How many of you will buy the M8 or Digital M [Archive]

Magnus

06-11-2006, 19:39

Digital being digital who int their right mind is going to buy an M8 for roughly the price as a full frame Canon ?
As for the "lens-quality" factor, with products like CS-2, Aperture and Lightzone you can basically simulate any lens characteristic you want, even with the cheapest of combo's (within margins obviously)
There simply will be no price quality justification for a 6500$ M8 combo, lifespan of the product (like the M series) is a no go for in 2max years the specs will be obselete, and last but not least name me one (even semi) electronic Leica product which functioned well and didn't have to go back to the factory for some sort of re-adjustment .... and the M8 is going to rely 100% on electronics ! ...

jlw

06-11-2006, 19:43

I suspect it will be exactly what I need (an R-D 1-like camera with a somewhat higher pixel count and provision for longer lenses) but I won't be able to afford it for many years.

My R-D 1 is by far my most useful and most heavily-used camera, but its purchase stretched my disposable income to the limit. A camera that costs 67% more is simply going to be beyond my means for the foreseeable future.

jlw

06-11-2006, 19:45

Digital being digital who int their right mind is going to buy an M8 for roughly the price as a full frame Canon ?

People who prefer to use a rangefinder camera...?

People who can't find the part in the Bible where it says, "Thou shalt have no other sensor sizes than 24 x 36 mm"...?

Nikon Bob

06-11-2006, 20:01

I voted for "Not interested or have no plans to get one." simply because there was no I do not have that kind of disposable income. Couple that with what Magnus has said and that settles it for me for a long while. The sensor size is not a deciding factor for me even if I can't find the part in the Bible on proper sensor size.

Nikon Bob

dexdog

06-11-2006, 20:05

People who can't find the part in the Bible where it says, "Thou shalt have no other sensor sizes than 24 x 36 mm"...?

Sometimes bigger is better. I can't imagine anyone arguing in favor of a camera that used APS-sized film. I would much rather spend 3K on a Canon 5D than 5K on a Leica digital.

I really think that the issue boils down to choices and preferences. There are lots of choices around for digital SLRs, but few for digital RFs. Leica might be the best choice at the time for a digital RF. Also, because I have no M-mount lenses, I have no vested interest in the M system, so this is not a factor for me. Your results may vary.

Magnus

06-11-2006, 20:06

jiw .... blablabla,
it's the quality of the image at different formats which in the long run might be important to all sort of camera users or is there anything in the bible that contradicts that ?

As for the "rangefinder" I can see that with film, digital photography however is a totally different issue, making the most of a 36 shot film requires different techniques than being able to shoot 2gigs of 7 megapixel jpegs.....

back alley

06-11-2006, 20:12

i'm with jlw!

i'd buy it in a heartbeat if i had that kind of money for toys.
and i'd shoot it side by side with my film cameras, all rangefinders.

just because it's digital doesn't mean i want to change and start shooting with a slr again.
i prefer to stay with rf cameras.

joe

Flinor

06-11-2006, 20:21

Add me to the jlw list. I would really like one but it's gonna be a while of skipping lunches.

Anyone who thinks that RF shooting is just about maximising a 36 frame roll of film is really missing the point.

Magnus

06-11-2006, 20:25

Joe wrote: just because it's digital doesn't mean i want to change and start shooting with a slr again. i prefer to stay with rf cameras.

I do agree, so would I if I had the choice, but the actual choice itself is not the issue I am trying to get across, it's the price gap between an M8 and an Olympus E1 with 14-54mm for instance (roughly 5500$!) and taking this into account, and still willing to invest leica M8 sort of money A full frame canon or even a midformat would definately be a better choice, if your into the best end-result for your money.

jlw

06-11-2006, 20:25

jiw .... blablabla,
it's the quality of the image at different formats which in the long run might be important to all sort of camera users or is there anything in the bible that contradicts that ?

I have this sense that we've had this discussion before! What I was satirizing with my Bible crack was the "religious" belief that some people seem to have that a "full frame" (full of what?) must be 24 x 36mm and no smaller.

This was never true even in the film era (to a cinematographer, a "full frame" might be the standard "Academy" format of 18.05 x 24mm... to a reproduction camera operator, it might be the standard double-broadsheet size of 30 x 22-3/4 inches.) And in the digital era it's simply a historical curiosity that some photographers prefer an imager the same size as those of the "35mm" cameras they used to use.

Canon, which has the technology to produce its own sensors rather than having to purchase an OEM sensor as do most other camera makers, is happy to cash in on this prejudice by producing cameras with a 35mm-film-size sensor and then charging extra money for them, even if smaller-sensor cameras with similar pixel counts produce similar image quality.

Of course, some photographers do insist that they can see ineffable virtues in pictures made with sensors that possess this mystical historical attribute of "fullness," just as some photographers insist that they can see an aura of superiority in pictures made with a particular brand of lens. But as I said, I want to avoid getting into a discussion of religious dogma!

As for the "rangefinder" I can see that with film, digital photography however is a totally different issue...

I don't see how the issues of viewing the scene, selecting and interacting with the subject, and focusing the lens are any different when forming the image on a digital sensor than when forming it on a silver-halide sensor.

In fact, seeing and responding to the world in front of the camera is what makes the difference between successful and unsuccessful photography -- not what kind of sensor happens to be behind the lens. If you're more successful and more comfortable making photographs with a film rangefinder camera than a film SLR, you're likely to be similarly more comfortable using a digital rangefinder camera than a digital SLR.

If there isn't something special about using a rangefinder camera, then why do so many people visit RFF?

back alley

06-11-2006, 20:29

magnus, i think i take better pics with a rf camera than i did with an slr.
in my case i would prefer a rf digital if i were to go digital.
but the point is moot as i can't even afford the rd-1.

joe

J. Borger

06-11-2006, 20:32

I will buy one for sure.
I will most likely sell my full frame Canon 1Ds Plus assorted L lenses the day the M8 hits the shelfs. I have not used the Canon gear for 1,5 years (since the day i bought the R-D1) anyway
I am not afraid the M8 will be obsolete in a couple of years .... i have gone through all the Canon DSLR cameras and could not care about anything less than about the full frame.
I would not even care if the M8 had the 1,5 cropfactor of the R-D1.

THe M8 will be my last camera for a long time to come. In fact the R-D1 is the first camera where i do not feel a need to "upgrade". My prints up to super A3 are simply stunning.
The reason I want an M8 is because i do not trust my R-D1 .. do not get me wrong i had no issues of any kind with this camera ever ... but i want an M8 to add to my R-D1 to split the risk.

THe higher pixel count will give me some additional cropping latitude .... that's all.
I just hope the B&W files from the M8 are up to the quality of those from the R-D1.

jlw

06-11-2006, 20:43

A full frame canon or even a midformat would definately be a better choice, if your into the best end-result for your money.

That's my point exactly. I went back to using an RF camera because I get a better end result -- i.e., picture -- when shooting with an RF camera than I do when shooting with an SLR.

Sure, I could buy a DSLR with more megapixels for the same money -- but I don't observe, react and respond as well to subject matter when using an SLR. And in my personal work, good photography is more about good observation, reaction and response than it is about pixel count.

Of course, that isn't true of everybody's style of photography, so don't feel I'm attacking anyone else's viewpoint.*

However, to me, saying "You're a fool to buy this camera when that camera gives you more megapixels for less money" makes no more sense than saying, "You're a fool to buy this book of poetry when that telephone directory gives you more words for less money."

*It may sound as if I'm trying to glorify the reaction-intensive style of photography vs. a more contemplative approach, but that's not the case. For example, reaction and response matter very little in the type of photography I shoot at work, which is mostly of food. Food just lies on the plate until the stylist has painstakingly organized it -- texture and detail count for a lot more than the "decisive moment" (except when you're shooting ice cream or drippy sauces!) I happen to do this type of photography with a DSLR, but it hardly matters because once the shot is set up I seldom look through the camera at all!

06-11-2006, 21:17

I won't buy a digital camera with a crop factor. No way. There are optical and financial reasons not to.

When the M9 or M10 comes out, with a full frame sensor, I'll maybe have the money to sink into a digital M and a nice selection of classic lenses.

No D-M lenses for me.

anaanda

06-11-2006, 21:23

In reality it is a very expensive toy. I don't think its moraly wrong to buy it but its more like buying a Ferrari or Maserati. I paid $800 (which is still a lot of money for some people) for a Mamiya 6 and a 75 lens. I really enjoy the whole process of film from shooting to developing to printing. I like the wait to see what I get. I think it adds something. I shoot for a hobby so it may be different for someone who makes a living from photography. I think if a professional had $6000 he/she would probably choose a different system than the M8. This being so, the Digital Leica is definitely geared towards the artist/enthusiast. everything is relative. I still believe film is forever..

wlewisiii

06-11-2006, 21:31

I chose "will buy it sooner or later" - but my approach to that is that it will be about as old as a "new" M3 is today when I do. Because, that is, simply, about when I'll be able to afford it. <shrug> At least with my collapsible 'Cron I'll actually own a real Leica lens to use on it on that far off day when I am able to buy a M8 body (we won't mention the M9, 10 or + ... :eek: )

...

William

J. Borger

06-11-2006, 21:33

However, to me, saying "You're a fool to buy this camera when that camera gives you more megapixels for less money" makes no more sense than saying, "You're a fool to buy this book of poetry when that telephone directory gives you more words for less money."

Exactly ........ i will remember this one ... it will not be the last time somebody stating investing in a Canon 5d is more economic.
I get tired of these arguments ... nobody ever said a Canon SLR film camera was a more cost efficient investment than a Leica M6 or M7.

I am with you ....
1) i want digital
2) i want a rangefinder (not an SLR anymore........)

So count my options .. :)
Any DSLR (full frame or not) does not fullfil my needs/wants ... economic or not!

Zack

06-11-2006, 21:38

Avotius

06-11-2006, 21:44

not interested, waiting for something that keeps 35mm as 35mm

rvaubel

06-11-2006, 22:01

I will start selling some of my Canon 20D stuff when the time comes. Don't get me wrong, nothing against the 20D except I have barely used it since getting my R-D1. I will keep the body, 70-300mm DO, 24mm TS , and macro lens for the specialty work that a SLR does best. But for the vast majority of the work I like to do, a rangefinder is best. I have enough Canon "L" lenses that overlap the M mount range to get most of the way $$wise towards the M8.

The fact is, I enjoy using fine mechanical equipment. The watch on my wrist is a Ulysses Nardin. My wife wears a Jaeger Lecoultre Reverso. I ride a 40 year old Capagnola equiped, Reynolds 531 double butted framed bicycle. My house was built in 1926 but I restored it, didn't replace it. I guess I could buy a throw away watch and relace it every few years . My Dad was kind of stupid to buy me a watch for my high school graduation that I've worn and treasured for the last 42 years. I guess I was kind of stupid to give my wife her Reverso as a wedding present 16 years ago.

