Announcement Published on Leica Website

[Joseph S. Wisniewski]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And then there's the other thing - the files and the resulting prints just look more like film than files from any other digital camera whose results I've seen.

The common claim of all the "fringe cameras". I've heard "it's the most film like" from Foveon sensor fans (Sigma SD9 and SD10), from Fuji Super CCD (S1, S2) and Super CCD HR (S3 and the upcoming S5) fans, from Leica R9 fans, from Kodak 14n and SLR/n owners... You all can't be "the most film like".

I like that and am willing to put up with some of the usual rangefinder weirdness and awkwardness to get the result.

Again, claims from every cult camera, because they're all weird. The Kodak and the Sigma are so touchy with their exposure that they make slide film look easy. The Fuji S3, the Leica R9, and the Sigma SD10 are in a three way tie for the worst ergonomics in the world (but each camera's fans will patiently explain to you how it's ergonomics are the "best" in the world).

I've never been able to get an excellent 16x20 print from scanned 35mm film with any amount of tweaking, and I've already gotten one (out of three attempts) out of an M8 file with essentially NO manipulation - and in particular with no sharpening or noise reduction. I'm pretty happy with that, and it was a lot LESS work than shooting film would have been.

So, what you're really saying is that the camera isn't that "prints just look more like film", at all. You're saying that the prints look like you wished film could.

I could probably do the same with a 1DsII (in fact just today I saw a really NICE 24x36 print from a 1DsII, so I know somebody can do it even if I can't)

Many people can. I routinely pull exceptional large prints from a Nikon D2X. I've seen plenty of stunning Canon prints, Kodak prints, Fuji prints, and even Sigma prints.

- but then I'd have to use an SLR, which I don't really want to do.

And that is the truth of the matter. The M8 isn't more exceptional, as a camera, than a $5000 DSLR. It's not "more like film", and it's not the only camera that can make big pictures. You just prefer a rangefinder to a DSLR. There's nothing at all wrong with that, it's a question of personal style. There's no need to be embarrassed by it, to make up justifications about "look more like film" effects that don't actually exist. You like what you like.

[Joseph S. Wisniewski]

Not since the ill fated Contax ND and Kodak DCS have I seen such hard end-user work put into making a camera do what it is supposed to do. Some people may love the results, but the path seems incredibly difficult, not to mention potentially even more expensive and inconvenient.

 

It may well be that given the current state of technology this is IT if you need a pro level digital rangefinder. The question is DO you need it, and WHY?

OK, since you asked...

 

The "paddler" (PLDR, pro level digital rangefinder, see what you did!) is more comfortable to use with both eyes open than a DSLR over the focal length range of 21-105mm. Shooting with just one eye open results in muscle strain in both the open and closed eye (you're countering the body's natural motion of either opening or closing both eyes simultaneously). It also results in abnormal carrier depletion (light level adaptation) and accommodation (distance adaptation) in the closed eye, as well as increasing your vulnerability to vertigo.

 

The paddler uses lenses that do not have the radical retrofocus designs of SLR lenses. Rangefinder lenses are either fully symmetrical (any lens longer than 55mm, and slow lenses from 28mm to 50mm) or just asymmetrical enough to be buildable. The 15mm Helier, for example, is just a 1.6:1 retrofocus (15mm focal length, 24mm exit pupil) while an SLR 15mm is over twice as severe, 3.6:1. So the RF lenses have less chromatic aberrations and better corner sharpness than SLR lenses.

 

The paddler has a viewfinder eyepiece at the corner of the camera, instead of in the center, so it covers much less of the photographer's face than an SLR, promoting better rapport between photographer and photographee.

 

And the "bonus" reason: "paddler" is so much cooler than anything you can get from DSLR or DRF (digital rangefinder).

 

I think this camera makes nice files, partly because of the sensor design (a supposition, since I'm not an engineer), but also because of the excellent lenses in use. However, I shun the notion of exaggerating it's qualities beyond reason ... especially at the expense of other offerings available.

Every camera has strengths and weaknesses. Some people feel compelled to turn them into religion.

Frankly, I've seen nothing posted by anyone including myself that makes a compelling argument for this camera considering the cost and hoops you have to jump through to get a decent image.

Give it a little time, most of what is wrong is fixable, in a few months IR filters will be common and new firmware and software will make the color corrections pretty much painless.

Even though I argued with Jack Flesher about selling his M8 in preference for Canon, I think he may well be the smartest of the lot when the dust settles.

 

Others obviously feel differently. I may even feel differently because I always wonder if following the path least traveled isn't more rewarding in the end. Then again, I've sometimes done that and the path led to a dead end. Time will tell.

Here in Michigan, the path least traveled is always under construction...

