possible exception of interchangeable lenses on the M4/3 bodies - which the D-LUX4/LX3 can not do. To make a blanket statement the the D-LUX4/LX3 is better seems somewhat strange particularily if you have shot to any degree with any of these systems. We can agree that the G1 or EP-1 is not an M8 or M8 replacement - for the sake of clarity I own love the M8. Best regards, Terry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted July 13, 2009 Share #156 Posted July 13, 2009 frankly, i think d-lux 4 is better than olympus imo.. Other than the DLux red dot, what makes it a better camera than the Pen? From Terrys perspective the files are not as good, and from my own perspective having used the LX since first came out (how many years is that?) the DLux is not a great user camera. Anyone? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 14, 2009 Share #157 Posted July 14, 2009 Here is a comparison shot between the EP-1 on the left and the Panasonic LX3 (DL4) on the right at ISO 1600. The image after is at ISO 3200. Please do tell me how the DL4 has better IQ than the EP-1. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/89830-m8-competition/?do=findComment&comment=961528'>More sharing options...
trs Posted July 14, 2009 Share #158 Posted July 14, 2009 I see E-P1 is nice camera for what it is. Obsulutely, I have nothing against it. I don't mind having one. Why do we go crazy about Leica not making it? If you want it, now you have it (oly) with fraction of what Leica would've charged us. To me, it really sounds like want to have the red dot on the E-P1. I don't think E-P1 is threat to Leica (but I could be naive). The more E-P1 sells (for the purpose of putting M lens on), the more money Leica makes. People who want digital M still will buy digital M. People who like M lens, but did not want to spend a lot of money for body, now they have E-P1 and G1x. I see it as all win/win/win (leica/oly/customer) situation. Nothing to worry about Leica not building or now Leica loosing it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barjohn Posted July 14, 2009 Share #159 Posted July 14, 2009 TRS, Few buyers will be buying new Leica lenses for the EP-1. They either already have the lenses in their inventory or buy used ones. Unless Leica makes lenses especially designed for the 4/3rds market they miss the financial gravy train. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trs Posted July 14, 2009 Share #160 Posted July 14, 2009 John, Looking at track record of Leica, it seems that M is really their bread and butter as far as camera business goes. So, even if they did make 4/3 RF camera, not sure if they do much good if it was not using the M-lens. Of course, as soon as we hear the combination (4/3 and M lens), we would critisize them for how rediculous it is as they are not using full potential of the lens (x2 factor now), as we do with M8 already. I mean that Leica probably won't make much money by investing in new line of lens for 4/3 system, my guess. But, I understand, we are consumer and we want everything our way Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.