Believe it or not, some things are worth having for the pleasure they give, for the memories they evoke, and for the utility that they engender. Everything does not need to succum to the desposable notion of obsoleteism so prevalent in todays throw away society.

Anyway, when I die I'll leave cooler toys to my widow. Your toys will be obsolete before your body cools.

Rex
In Bezerkeley

Peter Klein

06-11-2006, 22:06

I am sitting on the fence right now. I am one of those people who just does better with an RF than with an SLR. So I *want* this camera badly.

On the other hand, $5,000 is an *awful* lot of money. I am not a rich guy. I'm not a pro who can depreciate the cost as part of a business. I am by necessity a bit of a bottom feeder when it comes to Leica stuff. Almost all of my gear was bought used.

There are now some indications afloat that if you don't pre-order now, you may not get one until 2008. Which means that if you want to wait for somebody else to be the guinea pig, you're going to wait a long time. This might be a good thing, as it will get past the initial returns and bug fix firmware updates.

As tempted as I am to pre-order, I have not so far. On the basis that the company that took 20 years to fix the M RF flare issue (and then charged for the fix) has to prove to me that the camera works in every way that I need it to before I'm plunking down that much money, sight unseen. Another is that I wonder if Zeiss will come up with a Digital ZM. If they do, I'd prefer the ZM viewfinder.

So I'm not sure what I'm going to do yet. I could simply continue to shoot film for important stuff, and use my Olympus E-1 for good-light pictures where I need the convenience of digital. I could get a used R-D1 or a new R-D1s from abroad. I can bow to economics and get a used or closeout Canon 20D for digital available light, and just bear with it until the situation becomes clearer. I could through caution to the winds and just buy the M8.

And I could continue to post indecisive messages to various photo forums, thoroughly documenting my inability to choose between several imperfect alternatives rife with unknown factors. :D

--Peter

pvdhaar

06-11-2006, 22:22

No plans to get one, because there's no way that I'll cough up such serious money for what's essentially a hobby..

Andy K

06-11-2006, 22:53

The sensor size is important if you are going to use lenses you already have, because the DOF will be very different with a sensor smaller than full frame.

RML

06-11-2006, 22:53

If the reports are good and if the price ever comes to a level I can justify on top of the R-D1 I already have, then I'd be seriously considering at least trying out the M8. Many if's, I know. :)

JonasYip

06-11-2006, 23:15

Well, I won't rush out to be first in line to buy it, but I'm sure eventually I'll give in and get one. But that's mostly because my RD-1 keeps me pretty happy already... otherwise I may have already pre-ordered it.

I really don't understand the people who compare the M8 with DSLRs. It seems that anyone who's reading the Rangefinder Forum would understand when and why we choose RF vs SLR handling, and apply the same reasoning whether it's digital or film. But whatever... for *my* purposes a Digital M would potentially be a fabulous tool.

(Disclaimer: I have a DSLR as well, and use it when appropriate. Heck, I even use film when it seems right).

j

Gid

06-11-2006, 23:20

Sensor size is important because full frame keeps the FOV of your lenses as they were intended - important if you like to shoot wide. That aside, sensor size (APS vs FF) is moot provided the electronics and software are up to scratch.

3 or 4 months ago I would have been a definite yes, but since getting into film in a serious way I've hardly used my RD-1, so I'm unlikely to drop mega $ on something I may not use. If I feel the need for digi RF then I've always got the RD-1 and its a fine camera, producing very nice 15 x 10 prints, but I do like film more :)

If I had $5000 that I could blow on a whim, I would definitely buy one because I like shiny new toys :)

jaapv

06-11-2006, 23:25

The sensor size is important if you are going to use lenses you already have, because the DOF will be very different with a sensor smaller than full frame.

So what - don't you like photographic challenges? And if not you can open up slightly over half a stop, which is the difference.......

jaapv

06-11-2006, 23:27

Andy K

06-11-2006, 23:33

So what - don't you like photographic challenges? And if not you can open up slightly over half a stop, which is the difference.......

Why pay $6500 for a camera that makes the markings on all the lenses you already have incorrect? For that money Leica could have done a proper job and made a camera full frame sensor. As it is it looks like they took the cheap option.
The $6500 will be better left in the bank for the next model in 18 months which will have full frame.

jaapv

06-12-2006, 00:07

Andy K

06-12-2006, 00:17

Well, these markings are pretty inaccurate, being based on 1930-ies film. Nowadays DOF is a lot narrower with new films and different DOF on modern lenses. And it is totally dependent on final enlargement and viewing distance in any case. So I fear your beloved markings are inaccurate to far more than 1/2 stop anyway. I must confess it is a long time ago that I actually looked at them.It seems the Canon marketing department has made a convert.....

I rarely look at the markings. I have used SLRs for three and a half decades so it is automatic for me to be estimating DOF as I adjust the aperture. Also if I choose I can check with DOF preview. But with RF cameras there is no such thing as DOF preview, so if you are trying to be accurate those markings are important.

jaapv

06-12-2006, 00:30

The economics are not as simple as that. It is reasonable to expect the M8 to depreciate 50% in 3 yearsif we look at other (semi) professional digital camera's, like the Digilux2 or Canon 1D series. For instance used Digilux2's have bottomed out at the 700-800$ mark. That is 2500 $. A film M body will depreciate 30% of 3500$ is about 1100$.
The difference is 1400$ So if you spend 500$ a year on film (I mean really spend, not what you tell your wife ;) ) you are in the black with a M8. The worst case scenario is that the fun of shooting a M8 costs you 460 $ a year if you shoot just one film a year normally. And I do not count the time wasted in scanning film.
I said before: A car will depreciate by 50% in three years. Still they seem to be selling somehow.

Andy K

06-12-2006, 00:34

The economics are not as simple as that. It is reasonable to expect the M8 to depreciate 50% in 3 yearsif we look at other (semi) professional digital camera's, like the Digilux2 or Canon 1D series. That is 2500 $. A film M body will depreciate 30% of 3500$ is about 1100$.
The difference is 1400$ So if you spend 500$ a year on film (I mean really spend, not what you tell your wife ;) ) you are in the black with a M8. The worst case scenario is that the fun of shooting a M8 costs you 460 $ a year if you shoot just one film a year normally. And I do not count the time wasted in scanning film.

You also have not counted the time spent editing files in PS. Also the film body will not be superceded by a superior spec body, thus increasing/accellerating the devaluation.

jaapv

06-12-2006, 00:36

You also have not counted the time spent editing files in PS. Also the film body will not be superceded by a superior spec body, thus increasing the devaluation.
I scan and PS my films now. That should be equal or better, as digital files are easier to PS in my experience.Sorry I edited after your reply.Why should I buy a superior spec body if I am happy with my current one?

hth

06-12-2006, 00:56

I am on the fence on whether to get an M8 1-3 years from now, or if I should use the money (less needed) for upgrading my darkroom equipment to be more convenient for fiber paper use (processor, washer and dryer).

Even if I go for high end new darkroom stuff, I am not getting anywhere near the M8 in price and it will probably last a much longer time...

I just have to decide on what kind of output(s) I want, then the tools needed to get there becomes much clearer.

/Håkan

Gid

06-12-2006, 00:57

I've already said why I will be unlikely to buy one. However, I don't think anyone has to justify why they want one and will buy one. Raising the usual film vs digital arguments won't change anyone's mind and are irrelevant IMHO. If you want one and can afford it then get it, enjoy and be happy.

Ash

06-12-2006, 01:16

I'd love to splash out if I had the cash. But I don't. In the time It'll take me to earn enough to buy one, I'll have bought about 2 or 3 cheaper (sub-£200) camera bodies/lenses or maybe a used LeicaIII, and shot hundreds of rolls of film, and got halfway to saving to travel abroad.

I'd much prefer that, especially since the bad press people have given the RD-1, the Leica is bound to have some problems that won't be ironed out for a year or two.

That, and all digital camera's become obselete very soon - may as well wait until there's a digital plateau and cheaper prices.

Rich Silfver

06-12-2006, 01:19

I voted 'will get one sooner or later'.

I don't really have a whole lot of money tied up in M-lenses (got a 50mm and a 90mm - total investment under 1,000 dollars) so I won't be getting an M8 'to use my enormous collection of M-lenses - but I do see the benefits with a digital camera and it would simply be fun to get one.

Having said that I may just end up doing what I do now - only getting older M-equipment years and years after they have been discontinued. I guess based on how well the M8 fares when it comes to quality and long-term reliability there may be a chance to get one 2-3 years after its introduction for less than half of what it was new. If so, I may be there ready to pick one up. I doubt I can rationilze or justify getting a brand new M8.

If I were to spend $3,000+ on anything Leica-related at this time it would be an MP - but can't really justify that either since my M3 does everything I could possibly ask of a rangefinder camera (apart from internal metering which, granted, would be nice).

nrb

06-12-2006, 01:34

the military are using hi-def film for critical purposes...

jaapv

06-12-2006, 02:01

The military are notoriously conservative... :p

jaapv

06-12-2006, 02:03

Jorge, just two pre-ordered? Is that you and me??

Paul T.

06-12-2006, 02:20

I am in the no camp, but if Zeiss bring in a digital Ikon, with a sensor crop of 1.3 or less at around $3000 the economics will be unarguable for me.

Personally, I feel there's a huge difference between the implications of a 1.3 and a 1.5 crop; if my 35/2 becomes a 45/2 it's still usable as my main lens.

jaapv

06-12-2006, 02:36

I am in the no camp, but if Zeiss bring in a digital Ikon, with a sensor crop of 1.3 or less at around $3000 the economics will be unarguable for me.

I'm sure that fear makes for some sleepless nights in Solms

Personally, I feel there's a huge difference between the implications of a 1.3 and a 1.5 crop; if my 35/2 becomes a 45/2 it's still usable as my main lens.

A very sensible observation.

Mackinaw

06-12-2006, 02:38

Will I buy a digital M? Yeah, someday, but no immediate plans, at least for now.

Jim Bielecki

Will

06-12-2006, 02:48

The fact is, I enjoy using fine mechanical equipment. The watch on my wrist is a Ulysses Nardin. My wife wears a Jaeger Lecoultre Reverso. I ride a 40 year old Capagnola equiped, Reynolds 531 double butted framed bicycle. My house was built in 1926 but I restored it, didn't replace it. I guess I could buy a throw away watch and relace it every few years . My Dad was kind of stupid to buy me a watch for my high school graduation that I've worn and treasured for the last 42 years. I guess I was kind of stupid to give my wife her Reverso as a wedding present 16 years ago.

Rex,

Are you into classic cars too?

No plans to get one, because there's no way that I'll cough up such serious money for what's essentially a hobby..

Well said.

In the time It'll take me to earn enough to buy one, I'll have bought about 2 or 3 cheaper (sub-£200) camera bodies/lenses

That's what I hope too...

If I can pick up M3 or M6 for half the current price, then I will be just as happy to continue with C41...