[blakley]

Well, Joseph... I've seen files from an SD-9 and from an S3, and neither looks at all like film to me. The R9 files I've seen include Tri-X negatives, which look a LOT like film :-) and also DMR shots, which I've personally taken with a demo camera, and which look more like film than what comes out of a Nikon or Canon system but not as much as the M8 files.

 

When I was referring to "rangefinder weirdness and awkwardness", I was talking about things like external viewfinders for wide-angle lenses, accessory rewind cranks, and eyes for closeup focusing. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the difference between analog and digital photography. If you want to classify the M3 through M6 as "cult cameras" be my guest - but it's a pretty big cult, and it's the ancestor of the SLR cult.

 

I'm in fact not saying that the M8 files look "like I wish film could" - I would have written that if it had been what I meant. I'm saying (and in fact wrote) that the M8 files look like film. In 16x20 prints, they look like medium-format film rather than 35mm film, which is (as I wrote originally) an advantage over all the 35mm film systems I've used.

 

I also didn't say that the M8 is "more exceptional, as a camera, than a $5000 DSLR". I don't think it is. You can put more exceptional lenses on it, though, and the prints from the files it generates do look more like prints from film, to me. You may not think so, but then, as Marc has written, you might be better off not buying an M8.

 

The fact that the files look more like film to me is, by the way, not a justification: I bought the camera before I'd seen ANY files or prints from it, even in JPEGs online, because it was the only digital camera which would take my Leica lenses. I expected the files to be a little sharper than 10MP DSLR files because of the lack of the low-pass filter, but I didn't expect the textural qualities I see, and I would have been happy even without them. I do prefer the texture of the M8 files, but it's purely a bonus in my book. I would have ordered the camera with or without the bonus, and I would have kept the camera without it.

[xrogers]

I'm glad Leica has a fix for the streaking problem. I have high hopes for a fast turnaround---I'm really going to miss the camera while it's gone.

 

I'm 1200 shots into my M8, and am amazed at what it and the Leica lenses can do. I'm very pleased with Leica for making this camera, and am so far satisfied with their support and service.

 

--clyde

[Guest stevenrk]

Steven

 

I certainly respect the right of people to choose and I'm sorry those returning their cameras or cancelling their orders are not happy with the camera. I know what it's like to be disappointed with a product - just recently, I cancelled my order for a Porsche 911 turbo because that car does not meet my expectations of it.

 

Making people happy is all about managing their expectations. If you deliver more than they expect, they're happy, if you deliver less than they expect - or even what they expect - they are unhappy.

 

For the M8, It was easy enough to fall into the trap of thinking that, somehow, this would be a no-compromise imaging solution. As it turns out, we know that it is compromised, compromised because the laws of physics the thing has to work with and the legacy of the lenses it has to work with do not sit happily together.

 

I had the privilege of talking to people at Photokina who had worked on the development of the camera, including Otto Domes. These people are not incompetent, they are not delinquent in any way and they do the best job they can. Their enthusiasm for the camera was palpable and Leica have brought it to market under the most difficult of commercial conditions. I think they deserve my support for doing so.

 

That said, I'm not blind to the camera's faults and Leica could have done more to set our expectations earlier so there would be less unhappy people. Right now though, we are not going to change the fundamentals of the camera. It is what it is and with the readout bug fixed, filters and firmware, we can look forward to a camera which delivers most of what we reasonably expect of it.

 

Those for whom that is not enough will go elsewhere or wait for something else to come along.

 

Mark, Actually, those for whom it is "not enough," will often stay with what they have and continue making pictures. I, for one, am not in constant wonder lust for the next best fastest car or camera. The M digital, as those very same Leica engineers envisioned it, was a camera that would have provided me and others with an excellent tool worth investing in. I had a specific use for it that has everything to do with available natural and incandescent light and subjects who are not used to being photographed. But I'll do just fine with the MkII -- and fortunate to have such a fine instrument to use.

 

Again I respect your views and your images. And we can disagree on something without suggesting that one voice is better informed or wiser. For example, I would never wish to own a 911 turbo, but certainly can appreciate someone who finds that the car meets a need and respect their knowledge in making a decision to purchase it -- or not because of a flaw. The suggestion that Leica engineers knew all along that the camera wouldn't produce acceptable colors is simply a fiction.

 

Leica is certainly relatively new to the digital world, and have relied on the expertise of others such as Kodak, Phase, and Panasonic to help them cope. Unfortunately here, in part because of the very real new technical challenges of an RF system and the desire to produce a camera that really did respect the quality of the M lenses, the communication broke down and the camera is less. Not less than hyped promises and the resultant voices of disappointed children angry they did not get the exact toy they were promised. Less than a continuation of the tradition that those Leica engineers expected to deliver. I'll bet you a 911 that when Otto was given the news, Otto didn't say: sure, I knew that. I'll bet what he said was not printable -- and to the extent he was aware of it at Photokina, not for public discussion with Leica's customer base.