Will

06-12-2006, 02:49

I am in the no camp, but if Zeiss bring in a digital Ikon, with a sensor crop of 1.3 or less at around $3000 the economics will be unarguable for me.

They will hit the market, bulleye...

Mark Norton

06-12-2006, 03:09

I'm buying two and have orders in with different dealers. For me, the Digital M is a dream come true and the cost of the bodies is about what I have paid during the last month for 5 new lenses. I won't be worrying about depreciation and if an M9 comes out, I'll buy two of those too.

x-ray

06-12-2006, 03:16

Kim Coxon

06-12-2006, 03:25

the military are using hi-def film for critical purposes...
One reason is that they can get "huge" format in film ie 6" wide and even larger. ;)
Many police forces will also continue to use film for the foreseeable future due to legal complications and evidence rules.

More on topic - I doubt very much I will get one. I have a couple of dSLR's which get a fair amount of use for webwork and shooting where other quick results are needed but for more serious work, I prefer to use film. There is no way I could justify such a price for a camera that would not be used for "mainstream" at the moment.

Kim

jaapv

06-12-2006, 03:27

More on topic - I doubt very much I will get one. I have a couple of dSLR's which get a fair amount of use for webwork and shooting where other quick results are needed but for more serious work, I prefer to use film. There is no way I could justify such a price for a camera that would not be used for "mainstream" at the moment.

Kim

I feel this qualifies for "famous last words" :p

Kim Coxon

06-12-2006, 03:43

Could well be :D

One problem is that even though I might be able to afford the camera, I doubt I could also keep the narrowboat and pay for the divorce. ;)

Kim

I feel this qualifies for "famous last words" :p

PeterL

06-12-2006, 04:19

I selected "no plans at the moment", but I am interested. Not to get one, but because the M8 is an interesting development and potentially one of the first mature digital cameras on the market. That "mature" goes with the "camera". We'll have to see if the digital side is mature, when it comes out :)

Peter.

JeffGreene

06-12-2006, 05:28

I selected no plans to get one immediately as I'm very happy with my RD-1. Like others previously, I'll wait to see what the reaction to the M8 is following its ACTUAL introduction. I'm also keeping an eye on Zeiss, which very well may deliver a superior, cost-effective product. Their ZI film camera is impressive both technically and cost-wise and may preview the kind of pricepoint that makes a digital rangefinder much more accessible to the membership here. Or at least more accessible to me! :>)

I envy Mark Norton's abililty to order two M8's, but with three in college and a college professor's salary that's just not an option for me!

Respectfully,

Ben Z

06-12-2006, 05:34

Put me in the "undecided" category. I certainly wouldn't want to buy one until I or someone I respected had had the chance to handle and review it, and all it's "Leica-esque" irritations, quirks, foibles and disappointing snafus have been revealed. I bought an MP without suspecting the eyepiece had been de-volved from the M6 and needed caulking to keep out dirt. Now there's all this talk about what importance there will or won't be of having all our lenses "coded" at $125 a pop. And my favorite lens, the 50 Summilux, can't be coded even though optically it's the same as the E46 version, plus my only 28 is a Voitlander f/1.9 which can't be coded, my only 35 is a version III which can't be coded, and my main 90 is the "fat" T-E which can't be coded. There's no way I could afford both the M8 and trading all my lenses for later ones and then have them coded.

So if the noise at ISO 400 and above are on a par at least with my 20D, and if not having my lenses coded doesn't affect the image quality adversely (I haven't heard users of the RD-1 griping about unfixable vignetting and other problems so why would the M8 suffer from them unless Leica purposely built-in a reason for making the codes necessary), and if the price doesn't end up being a thousand more than originally quoted like what happened to the DMR by the time I was ready to buy, then maybe I'll get one. But it still leaves me needing to carry a second M body and plenty of film when I travel, because I can't possibly afford two M8 bodies.

rxmd

06-12-2006, 05:46

I won't unless I unexpectedly get lots of money. The most I've ever spent on a camera was 150 EUR, on a lens 220 EUR. I guess I'm just not the Leica target audience. Maybe in five or ten years if and when there's more competition and digital rangefinders become affordable on the used market.

Philipp

Steve L

06-12-2006, 06:05

Used one Leica for 25 years...then jumped on digital (D-30 to 1D to 1Ds), then back to Digilux 2 (sensor too small) and then R-D1 (multiplier still too big). Finally I can be back where I wanted to be - a true Leica RF. 1.33 is fine with me. Life is way too short to wait any longer.

John Camp

06-12-2006, 06:13

I've pre-ordered. I gave up working with film in 2001 and never looked back. I have a D2x which I use regularly for a different kind of photography, and I like that camera, too. The R-D1 is okay, but has some limitations that I expect the M8 will overcome.

For people who want to work with film, I think that's great, and a good way to go. People tend to say that if you use $500 of film in a year, and include some other calculations, you'll have paid for an M8 in x years. But the fact is, with film you only have to come up with $40 a month
and if things are a little tight one month, you can get by with $20. If you finance $5,000, you'll pay more in interest than that...There's absolutely nothing wrong with film and an M3, but that's not what I do anymore.

As for some of the other small controversies listed here, I will post a note called "slag it out" in the general discussion...

JC

sdai

06-12-2006, 06:19

I've one on order from my dealer in Japan, whom I've bought from for over 20 years ... I believe they'll get the first silver chrome cameras. ;) :D

Simon Larbalestier

06-12-2006, 06:47

There needs to be another option in the voting, "give it time to get the bugs out before I buy". I have to see the performance before I lay down hard cash. I'll give it six months or so and take a close look. You can't buy on specs only.

i'd agree with Don here. Sure an M8 would be a great thing to have but i've already got 4 M film bodies which do what i want, when i want. This may well make some of you laugh at me but right now i'm having fun with an old Oly C-5050-Z got off ebay at a good price. In the same day i paid $600 for an M4-2.

For my current projects and ways of printing- film although expensive when you include the film/darkroom costs (and i print myself) the digital option is for those projects where
there are no expenses and hi definition files aren't really an issue. When the work load changes and the workflow and time demands a digital option then it would make sense to own a digital M be it an 8, 9 or later model. Until that time comes i'll wait.

billh

06-12-2006, 09:16

<Digital being digital who int their right mind is going to buy an M8 for roughly the price as a full frame Canon ?>

While I am not sure I qualify for “being in his right mind”, I have ordered the M8 and I also own both the 1D2 and 1Ds2 (full frame).

The Canons and the SLR lenses (I mostly end up using the 35 f1.4, 85 f1.2 and 300 f2.8 IS, with these cameras, although I own many other Canon and Leica SLR lenses with Canon adapters), and they are both quite large and very heavy. Obviously there are times where these cameras will be preferable to a rangefinder, but I am really looking forward to carrying an M and two or three lenses instead of toting the huge Canon/lens combinations around with me.

The other reason is the same as when I bought my first M4 over thirty years ago, and that is because (hopefully) it very quiet compared to a (then) Nikon F SLR, or the Canons today. Recently I photographed a piano concert with terrible lighting (different light sources and uneven lighting). I had to use the 1Ds2, and most exposures were at ISO 1600 and 3200. They provided a roped off area for me, and while it did provide the best view, it was also immediately adjacent to the audience seating. The sound of the camera mirror was really intrusive, and I hope the M8 shutter will be as quiet as the M7. I do have the Epson, but the shutter in that camera makes a metallic sound that is certainly noticeable, and I find the 6 MP limiting. I am also not fond of the 1.5 crop. Obviously I would prefer a full frame digital Leica, but I can make the tighter crop work on this camera.

By the way, a friend who ordered an M8 the same time I did also has a full frame Canon digital camera, and I have another friend (who owns a full frame Canon) who will buy it when it becomes available. I actually think the M8 will be attractive to people using the larger SLR systems.

Bob Ross

06-12-2006, 09:24

I am sitting on the fence right now. I am one of those people who just does better with an RF than with an SLR. So I *want* this camera badly. ...............And I could continue to post indecisive messages to various photo forums, thoroughly documenting my inability to choose between several imperfect alternatives rife with unknown factors. :D

--Peter
Peter, your reply is very representative of my possition.
At the moment, I think we have a lack of significant information on which to make a commitment. What I see desireable here is that we will finally get a large sensor camera that is small and we will get a bright full sized viewfinder, in contrast to what we presently get with most DSLRs. Having some lenses makes this a viable possibility, that I might ignor otherwise. What compromises we may have to put up with on the fall off issue and our existing lenses, may have an influence on the desireability.

JonasYip

06-12-2006, 10:34

Simon Larbalestier

... Simon Larbalestier as in 4AD Simon Larbalestier?

I love your work ... the set of LP records on my shelf that I keep despite no longer owning a turntable has much of the 4AD work represented. Your current work is great too, but during a certain period of my life the 4AD images were very influential to my visual sense (and still are, really). Uh, thanks!

j

nrb

06-12-2006, 10:39

The military are notoriously conservative... :p
these military who use hi-def film only a few know, also have access to the latest in digital photography, and even Leica used to design special lenses to their special requirements in the old days

tkluck

06-12-2006, 11:12

Naw, film is more fun.
Figured out that I could afford one, just don't want a digital.

T_om

06-12-2006, 12:21

I will buy one for sure.
I will most likely sell my full frame Canon 1Ds Plus assorted L lenses the day the M8 hits the shelfs. I have not used the Canon gear for 1,5 years (since the day i bought the R-D1) anyway

If you are selling any Canon L glass, give me a shout. My email address is tg.omeara(at)gmail.com

The 1Ds is old technology now, but still produces good files for studio shooting. I am interested in the glass though since you aren't using them.

As for the Leica... cameras are tools. If it has something I can't get with any other camera, I'll consider it. Otherwise, not.

Also, Leica is late to the game with digital and unless they have something amazing up their sleeves, i.e, the quality of the file produced is astounding, then the only people interested are going to be the die-hards that would buy ANYTHING with a "Leica" sticker on it.

Tom

ywenz

06-12-2006, 12:22

pointless poll. Aren't most GAS attacks the result of seeing others' results with a particular piece of gear? The poll will be more accurate once the M8 comes out in the market.

I will buy one for sure.
I will most likely sell my full frame Canon 1Ds Plus assorted L lenses the day the M8 hits the shelfs. I have not used the Canon gear for 1,5 years (since the day i bought the R-D1) anyway

I dont believe that. If you haven't used your Canon gear for 1.5 years, when why wait until the M8 comes out before you start selling them to build the funds? Your Canon stuff will only depreciate more with time... your claim just don't make sense.

J. Borger

06-12-2006, 12:39

I dont believe that. If you haven't used your Canon gear for 1.5 years, when why wait until the M8 comes out before you start selling them to build the funds?

I already sold my TS lenses and the 85 1,2L.
I still own the 70-200 IS, 300 f4, 135 f2.0, 35 1.4L & 50 1.4.