 

Porsche will do quite well whether you, or I, choose not to buy a 911 from them. Whether Leica is as able to weather a much reduced market is another question. I hope they prosper and grow like Porsche, and not find themselves left behind in an eddy like a Morgan -- great tradition, great car in its time, but lost in a different world with an ever smaller following.

 

The only Morgan I've ever driven was owned by an English photographer who I assisted when I was young. She would fly with that car to shoots -- and I mean fly. She also let me drive on occasion and happy to see me try and match her driving -- it was a wonderfully unPorsche like feeling of speed with the constant promise of danger at the edge of control. (Or in Porsche field of reference much more a 356 on steriods than modern 911.) Great fun. She was probably all of 25 at the time, I was much younger. She's still very alive and well -- no thanks to some of my driving. I'm guessing that if it all were today, we wouldn't be flying about in a Morgan. The world of sporting car enthusiasts and people with a certain sense of style and life have moved on.

 

Enjoy the M. Look forward to seeing the work you produce with it.

 

Steven

[stunsworth]

The Fuji S3, the Leica R9, and the Sigma SD10 are in a three way tie for the worst ergonomics in the world (but each camera's fans will patiently explain to you how it's ergonomics are the "best" in the world)

I haven't used all the cameras out there, but I have to say that when compared to the SLRs I've used over the last 35 years or so the R8 (I don't have an R9) _does_ have the best ergonomics of any camera that I've used.

 

It's a matter of personal taste, you're mileage may differ.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am quite sure this whole episode has been a salutary experience for Leica. The fact that it's happened at all, never mind some aspects of the solution and worries over whether this will be the end of it, will put some people off buying. I'm not in the least risk averse, so have confirmed my order for a second camera with my dealer.

 

I recognise that this is Leica's first DRF and that it's likely to be improved upon over time. What's certain is that if we all waited for perfection, Leica would not stay in business. I'm happy to support Leica by buying their products where wild horses wouldn't make me buy one of the antedeluvian sports cars you like to compare them to. I have visited both Leica and Morgan and I can assure you they are worlds apart.

 

As I said in my original post which seems to have upset you so, each of us can now decide whether to go with the camera and proposed solution or else bail out/back off. Those that do will be able to watch from the sidelines, indulge in a little Schadenfreude from time to time and continue banging on self-righteously about how good their Canons are.

[Riley]

The Fuji S3, the Leica R9, and the Sigma SD10 are in a three way tie for the worst ergonomics in the world (but each camera's fans will patiently explain to you how it's ergonomics are the "best" in the world

 

the Fuji S3 as is the new S5 are using the Nikon N80 chassis, perhaps no surprise its difficult ask to refit into the digital world. It is a camera with good results, and a safe future

 

in my view one of the most ergonomic and intuitive cameras to use is the Digilux 2/LC-1

 

Riley

[scott kirkpatrick]

The only Morgan I've ever driven was owned by an English photographer ... -- it was a wonderfully unPorsche like feeling of speed with the constant promise of danger at the edge of control.

 

All this Morgan stuff calls to mind the Vincent Black Shadow -- too much power for its time, and a suspension that left it barely controllable. memorable, and a few still exist...

 

scott

[Maximus]

Overall this is very dissapointing and sounds like a "best we can do at the moment" fix. But for a camera of this value and a Leica too it isn't on. I've been waiting for a resolution before placing my M8 order but now I won't be bothering. The banding solution sounds promising but the filter fix isn't good enough.

 

It's a pretty camera and in the hands of a skilled photographer will still take stunning shots, but it is flawed and for me not a viable purchase.

 

When it is properly fixed I'll be first in line to get my hands one one. Until then I can only imagine how Leica management must be feeling about the M8 launch.

[marknorton]

Until then I can only imagine how Leica management must be feeling about the M8 launch.

 

Indeed, and I doubt we will ever find out exactly what happened.

 

Right now, this is as good as it's going to get. It will be interesting to see what direction they move in - further sensor/filter development, a new line of lenses which allow the use of different filters, different sensors. That's all for the future.

[blakley]

It will surprise me if we don't eventually find out exactly what happened, both technically and from a management point of view. This is precisely the sort of thing management case studies are made from, and you can bet that Leica is in the process of assembling the case-study information needed to try to avoid a repetition of this kind of problem.

[Guest stevenrk]

I am quite sure this whole episode has been a salutary experience for Leica. The fact that it's happened at all, never mind some aspects of the solution and worries over whether this will be the end of it, will put some people off buying. I'm not in the least risk averse, so have confirmed my order for a second camera with my dealer.

 

I recognise that this is Leica's first DRF and that it's likely to be improved upon over time. What's certain is that if we all waited for perfection, Leica would not stay in business. I'm happy to support Leica by buying their products where wild horses wouldn't make me buy one of the antedeluvian sports cars you like to compare them to. I have visited both Leica and Morgan and I can assure you they are worlds apart.