Since i can still write off investments (tax deduction) on the gear and prices of the lenses are stable it would have been foolish for me to sell earlier. Besides i really had to see if there would ever be a new digital RF after the R-d1 .....

For the 1Ds ... it just hurts to sell a camera i payd almost 8000 Euro for .. for let's say 2000- 2500 Euro at the most.

My photography changed completely since i started using a RF camera.
If you might wonder how i substitute those long lenses for lenses in the 35-75mm range.

Hope this makes sense for you!

Simon Larbalestier

06-12-2006, 12:42

... Simon Larbalestier as in 4AD Simon Larbalestier?

I love your work ... the set of LP records on my shelf that I keep despite no longer owning a turntable has much of the 4AD work represented. Your current work is great too, but during a certain period of my life the 4AD images were very influential to my visual sense (and still are, really). Uh, thanks!

j

Yes that's me. Thanks for the kind words and encouragement J.

sdai

06-12-2006, 16:19

For the 1Ds ... it just hurts to sell a camera i payd almost 8000 Euro for .. for let's say 2000- 2500 Euro at the most.

In fact, the classic 1Ds is still the very best DSLR Canon has ever made in terms of image quality at base ISO ... and I mean it's better than the 1Ds Mark II.

06-12-2006, 16:58

I think it is amazing that we have so many people already pre-ordering the M8.

T_om

06-12-2006, 17:04

I already sold my TS lenses and the 85 1,2L.
I still own the 70-200 IS, 300 f4, 135 f2.0, 35 1.4L & 50 1.4.

I am serious about buying the glass if you still want to sell. I need another 70-200 for my second shooter and as a backup and would also consider the 135/2.0 as that is one Canon lens I have not used but read glowing reports about. The 50/1.4 is, I believe, overrated in most of what I read. At least my copy is not a very stellar performer and it has been to CPS for a look-see. I am not a long-lens shooter, but I know someone that would probably buy the 300/4.0 too.

Tom

T_om

06-12-2006, 17:09

I think it is amazing that we have so many people already pre-ordering the M8.

This is not a jab at anyone's veracity, but you will find Internet polls often reflect fantasy more than fact.

Tom

JohnM

06-12-2006, 17:17

While spending $5,000 on a camera shows questionable judgement at best, at this point, I believe I will buy an M8. (Questionable judgement is almost a hobby of mine.) The only thing that gives me pause, other than the $5K, is the crop factor.

I deal with the 1.6x in my Canon DSLR system without suffering too badly - I use a 35/1.4L as my 'normal' lens and make use of one of the digital-only wides quite often. (Tokina 12-24...wonderful lens.)

It will be more of an issue with an M8. I currently use an M3 and use nothing wider than 50mm - whatever the cost of the camera, I will have to invest in a 35 Summicron as well to compensate for the crop.

(Tom - I have found the 50/1.4 to be a little overrated as well. The copy I had felt and sounded very cheap...it was not a bad lens, but it was not what it has been made out to be either.)

Gabriel M.A.

06-12-2006, 17:19

The option "I'm seriously thinking about it -- once it comes out, I'll make my decision" plan isn't there.

Oh well.

Gabriel M.A.

06-12-2006, 17:20

I am with JohnM, a 99.9366% (the remainder is I have a very good Canon EF 50 1.4 copy ;) )

kmack

06-12-2006, 17:22

I'm having too much fun with large format (4x5) right now. For me it is not so much about taking the picture it is the craft of making a photograph. I am interested in the traditional process. I am considering things like Vandyke process and variants. My rangefinders are now used for shots that you just can not get with a view camera or for scouting for shots that I can later go back to and shoot with the big gun. I could use a digital instead of film, but I love the process, the unique look of film.

A dSLR maybe, a digital M is just not in my plans.

harmsr

06-12-2006, 19:19

I love my M's and basically deal with the DSLR (D200) only as needed.

As I hate a big camera and big lense, the M works very well for my normal style of shooting which is 75% with a 50mm lens. However, I hate scanning. I also find that the Raw file from the D200 is often cleaner than the film scan from my Nikon 5000 ED scanner.

From a workflow (ease of use) standpoint, I much prefer the digital file over developing, scanning, and printing. The majority of my shots do need to be provided in an electronic format. After having seen the results out of the DMR and thinking that it compares favorably with film, I am very excitedly awaiting the digital M.

To me the digital M will be very close to my perfect camera.

I recently sold off some lenses and my spare M5 body in preparation for the digital M. However, my M5 is staying and I bought an MP3 body recently so that I can always shoot film also.

So yes I'm guilty and have one on pre-order.

Ray

J. Borger

06-12-2006, 21:55

In fact, the classic 1Ds is still the very best DSLR Canon has ever made in terms of image quality at base ISO ... and I mean it's better than the 1Ds Mark II.
Hello Simon,

You are not the only one stating this :)

It's a pitty the 2nd hand prices are not accordingly :p

A rangefinder just suits me better.

- i see different and compose different
- the small package is such a joy .... i can't go back to carrying a 1 series cameras with assorted lenses
- i just love the tonality of the B&W pictures i get from mounting older lens designs on the R-D1

I am a one camera- one lens shooter nowadays :D
All i need fits in the pocket of my coat!

KInd regards

Han

jaapv

06-13-2006, 00:26

General disclaimer:This post is based on a generalisation and was not written with any specific member, real or imagined, in mind.
It seems to me that there is an increasing number of posts rationalising decisions made with any argument imaginable, spurious or not. In addition it seems other members are challenged to justify choices they made. Unfortunately I bait easily, so I decided to defend my choice for the M8 -once-
*start of r(f)ant*
When Leica first announced their intention to build a digital M I swung between:"Why?, the M is perfect as it is"and "I want it now!". So I decided to analyse my photographic hobby.
I have been taking photo's for 53 years now. Starting with a 6x9 box camera,I progressed through a succession of Agfa Click's and Clack's to my fathers Agfa Silette. The first real camera I bought was an Exacta SLR, followed by an Olympus OM1 set. Then I bought a used M3 and since then I was never without a rangefinder: M4,M6,M6TTL despite occasional digressions to midformat photography.I even shot a Safari using a Mamiya 645 and 500 mm & 1.4xconv. Beside that I shot SLR's, Leica R3,R4,R5,R7, mainly for wildlife.
Then digital arrived and I traded my Leica R system for a Canon 10D and was very happy with the result until a local camera shopowner (he knew what he was doing ;)) gave me a Digilux2 "to try out". The Canon is relegated to photography needed for my work and occasional wildlife and I only use the Digilux2 and M6TTL.
So I found four things:
1.It seems that my whole photographic progression has been a quest for excellence (at any rate of equipment).
2.I seem to be irrevocably wedded to the Leica M system for over 30 years.
3.I found I was delighted to regain my freedom to "darkroom" my colour photography again when digital arrived, and I digital gave me back my inspiration, but I hate scanning. So I will have to go digital for 90%.
4. For me current digital quality is as good or better than film
This can only lead to the conclusion that the M8 is just right for me.
Now the main purpose of this post is to explain that it is utterly useless to try and tell me that I should not buy the M8 because
a. It will be worth only 10$ one week after I purchase it.
b. Leica will introduce a "full frame" M9 within three months and if not Leica it will be Suzuki.
c. Digital is horrible and will never replace the Daguerrotype.
d. The 250 MP 12000 ISO sensor is just around the corner.
e. This camera is overpriced by 900%.
as all these considerations are as irrelevant to me as my reasons are irrelevant to anybody else.
*end of r(f)ant*
And I wish everybody happy shooting with the camera of his/her choice! :) :)

pvdhaar

06-13-2006, 00:53

I'm amazed that a camera (whether M8 or anything else for that matter) can be claimed to be 'just right' without a proper test-drive..

But then again, I like a Bessa-T more than a Leica M, so you may take my words with a grain of salt..

jaapv

06-13-2006, 01:21

Leica is amazing! :p Early adopters- trendfollowers etc. You know the theory.....

Ben Z

06-13-2006, 07:07

as all these considerations are as irrelevant to me as my reasons are irrelevant to anybody else.

There's a saying "shockin' awesome goo" (I think it's really French, but that's how it sounds) that roughly means "each person is entitled to his own taste". It really shouldn't be necessary to defend one's camera gear choices, but some of the rationalizations people come up with to support or deny, are very entertaining :D

willie_901

06-13-2006, 07:22

10. I just ran out of film.

9. There's one space left in my camera cabinet.

8. I'm bored with the perspective of my 20, 24, 28, 35, 40, 50, 85, 90, and 135 mm focal length lenses.

7. No more aggravating my carpal tunnel syndrome when rewinding those 36 exposure film cassettes.

6. The sexy mini-lab attendant at the local WalMart just quit.

5. I can tell my spouse I'm not spending another penny on film.

4. No more strange looks when friends and family members peek over my shoulder after a shot and only see leatherette.

3. Everybody else on the planet uses a digital camera.

2. Three words: Babes, babes, babes!

And, the number one reason for getting the new Leica M-8

My photos will suddenly become more interesting.

Mark Norton

06-13-2006, 07:31

There's a saying "shockin' awesome goo" (I think it's really French, but that's how it sounds) that roughly means "each person is entitled to his own taste". It really shouldn't be necessary to defend one's camera gear choices, but some of the rationalizations people come up with to support or deny, are very entertaining :D

My Ben, your knowledge of the French language IS awesome... "chacun a son gout". There's a couple of accents in there as well.

jaapv

06-13-2006, 07:33

Willie_901,I like your photo's on your S-ITP site, but my, does it make me dizzy http://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/other/s522.gif the way it turnes white-in-light-blue before getting to a sensible black and white!

fgianni

06-13-2006, 08:25

I have an RD-1 so I am not really desperate to get a digital M, better sit on the fence and see if the M8 will have the kind of long time support that other cameras in the M range have.
I mean my main problem with my RD-1 is that if Epson decides not to bother anymore with Digital RF cameras, it will become impossible to repair in 2-3 years.
If I spend $5000 on a camera, I want it to be repairable even after 30 years, like the M3, Obsolescence is not a problem for me since I feel 6Mpixel are good enough, 10 will be even more so.

Will

06-13-2006, 09:21

Andrew McK

06-13-2006, 10:38

I found the proposed pric e of the M8 a bit too high. It's higher than the Hasselblad or Mamiya digitals.
I'm not so worried about buying a digital camera and finding it obsolete quickly. I sort of expect that with digital.
The Canon 5d looks great and is a reasonable price too (not that I can afford to spend that sort of money) but it's MASSIVE. If the M8 was the same size as the MP then that'd be a big advantage over it.
I wonder what sort o fimpact a digital M camera will have on Leica's film camera business.

Harry Lime

06-13-2006, 11:08

Here is my take on it:

- $6000 for a camera that I won't be using professionally is a little much. I could afford it, but it just seems excessive for something that will spend a lot of time on the shelf.

I occasionally shoot paid assignments, but the great irony is that one reason why people hire me in the first place, is because I still shoot black and white film.

There are two circumstances under which I would buy a digital M. a) If I landed an assignment that demanded digital and paid for the camera. b) I won the lottery and had money to burn.

- I really like film. I like the way film looks. I see the world in Tri-X.

- I enjoy the analog process. I sit in front of a computer all day, working in the digital imaging field. The last thing I want to do in my spare time is spend more time with a computer or something that blinks and beeps at me.

- I prefer the archival qualities of film. I shoot about 600-1000 rolls of film a year, which would translate in to several terabytes of RAW files. Not exactly a small amount to manage, especially when you look 10 years down the road.

- I would prefer a full frame digital camera, if I was forced to buy one. But x1.33 isn't the end of the world, either.

That said I am very happy that Leica will be offering the M8. It is an important component in keeping the company strong and profitable. Perhaps the price will drop in the coming years and I will pick one up to add to my arsenal of tools.

Nikon Bob

06-13-2006, 13:14

Nobody should feel they have to defend why they will or won't buy an item. I hope the buyers of the M8 will enjpy them fully. What I find interesting about this thread is that out of over 5500 members and over 1800 views there are only 16 confirmed purchasers out of only 150 odd votes. It may be that the M8 is a big to do about nothing for the vast majority of RF shooters for various reasons. It is nice to be passionate about an item but it will impact few directly. I am really looking forward to user reports to see what I maybe missing out on. Enjoy them when you get em.

Nikon Bob

Ben Z

06-13-2006, 13:23

My Ben, your knowledge of the French language IS awesome... "chacun a son gout". There's a couple of accents in there as well.

I was just writing it like it sounded when I heard it. Never would've figured it would be spelled like you wrote it. "Gout"? My old man used to get that in his big toe, hurt like the dickens. Yep, if I say I passed French Class back in high school, I mean I passed it in the hall :D

Simon Larbalestier

06-13-2006, 14:14

Does anyone know when they are likely to be avaialble for sale in the UK? with all the excitement in this thread i checked the Leica Europe site - no mention and The Classic Camera in London and nothing posted in their news section?

Mark Norton

06-13-2006, 14:31

The camera will not be launched until Photokina in September and Leica have previously said they are aiming to have it available immediately thereafter. They want to avoid the problems they had with the DMR where customer availability was put back because of software bugs.

All this anticipation is based around a few hard facts, extrapolation from the DMR and a good deal of rumour and supposition thrown into the mix. The UK dealers seem to be taking an attitude of "don't hold your breath". How much more we will know before Photokina is anyone's guess.

Simon Larbalestier

06-13-2006, 14:43

Thanks for the info Mark.

fitzihardwurshd

06-13-2006, 16:04

I have this sense that we've had this discussion before! What I was satirizing with my Bible crack was the "religious" belief that some people seem to have that a "full frame" (full of what?) must be 24 x 36mm and no smaller.

I voted for not interested, for several reasons. I don't need a digital rangegefinder, I do not pay $ 6500 for any camera-lens combo I use exlusively in my private life and I do not trust in Leicas ability to deal with any kind of electronic systems.

A word about the full frame sensor: My POV is that the whole MP issue is only a trap, which the camera industry has built for us . A silly number on which they hang the whole quality issue. Actually MPs are only important in a defined relation to enlargement ratios and do not say ANYTHING per se about the whole quality of an image, which is determined by tonality, transitions, dynamic range and colour reproduction too.

The larger sensor can make sense anyway , less noise and no crop factor are reasons one should mention here. The latter a huge reason to buy it for those who own sets of 35mm top lenses worth ten-thousand of $$$$.

The analogy with film does not work well IMO, already a 13X18 print makes clearly visible the benefits of the larger neg.

Regards,
Fitzi

ZeissFan

06-13-2006, 18:40

No way am I spending $5,000 on a digital camera body. Well, maybe if it was a digital Zeiss Ikon.

Gabriel M.A.

06-13-2006, 20:35

Now, let me tell you why I don't buy 2% milk...

It distracts me from the original question. What was the original question?

waileong

06-14-2006, 00:29

Don't understand all this hand-wringing.

If you want to buy, buy.

If you don't want to buy, don't buy.

Who says you have to convince the world of your reasons, one way or the other?

Now, if you don't know whether you should buy, I know this-- you're not ready for the M8.

People can give their opinions-- it's good, it's bad, it'll depreciate like hell, it will retain its value because it's an M. Who is to say they will be right? How can you base your decision on what people say?

It's not so complicated. The M8 is just a very expensive digital camera.

If you can afford it, it's up to you. If you can't or don't want to, there's no shame in not buying one, and there's no need for you to put down others who want to buy one.

Mark Norton

06-14-2006, 00:33

Well said. I expect the Epson R-D1 will also benefit when the M8 comes out for people who want a slice of the action but for whom the stretch to an M8 is too much.

nrb

06-14-2006, 03:30

Surely any decision to buy should be based on the merits, if any, of this new camera and its corresponding value for money.

jaapv

06-14-2006, 03:32

Jaapv,

You don't have to defend your choice, the only person you need to justify the purchase is yourself.
Will

I showed this post to my wife. She didn't agree....http://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/weapons/violent-smiley-031.gif

sgy1962

06-14-2006, 03:41

It will be a good seller. There is a large segment of the analog rangefinder popoulation -- albeit possibly a minority -- who have been waiting for this camera. They will definately sell more then 10,000 units for the first year or so.

I'm not interested, however, because I'm satisfied with film and like the mechanical nature of Leica Ms. I also don't want to go out and purchase a 28mm lens to account for the 1.33 crop factor. I can see myself only making the digital plunge if film or good processing disappear. Until then my inclination is to stick with what I have.

Nemo

06-14-2006, 03:41

I will buy one, for sure.
I would like a 28mm f/2.8 or a 35mm f/2 as a kit lens.

nrb

06-14-2006, 04:33

Surely film is much more fun than digital, and there is no need to buy any new wide angle lenses to compensate for the crop factor that this camera is said to still use.

jaapv

06-14-2006, 06:27

Surely film is much more fun than digital,.

I HATE scanning! :mad: :bang: :mad:

JohanV

06-14-2006, 07:35

I just found a Belgian website where it's advertised at €3.900. No pics yet, but they are taking orders

http://www.fotorembrandt.be/content/4513/site/?id=3756

sorry, it's in Dutch...

Will

06-14-2006, 08:24

I showed this post to my wife. She didn't agree....http://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/weapons/violent-smiley-031.gif

I like your smiley...

http://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/weapons/violent-smiley-031.gifhttp://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/weapons/violent-smiley-031.gifhttp://www.freewebdesign.be/smileys/images/weapons/violent-smiley-031.gif

LOL...

Did you budget-in a diamond necklace with your M8 purchase?

Will

Les Lammers

06-14-2006, 08:35

jaapv

06-14-2006, 08:49

Did you budget-in a diamond necklace with your M8 purchase?

Will
New Suzuki Swift I fear....But she has really used up the Alto she has now. Like I did my M6TTL :D

Will

06-14-2006, 09:00

New Suzuki Swift I fear....But she has really used up the Alto she has now. Like I did my M6TTL :D

you win some, you lose some...

but that's getting out of proportion...

mac_wt

06-14-2006, 09:10

I just found a Belgian website where it's advertised at €3.900. No pics yet, but they are taking orders

http://www.fotorembrandt.be/content/4513/site/?id=3756

sorry, it's in Dutch...

That would be 3900 Euro including VAT!?! That is a lot better than I expected. It's only 400 Euro more than the analog leicas! Not that I have this kind of cash in my pocket, but the outlook on buying one someday has much improved.

Wim

JohanV

06-14-2006, 10:06

That would be 3900 Euro including VAT!?! That is a lot better than I expected. It's only 400 Euro more than the analog leicas! Not that I have this kind of cash in my pocket, but the outlook on buying one someday has much improved.

Wim

I suppose it is inclusive of VAT, as the M7 is priced at €3.495 which is the inclusive price iirc.

Mark Norton

06-14-2006, 22:29

I think it's curious that a Belgian company can be offering a camera for sale which hasn't been launched yet and for which only the most tentative pricing is available, US $4995 + tax. By my reckoning, that puts it at €3995 + tax, depending on the exchange rate you choose. Or £2750 + tax.

Seems to me their offer price is based on this simple conversion. Whether they will honour pre-orders at that price remains to be seen.

jaapv

06-14-2006, 23:07

you win some, you lose some...

but that's getting out of proportion...
Not really. She needs it anyway... :)

petermcwerner

06-15-2006, 20:15

Sometimes bigger is better. I can't imagine anyone arguing in favor of a camera that used APS-sized film. I would much rather spend 3K on a Canon 5D than 5K on a Leica digital.

I am all for full frame: 8"x10" negs that is. Leica's first mistake was to introduce that 35mm film; they should have stuck to glass plates and sheet film. Real photographers use real cameras: full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.

Gabriel M.A.

06-15-2006, 20:27

full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.
Perhaps a forum dedicated to rangefinders mostly dedicated to a format with no practical use, is...what then?

06-16-2006, 00:36

I'm more likely to stay with film in the RF world, and maybe buy a D200 when some money comes around. The only reason I'd opt for digital over film would be for a very VERY fast, powerful camera for doing things like sports and internet marketing photography where image quality is second in value to efficiency.

I played with a D200 a couple days ago. What a nice camera. Never though I'd say that.

I'll never be leaving film behind when it matters, though. Today, I scanned a panoramic crop out of the center of one of my 645 frames. I have this 279 MB file now. 47MP of totally crisp image area (velvia scanned at 4800dpi on the Multi Pro in 35mm multi format mode). If I were using the whole 645 frame, that would come out to about 90MP. And no softness at 100%.

Ray Kilby

06-16-2006, 00:36

I am all for full frame: 8"x10" negs that is. Leica's first mistake was to introduce that 35mm film; they should have stuck to glass plates and sheet film. Real photographers use real cameras: full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.

I hope you are joking. I can't believe your not. I agree that 10x 8 large negs are wonderful. But you have to agree that some of the greatest images shot, and for that matter probably the majority have been shot on 35mm film. I had a epithany a few years back and realised that the actual camera and format wasn't really that important. It was the eye of the photographer and their personal vision.

06-16-2006, 00:51

Talent is important when capturing the image.

Pixel or grain peeping is relevant come printing time - to a degree. It's like getting dressed up for a date or bathing before an interview - you need to do it because presentation DOES matter, regardless of the content.

John Camp

06-16-2006, 06:29

"I played with a D200 a couple days ago. What a nice camera. Never thought I'd say that."

Nikons *are* nice cameras. My son has a Canon 1Ds that I've handled, and while Canon certainly has been at the forefront of technical inovation -- image stabilization, 35mm-format digital, etc. -- they have never done the ergonomics as well as Nikon, IMHO. Handling a Nikon is like handling a Leica; everything just sems to fall under your fingers, and you get the impression that the Nikon people spend a lot of time worrying about it. If I couldn't afford to get a Leica for the kind of moving, urban photography that I've been doing, I'd get a D200. I've got a D2x but it's too big; a D200 strikes me as about as good ergonomically as an SLR is going to get.