 

As I said in my original post which seems to have upset you so, each of us can now decide whether to go with the camera and proposed solution or else bail out/back off. Those that do will be able to watch from the sidelines, indulge in a little Schadenfreude from time to time and continue banging on self-righteously about how good their Canons are.

 

Mark, WOW, talk about defensive and missing the point. The only thing I was in any way troubled by was your characterization of all people who have decided not to buy an M as a certain type of whining child in search of perfection and waiting by their screens for the next best thing, as opposed to M owners ready to roll up their sleeves and get out there and take pictures.

 

I thought, and still think, the characterization misses the point for many on this forum who have chosen now not to purchase the M or to return it, is rather close minded, defensive and not helpful to anyone. That said, I won't follow the temptation to make some equally incorrect and unfair global characterizations of all M owners based on your tone and seeming continuing need to justify your decision by belittling those who chose a different path.

 

If it helps, you have made what is a personal but excellent choice. And I still may buy an M for the BW work that I plan, in part because of the effect of IR on the tonal gradation in BW (thank you SR for this insight), and because the M is such an excellent camera in so many ways tied to and independent of the M glass.

 

And, as I said and meant, enjoy the M and look forward to seeing some of the excellent and moving pictures I have no doubt you will produce with it.

 

Steven

[Guest stevenrk]

All this Morgan stuff calls to mind the Vincent Black Shadow -- too much power for its time, and a suspension that left it barely controllable. memorable, and a few still exist...

 

scott

 

Scott, the Vincent Black Shadow certainly looks the part

 

Steven

[espressogeek]

expressogeek

if you read the announcement you will see that you register in december somewhere

 

Riley

 

Thats ridiculous. Why can't I contact the Leica rep in the US and get it ready for shipment now? I really need to make a decision as to if I need to send this back. I admit this camera has some awesome benefits but it also has some really HUGE drawbacks.

The moire articfacting is KILLING me. How do I clean this crap in photoshop in shots with LOTS of it such as splashing water? The magenta filter fix is a flipping bandaid. The jog dial feels like some cheap part gleaned from a korean car radio. I still haven't heard if the files are really 16bit but popular opinion seems to point to this being false advertising.

I really like the ability to hand hold about twice as long as my SLRs. I love the ergonomics of this thing including ISO selection. I love most of the attributes of the construction quality, minus the jog dial . I love the lenses you can put on it. I'm conflicted but at this juncture I might have to send it back.

[scott_233]

Cameras shipped from our factory as of November 27th, 2006 will be equipped with the upgrade

 

How will this be verified by the customer at point of sale?

[wattsy]

How will this be verified by the customer at point of sale?

 

It will most likely have much newer firmware installed than the 1.06 that most (all?) of us early buyers currently have.

[jaapv]

Thats ridiculous. Why can't I contact the Leica rep in the US and get it ready for shipment now? I really need to make a decision as to if I need to send this back. I admit this camera has some awesome benefits but it also has some really HUGE drawbacks.

The moire articfacting is KILLING me. How do I clean this crap in photoshop in shots with LOTS of it such as splashing water? The magenta filter fix is a flipping bandaid. The jog dial feels like some cheap part gleaned from a korean car radio. I still haven't heard if the files are really 16bit but popular opinion seems to point to this being false advertising.

I really like the ability to hand hold about twice as long as my SLRs. I love the ergonomics of this thing including ISO selection. I love most of the attributes of the construction quality, minus the jog dial . I love the lenses you can put on it. I'm conflicted but at this juncture I might have to send it back.

 

Reading this I feel your best move would be to a M7 and film.

[wattsy]

The moire articfacting is KILLING me. How do I clean this crap in photoshop in shots with LOTS of it such as splashing water? The magenta filter fix is a flipping bandaid. The jog dial feels like some cheap part gleaned from a korean car radio.

 

The moire was always going to be a potential issue with the M8 because of Leica's decision to go without an AA filter. I have encountered moire on the odd occasion with the M8 but I can hardly blame Leica for this because the lack of an AA filter was a well documented 'feature' of the M8 long before it came to market.

 

I agree that the jog dial plastic is a bit cheap (it's not unlike the very cheap and nasty ISO selection wheel on the M7 and newer MP bodies) but I'm sure it'll be good for the functional life of the camera.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[B&W]

The moire was always going to be a potential issue with the M8 because of Leica's decision to go without an AA filter. I have encountered moire on the odd occasion with the M8 but I can hardly blame Leica for this because the lack of an AA filter was a well documented 'feature' of the M8 long before it came to market.

 

 

It is correct that M8 comes, as planned, without the AA filter, but in there Leica M System brochure says:

“Instead, any moiré patterns are eliminated by the camera’s signal processor”