JC

jaapv

06-16-2006, 08:53

I hope you are joking. I can't believe your not. I agree that 10x 8 large negs are wonderful. But you have to agree that some of the greatest images shot, and for that matter probably the majority have been shot on 35mm film. I had a epithany a few years back and realised that the actual camera and format wasn't really that important. It was the eye of the photographer and their personal vision.

He aint jokin', he is just irritated bij advertising cr@p, like I am...

Ray Kilby

06-17-2006, 03:19

He aint jokin', he is just irritated bij advertising cr@p, like I am...

What's bij advertising? If he's not joking, then why hit out at completely innocent 35mm and say it's only good enough for spyware? It's like punching the guy in the face next the one who insulted your wife. It doesn't make sense. And anyway, shouldn't he have the opportunity to defend himself? I was only saying that Cartier Bresson and Robert Capa took pretty good pictures in 35mm, Or do you think that's also a bit contentious to remind people of? God, this is fun, I love a good aurgument. I like your pictures by the way very much.

jaapv

06-17-2006, 04:14

What's bij advertising? If he's not joking, then why hit out at completely innocent 35mm and say it's only good enough for spyware? It's like punching the guy in the face next the one who insulted your wife. It doesn't make sense. And anyway, shouldn't he have the opportunity to defend himself? I was only saying that Cartier Bresson and Robert Capa took pretty good pictures in 35mm, Or do you think that's also a bit contentious to remind people of? God, this is fun, I love a good aurgument. I like your pictures by the way very much.
The advertising is just Canon trying to camouflage that Leica makes the better wideangles :p

Hey! :) Thanks :):)

jaapv

06-17-2006, 04:18

ZeissFan

06-17-2006, 06:18

I would not even post this rumour as I don't believe it (well, for 99%) but it came from a fairly deep throat. The M8 will cost 2990 Euro plus sales margin plus VAT. As I said, this is *highly unlikely* imo, but added to the advertised price of Foto Rembrandt in Belgium of 3900 Euro and a bit, it makes for that nagging 1% hope.......

I agree that the "source" here is likely off the target by a bit -- how much remains to be seen.

I also tend not to put much credence into anonymous sources.

There was some goofball on pnet who claimed to have "an industry source" who told him the Zeiss Ikon wouldn't be released until 2007, 2008 or never. He kept insisting this even after the camera was for sale.

I would be very surprised if the digital M comes in under 4000 Euros. But we'll see soon enough.

Mark Norton

06-17-2006, 07:52

I sent an email to Foto Rembrandt asking if they would accept my order at €3900 and there was no reply. They're a waste of time.

petermcwerner

06-17-2006, 10:29

I am all for full frame: 8"x10" negs that is. Leica's first mistake was to introduce that 35mm film; they should have stuck to glass plates and sheet film. Real photographers use real cameras: full frame is 8x10 negs, 4x5 is half frame and 35mm is plain nothing, good for so called "spy cameras" that end up in museums and have no practical use. Let us wait for the 8x10 digital cameras to come.
.....
I hope you are joking. I can't believe your not. I agree that 10x 8 large negs are wonderful. But you have to agree that some of the greatest images shot, and for that matter probably the majority have been shot on 35mm film

Of course I was not serious, but the discussion about wanting a full size 24x36mm sensor for the M8 reminds me very much of the argumentation that was current fifty years ago. Respectable press photographer would use Speed Graphics or similar cameras, nothing less than 4x5".

amateriat

06-17-2006, 11:32

As for the "rangefinder" I can see that with film, digital photography however is a totally different issue, making the most of a 36 shot film requires different techniques than being able to shoot 2gigs of 7 megapixel jpegs.....
Is this another way of saying a dSLR shooter doesn't need to think as much before dropping the hammer on the shutter release? (A lot of PJ output over the years would appear to bear this out, IMO.)

- Barrett

2001alal

06-17-2006, 22:31

I voted for no plans to get one. I already have a full darkroom setup, so not only would i have to pay $6500 for a system i would also have to buy a computer that could hadle large file sizes and a printer that was high enough quality to make decdent prints, so it would be in the $10,000 range. thats way to much for anything other than a down payment on a home or car. And who knows what sorts of things will go wrong with it.

zack
i'm sorry but you reason for not getting a M8 seams to be more financial which is fine
but lets not confuse the issue, leica / canon / nikon etc
it always going to be the person behind the tool NOT the tool itself
the word photography is to ''write with light''
what tool the photographer chooses use is not the question
its the results to which he or she strives to obtain
from old school pinhole box cameras to digital
thanks and be well
alex

Mark Norton

06-17-2006, 22:47

Is this another way of saying a dSLR shooter doesn't need to think as much before dropping the hammer on the shutter release? (A lot of PJ output over the years would appear to bear this out, IMO.)

Good point. If you use a P&S camera or Program Mode on a DSLR, you're much less likely to use the aperture setting and resulting depth of field as a creative tool, and if you use autofocus, you're much less likely to experiment with different planes of focus.

A rangefinder camera forces you to select the aperture you want manually and to focus manually and, without the benefit of Depth of Field preview, relies on you the photographer being able to visualise what the image is going to look like. There's a learning process there which a digital camera can speed up by making the results more quickly available.

That's why I run rangefinder in parallel to SLR. Rangefinder forces on me a more considered approach to what I am photographing and makes me a better photographer as a result.

ezio gallino

06-18-2006, 03:41

I will go very very slow. 4500 euros are a fortune and I will never spend for that. first I will look for a second-hand epson under 1500 euros: they are beginning to appear and if I will be a little lucky prices will go even downer. If they will be unreachable I will look for a Digilux2 or its Panasonic counterpart; in parallel I will go for films like Fuji Velvia , Efke, scanned and computer printed.
Then at last when prices became reasonnable I will finally look for a lightly used M8. maybe three years from now reevaluating my needs. No crazy acts of any kind. If Zeiss Ikon will do something equivalent (not so easy) I will consider it too: so anything else. Remember camera is just a box only lens are really important (if they don't weight too much to carry them with you). :cool:

bye to everybody.

Ezio

sgy1962

06-18-2006, 04:18

I think it is amazing that we have so many people already pre-ordering the M8.

And Leica is not even taking pre-orders yet. I'll stick with my analog Ms, but I really belive this digital M will be a good seller, at least initially.

Mark Norton

06-18-2006, 05:08

... which is why I think the price of €3900 from one Belgian dealer is, at best, a guestimate.

If that is the price, it's not that much more than an M7 so represents good value (at least by Leica standards) for money.

Once the M8 is out, I think prices for the R-D1 will harden, currently there's limited ex-demo stock available in the UK at around $2000 + tax. New stock appears to be sold out so that the M8 will be the only (new) game in town.

ezio gallino

06-18-2006, 05:31

What I heard about European price is 4500 euros (Leica FAQ). Too much... considering that in USA they will be $5000: at the actual euro/dollar ratio is crazy. I know that american market for Solms is a must: but I know that the world it's becoming a global thing too...

Mark Norton

06-18-2006, 05:51

Pistach

06-18-2006, 06:10

Evenctually, maybe, I will buy a digital and I want to spend very little money (in any case it will be obsolete the very moment I will buy it)
Want to know what I will use it for?
Here are some example:
If someone hits my car. If I need toservice my Nikon F, then I want to take a picture after removing each single part, etc. Got the idea?
Thiese I call utility pictures. may be my next cell will be adequate for that.
To take instead PHOTOS I will use film for the rest of my life
Regards
Pistach

ezio gallino

06-19-2006, 03:23

Yet nobody seems to think $4500 for a D2X is too much or that $3500 for a Noctilux is too much. What I would hate to see is Leica building the camera down to a price instead of up to a specification. We've got too used to buying stuff from China costing next to nothing, sadly, if you want it made in Germany, that is going to be expensive.

Too much for my pockets...., of course; for me take photograph is a pleasure, not a job. Canos EOS fully framed and Nikon D2X and why not a Leica DMR system are heavy and in the same range. I don't want to carry an heavy bag on my back everytime I exit to shoot some image. M6 + nocti are night perfect! probably m8 with same nocti will do the trick.

nrb

06-19-2006, 03:23

I guess many of us will review their options on buying a new M7 after analysis of images taken by it. I'm sure this M7 will be much better than Leica's slr counterpart.

Grober

06-20-2006, 10:11

I have a pile of M-glass (Leica, Canon, Voigtlander) but have set a personal limit of $ 3200 for a Leica-built digital body or $2200 for other-built digital bodies. Of course, it needs to be new with a valid warranty in the USA.

$5K for a Leica digital? Nope, I don't need to feed my habit that badly.

I believe Photokina will hold a surprise or two that no one sees currently. Epson R-D2? Zeiss MD? Surely one of the above.

Mark Norton

06-20-2006, 12:06

You may well be right, there might be some other manufacturer planning to take the wind out of Leica's sails (and sales) by announcing a competitor. If so, they are keeping it a closely guarded secret.

I'd be surprised if it was Epson planning to come out with something new...

John Camp

06-20-2006, 15:23

I'd be shocked by another M-compatible digital rangefinder -- it'd be the best-kept camera development secret in history. I suppose it's possible, but why would you do it? If you wanted to take the wind out of Leica's sails, the time to do it would have been last winter, or this spring...now, people are already putting money down on the Leica,

JC

Mark Norton

06-20-2006, 17:32

Which kind of highlights how remarkable it was for Epson to get into this market, and I am pleased they did to force Leica out of the "can't be done" mind set.

RML

06-20-2006, 21:25

I'd be shocked by another M-compatible digital rangefinder -- it'd be the best-kept camera development secret in history. I suppose it's possible,

It's indeed possible. Leica announced that a digital rf was "impossible" or at least unpractical. Moments later, Epson announced the R-D1 without any prior warning. If Leica was at that time already working on a digital M, they sure got shocked into action after that sudden release of the R-D1.

Paul T.

06-21-2006, 01:24

I would love to presume Zeiss had a digital Ikon ready. But if we look at how far ahead they tend to announce their upcoming products, one could assume that it won't even reach the shops by 2007. TO me, this seems a hugely illogical approach.

The film Ikon can only ever be a niche product - after all, who really needs to replace the huge numbers of, say, film M6s that are already in use? Whereas if only 20% of film rangefinder users switch or augment their camera with a digital rangefinder, the market would be an order of magnitude larger than that for the film Ikon. I guess there's a question of factory capacity too - it seems Cosina won't have the ability to instal the electronics, given that they didn't do so on the Epson, so Zeiss will probably have to source new production facilities somewhere.

One would have hoped, too, that when Zeiss designed the basicIkon chassis they kept the implications of a digital version in mind. On the bright side, with the Digital Ikon, no-one will complain that the rewind is on the bottom.

jdos2

06-21-2006, 19:26

Gotta be full frame. I spent my Leica gear on a 5D and I'm not sorry in the SLIGHTEST. Full frame. Leica? FULL FRAME. Gimme REAL WIDE ANGLE LENSES, please.

They do THAT, and I'll have a much harder time rationalizing staying with a big, loud SLR with mediocre glass.

RML

06-21-2006, 23:01

Didier

06-21-2006, 23:14

Certainly I would love to buy a M8, but the price is out of my reach. I have a family with three kids, who are needing new bicycles, new music instruments, new sport gear, new furniture, new whatever, all the time... thus my budget for photographic gear is limited. My M6 was bought used, as well as the M lenses. But at least I could now afford one of the demo R-D1 from Robert White. That's gonna be my camera for the next years, even if the M8 will be way better (or not, who knows).
Didier

jaapv

06-22-2006, 00:17

Gotta be full frame. I spent my Leica gear on a 5D and I'm not sorry in the SLIGHTEST. Full frame. Leica? FULL FRAME.
You need a Hassy for REAL full frame, with a Leaf back, or rarher a future 18x24 cm sensor. Full frame means just that: the size of the print. You are distinguishing between miniature format and miniaturest format, and would like the size of a 1890-ies cine film.Leica has that camera on the market since 1998. Just buy it.
Gimme REAL WIDE ANGLE LENSES, please.
They do THAT, and I'll have a much harder time rationalizing staying with a big, loud SLR with mediocre glass.
Err... That is exactly what they are doing by offering special wide-angle lenses with the M8.

nrb

06-22-2006, 07:02

jaapv

06-22-2006, 07:35

J. Borger

06-22-2006, 07:58

I respect everybody who loves his 5d, 1Ds or whatever ...... but please these cameras are no benchmarks for the M8. There is only ONE benchmark for the M8 and that is called the R-D1(s). And perhaps the M7 (on some aspects). The rest is apples and oranges .... and the ful frame argument is yesterdaysnews and very boring to read over and over again!
How about a 5d vs. a Hassy with a digital back with a crop factor? does this setup also suck compared to the 5D?

06-22-2006, 09:50

Check these images out. They came from the Casio EXZ750 P&S digicam. Best performance I've ever seen for under $300 in a digital camera.

I think Leica should be working with these guys. . .

mac_wt

06-22-2006, 10:46

MP Guy

06-22-2006, 11:23

All this digital talk should be making you guys want to go to dslrx.com :) and pump some life into it.

Mark Norton

06-22-2006, 11:39

Oh please, these images are just standard mass market P&S fodder. As Wim says, the highlights are blown, where's the sharpness? Where's the colour? Typical results from a camera churned out by the thousand every day for a target market who don't know any better and care less.

If you think this shows Leica have anything to learn from Casio, you've completely missed the point of Leica and especially of the M8.

I've no doubt that the M8 will give us the very best digital imaging, ranking alongside the R9DMR and D2X and even Canon's best might approach the M8 (when used with R-glass of course). Best of all, that quality will come in a package which is smaller, lighter, quieter, more discrete than anything which has gone before. We're in for a real treat.

Dougg

06-22-2006, 13:06

Leica is in a bind: The M8 HAS to be outstandingly good, it must not be a flop; it MUST live up to the Leica name. Tough situation for any company to be in, but common among elite brands; they're on a treadmill where only the best is acceptable. The only comfort for them is that the price will be high and the customers expect that. I bet the camera will be spectacular.

I expect the M8 results will be compared to those of top dSLRs, but it's not reasonable to compare it as a product to those dSLRs because the dSLRs are not RFs and vice versa. Different market, different uses. I far far prefer an analog user interface, or a digital interface that mimics analog controls, and along with preferring an RF for everyday use, this severely limits my choices.

Will I get a Leica M8? I'm not ready to "go digital" for expressive photography, and must be forced to it, kicking and screaming along the way, when and if film and processing become impossibly troublesome/rare/expensive. But in the meantime that won't stop me from using a modest digital camera for business uses and snapping shots of other gear to show off here in RFF. :D

Ben Z

06-22-2006, 14:27

Leica is in a bind: The M8 HAS to be outstandingly good, it must not be a flop :D

Sadly the M8 does not have to be outstandingly good in order not to be a flop. Leica can guarantee themselves a chunk of sales just because it's the only genuine Leica M-mount digital. A lot of people would've bought it if they'd just re-badged the RD1 and charged another 30% for it, witness the Panasonic "Leicas". Just as there are some people who will gripe and be dissatisfied no matter what the specifications are, there are others who will buy it regardless of what as-yet-unknown quirks or foibles are uncovered once a working production model is actually reviewed. And if history is any guide, some people who in reality haven't even tried it will "authoritatively" shovel dirt on it on internet forums. And almost everyone who does own it will heap it with mounds of praise no matter how it objectively compares to any other camera. From what I've witnessed, the Canon-vs-Nikon debates are like little kittens playing, in comparison to the vicious bloodfest whenever Leica-vs-nonLeica is debated.

Mark Norton

06-22-2006, 15:05

Ben, I think you've characterised what's going to happen when the camera is announced except I think there will be a three way battle - non-Leica, Leica film die-hards and Leica digital newbies.

I'm very much in the camp of buying the camera no matter what because I feel certain they will deliver and I no longer do film.

I hope Leica continues providing film cameras for as long as people want them. Problem is, there's a lot of them out there so that even if Leica never made another film camera, the secondhand market would supply the demand. As a business, that's a non-starter so that the move to digital was the only direction Leica could take.

richard_l

06-22-2006, 15:11

...And if history is any guide, some people who in reality haven't even tried it will "authoritatively" shovel dirt on it on internet forums. And almost everyone who does own it will heap it with mounds of praise no matter how it objectively compares to any other camera...So true.........

Mark Norton

06-22-2006, 15:29

Cape Hatteras...

rvaubel

06-23-2006, 01:01

I've no doubt that the M8 will give us the very best digital imaging, ranking alongside the R9DMR and D2X and even Canon's best might approach the M8 (when used with R-glass of course).

Mark
I sure hope so, but if i can just get a R-D1 that has 10Meg and Leica quality and build, I'd be happy. In fact, if I could get an R-D2, I'd be happy.
Quite frankly, I wish that Epson/Cosina would continue on down the path of further development of the R-D1. They have come so tantilizingly close to a perfect example of a digital rangefinder, that it almost makes me want to cry when I realize that the chances of another chapter in its development is grim at best.
Leica is starting from scratch and there are bound to be teething problems. Don't get me wrong, I'm "in" with regards the M8. But I sure wish there was another choice available as a second body or backup. My R-D1 won't last forever.
Needless to say, I won't be selling my R-D1 anytime soon. In fact, I'm thinking about a second body especially if the price actually reaches a 2K level. I doubt the M8 will have the Epson/Seiko's cool watch dials that make the R-D1 worth the price of admission by themselves, in my book. Of course I'm crazy.

Rex
Peoples Republic of Berkeley

06-23-2006, 01:19

Hmmm, they're nice pics, but I'm not overly impressed. The first one has some seriously blown highlights (but it is a high contrast scene). The flare in the second one is not really spectacular and overall I don't think the colors really pop. They're certainly nothing you couldn't do with a (cheap) film camera. I hope the M8 will do better.

Wim

yeah, blown, but from a moving vehicle this was shot, on a sketchy Casio with 5500+ shots through it at a reasonably high ISO. For under $300, that isn't bad at all. In fact, I used a D200 about a week ago, and it was awful - worse than this Casio by a fair margin.

jaapv

06-26-2006, 00:41

Mark
I sure hope so, but if i can just get a R-D1 that has 10Meg and Leica quality and build.....
Rex
Peoples Republic of Berkeley

Haven't you just described the M8? This reminds me of the old joke that Shakespeare's plays weren't written by Shakespeare at all, but by another bloke with the same name.....

jaapv

06-26-2006, 06:25

A lot of people would've bought it if they'd just re-badged the RD1 and charged another 30% for it
The price diffeenc there was only very partly due to the cost of the Leica badge; the bodies were virtually the same, but the lens was different. The Panasonic lens had "ordinary"multicoating, but the Leica version had the far more expensive Leica "ultrathin"coating on some of the inner lens surfaces, giving a slight, but noticable better flare behaviour.

Ben Z

06-26-2006, 06:52

The price diffeenc there was only very partly due to the cost of the Leica badge; the bodies were virtually the same, but the lens was different. The Panasonic lens had "ordinary"multicoating, but the Leica version had the far more expensive Leica "ultrathin"coating on some of the inner lens surfaces, giving a slight, but noticable better flare behaviour.

Interesting. I never heard of this before, certainly not from anyone affiliated with Leica. Could you post a link to where Leica or Panasonic describes this? The only substantiated rationale (other than the cosmetics and Leica nameplate) I've ever seen for the price difference was attributed to "better bundled software" :D

jaapv

06-26-2006, 07:16

That is the reason that the lettering was different on the two versions of the lens as well. I did see this, years ago, on DPreview forum I think, but I cannot for the life of me recall the exact thread. Sorry.:( :( I doubt Leica would avow this publicly.

Ben Z

06-26-2006, 09:17

I can imagine Leica's angst over that catch-22. If they didn't point out the lens is better they lose sales because the only reason people would buy their version is because it says Leica, and OTOH if the did point out the lens is better then they cost Panasonic sales and tick off their partner.

jaapv

06-26-2006, 09:29

Mark

07-04-2006, 07:00

I'm going to take a wait and see attitude. I would like a camera with FEWER modes, better usability and a more elegant design that what is offered in the market today. A number of years ago, I purchased a canon EOS elan II with eye control. It was a high tech as you could get back then. The camera took great pictures, but I never really enjoyed using it as much the Pentax MX it replaced; for me personally, there were just too many menus, modes, spot meter settings etc. I've been using a variety of digital cameras for years but they all suffer from the same "feature creep" that exists in the Canon Elan. A Leica digital wont be the highest pixel count or the most features. I'm hoping it will take traditional, straight forward, elegant Leica design and wrap it around a digital sensor.

jdos2

07-04-2006, 07:41

Do you like the 5D? I borrowed one for a few weeks to see if it was a decent upgrade over my 10D. It was - in a technical sense. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the results from a technical point of view. But I did find it had the same boring digital look my 10D has. Maybe it has something to do with the CMos sensor.

I do. I like it very much. With the exception of my (Mamiya) Universals, it's my go-anywhere camera. If I need a tinier camera, I simply bring along the SP or the Prominent, but the 5D...

I understand the comment about the 10D's "look." I had one, and I really didn't like the "plastic effect" of that particular camera. I also don't like Canon wide lenses at all, but there are ways around both of those things.

First of all, use lenses pretty wide open for good DoF control. That's my style in particular and works well with the 5D. Increase sharpening in the camera for less "plastic" look.
For wides, go Zeiss, Solms, or (as I did, as I got it for free!) an M42 mount 28mm works just fine. Just file a bit off or the mirror will hit the back of the lens on the way down...

I'm looking (quietly- I really can't afford one) for the Canon 50mm f/1 EOS lens. I miss my Noctilux.

Nachkebia

07-05-2006, 00:31

Digital is awfull!

jaapv

07-05-2006, 00:38

Digital is awfull!
Better to post this one on APUG ;)

jean-marc B.

07-05-2006, 01:26

I prefer my Leica M3, with Kodak Tri-X

chrisweeks

07-18-2006, 16:34

us$5000 already allocated. not that i'll shoot any less with the mp's.

espressogeek

07-18-2006, 17:23

I understand the comment about the 10D's "look." I had one, and I really didn't like the "plastic effect" of that particular camera. I also don't like Canon wide lenses at all, but there are ways around both of those things.

You dont like the canon 12-24mm? I thought that lens made beautiful wide angle shots.

espressogeek

07-18-2006, 17:45

yeah, blown, but from a moving vehicle this was shot, on a sketchy Casio with 5500+ shots through it at a reasonably high ISO. For under $300, that isn't bad at all. In fact, I used a D200 about a week ago, and it was awful - worse than this Casio by a fair margin.

Im sorry, either something wasnt setup right or your were not familiar with the camera. The D200 has garnered countless praise from the press and most users. My shoot VERY clean all the time and is heads and shoulders above my Olympus e-300 and my other cameras.

julianphotoart

07-19-2006, 08:14

Digital is awfull!

Those words, or words to that effect, will be on my tombstone. Curmudgeons unite.

Toby

07-19-2006, 14:39

Eddyboy

07-19-2006, 14:56

I've been thinking about this far more than the subject merits.

Pre 9/11, my bride and I went to Africa on a photo safari. We shots hundreds of rolls of film. Processing was in the thousands $$. In 2002 we went again with nikon d-100's. We made far more photographs and, by my calculations, saved the price of both the cameras in processing in that single trip. As a backup, I took some conventional film cameras and film. What a hassle through 4 airports both ways and wrestling with inspectors who want to xray it!

If the M-8 is done well or if it is a disaster, film will slowly become a quaint anachronism like vinyl phonograph records did when the music CD arrived. There'll be film around for a great long while, but the economies of scale are disappearing in manufacturing and processing etc. Soon the price of film and processing will skyrocket. Nikon has signalled it's exit from the film camera market. ..what more is there to say? This is not an opinion about what should happen it is about what will happen.

I am selling ALL my film stuff. If I sell it by the pound, I should have enough for an M8!

Digital Baby

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a304/eddyboy_1956/walking-gray-card-2.jpg

Trius

07-19-2006, 15:58

Bike Tourist

07-19-2006, 16:05

yeah, blown, but from a moving vehicle this was shot, on a sketchy Casio with 5500+ shots through it at a reasonably high ISO. For under $300, that isn't bad at all. In fact, I used a D200 about a week ago, and it was awful - worse than this Casio by a fair margin.

I have to differ a little, George. I will admit to selling off some Nikon gear to pay for my re-aquired Leica habit, but my D200 is an absolute, drop dead keeper with sterling performance for my needs. For me personally, it is not awful, it is awesome!

paultreacy

07-19-2006, 16:42

What Leica needs to do, I think, is design a digital M into which you can install updated chips as the technology progresses over the years. That way they'll be able to continue building cameras that people will hang onto for years to come. That might give them an edge. http://www.yellowbellybooks.com

nrb

07-20-2006, 03:36

how much of a difference there will be between that M8 and any dSLR

Nachkebia

07-20-2006, 03:40

nrb : there will be one and big difference! size! size of the body and lenses...

jaapv

07-20-2006, 04:42

I just got my Calumet catalogue and they are saying the Sony Alpha with the same resolution as the M8 will be sold for around £600 ($1000?). Now forgive me for being trollish but if leica really wanted to make headway in the digital market surely they could price the M8 a bit more aggressively. As it is they are preaching to (dwindling numbers of) the converted yet again. Say what you like about CV but at least they're a bit more evangelical about the rangefinder concept. I love RF photography but without a proactive approach, it will die.

The resolution has nothing to do with camera quality. That legend has long been exploded. The rangefider on a Leica M camera alone costs more to build than the whole Sony camera. Comparing these two cameras is not apples and pears, but apples and cheese.....Actually the Leica is not priced extremely high compared to other camera's like the top of the line Canons, Nikons etc.

Eddyboy

07-20-2006, 09:17

Ex-squeeze me, but some of the best vinyl is NOW being pressed, and even high end digital (far better than the ca. 1982 "Perfect Sound Forever" [ha!]) still only matches or barely exceeds a superb analog recording.

That said ... digital in the form of the M8 is seductive to me. Why? I have seen wonderful stuff from the R-D1(s).

To be sure! I still have all my vinyl as well. ...Look at the available selection of players and titles. Great stuff is out there as part of a very tiny niche, supported by a few folks with bat-like hearing who can appreciate the differences. Continued existence of the LP record medium in vestigial form is exactly the model towards which film is heading. Again, it doesn't matter if I like it or not. It is what it is.

amateriat

07-20-2006, 09:22

how much of a difference there will be between that M8 and any dSLR 'Taint the "what", but the "how": I learned this when switiching from a pair of high-zoot AF SLRs (Minolta 9xi) to my current pair of Konica Hexar RFs. Whole different way of shooting, and, to my sensibilites at least, better. One buys a Leica M-mount rangefinder not for some mythical powers it might bestow on one's photographic prowess (well, I hope not, anyway), but for the unique experience and potential advantages such a camera can offer. The digital M will establish its own not-so-tiny niche (I prefdict the degree of its adoption by the PJ cognoscenti will surprise a lot of us), not by way of a toe-to-toe comparison with cheaper dSLRs du jour, but by offer a shooting exeperience those cameras can't offer. I, being quite shallow-of-pocket, won't be one of them, which is just as well. I'm having a ball with what I have.

- Barrett

Bob Ross

07-20-2006, 14:30

nrb,Aside from the hardware and shooting style addressed by others, the M8 does have a good chance of producing a better digital file, than the present crop of DSLRs (other than the DMR). The image files are supposed to be like the DMR, using the same sensor, no AA filter and using 16 bit depth. The Kodak KAF-FFT family of sensors is used in the Oly E-1, DMR and the Phase One P30 and P45 medium format backs. The E-1 that I have uses a fairly strong AA filter and 12 bit depth. It has very good tonal and color gradients, that I prefer over the competition, as it seem more film like to me. There is good potential here with the small size, good lenses and digital image quality. Then it always goes to what is good enough for your purposes...:-)

Trius

07-20-2006, 16:35

This thread is so long I've forgotten when rumoured release date is ... Photokina in Sept? Anyway, if you go to the Leica USA site, you can find Leica Days at various Leica dealers. The Toronto event (http://www.leica-camera.us/news/events/by_date/3/971.html) is Oct. 27-28, so maybe I'll make the trip up and we can have a RFF meetup. Other RFF regions might be able to do that as well.

Larry Kellogg

07-21-2006, 04:50

To be sure! I still have all my vinyl as well. ...Look at the available selection of players and titles. Great stuff is out there as part of a very tiny niche, supported by a few folks with bat-like hearing who can appreciate the differences. Continued existence of the LP record medium in vestigial form is exactly the model towards which film is heading. Again, it doesn't matter if I like it or not. It is what it is.

Well, I don't think it takes bat-like hearing to appreciate the qualities of an analog recording as preserved on vinyl. The difference in the sound is clearly audible. LPs have a more organic feel to them and sound more like music to me, even though there is more noise on records and the frequency response is not as wide. A lot is made of what is missing from CDs, namely noise, but a lot can't be said for what is on CDs. :) Sometimes the CD is better than the corresponding LP, but in many cases the original LP sounds better than the CD, mainly because of how the CD was messed up during production.

Of course, I have both CDs and LPs. There is a huge supply of vinyl out there, in finished form, ready to be played on any turntable. We have over fifty years worth of LPs. As for new stuff, it is hard to say if vinyl production will be around in the years to come. Probably not, as better digital formats become available. But, there will always be music in those grooves!

Digital capture is taking the world by storm, mainly because it is so easy and because everyone has a computer for post-processing. I think it is great to not have to produce a physical artifact of every single shot. It frees me up to experiment, without having to pay for that experimentation. I never have to think I have wasted a frame of film when shooting digitally.

Regards,

Larry

JohnL

07-23-2006, 13:00

I haven't voted on this because there's no option that exactly fits my thinking. If I could get a digital full-frame M-mount RF body for a reasonable price (say $3K or thereabouts), I probably would, and sooner rather than later. Why full-frame? Because my RF lenses were chosen for full-frame - i.e. for film. Even after having an APS DSLR (Canon 10D), all the lenses I got for it had a FF image circle, and were chosen with future FF in mind, so they also worked fine on my EOS 3 and on the 5D I have now. So when I think about taking a picture, I know what focal length I need for it, without calculations. I did the math when I was using the 10D, but it's one less thing to worry about now. How long will I have to wait for this camera? Don't know, but I'd be surprised if it was more than another three years or so.

egpj

07-23-2006, 18:03

jaapv

07-23-2006, 23:24

@ Larry{about vinyl records} the frequency response is not as wide
:confused: I always understood CD's cut off at 20 and 20.000 Hz. My cartrige responds from 10 to 30.000 Hz within 3Db. I always understood the ability to respond to "inaudible" overtones was one of the reasons that vinyl sounds more natural

Dougg

07-24-2006, 00:50

Not interested because I want a camera that I do not have to send my lenses off and have them modified in order to be able to use them.As I understand it from other posts here, Glenn, is that the coding is not necessary to continue to use the lenses, just a way to convey lens info for the EXIF data, and possibly a nicety or two in pre-processing the image file that could nearly as easily be done later. Not a deal-breaker, I would think. :)

nrb

07-24-2006, 00:59

Since a full frame sensor is technically possible, it will be a matter of time, hopefully short, until it will be mounted on a rangefinder body...
The full frame sensor is vital for the survival of the whole rangefinder concept, since it is based, quite unlike the SLRs, around 3 prime focals, 35, 50 and 90 mm.

jaapv

07-24-2006, 01:11

Since a full frame sensor is technically possible, it will be a matter of time, hopefully short, that it will be mounted on a rangefinder body...
The full frame sensor is vital for the survival of the whole rangefinder concept, since it is based, quite unlike the SLRs, around 3 prime focals, 35, 50 and 90 mm.

??? At the present time a 35 mm sensor is technically impossible for a range-finder, until somebody finds a way to increase the acceptance angle of the edges.The lens is closer to the sensor than a DSLR, making the angle of incidence a lot more acute. Full-frame is an irritating misnomer, as it means maybe a 18x28 cm size sensor , as it implies that the sensor is the size of the final print.....
Focal length- the ones you mention are just hallowed by tradition, but by no means the only possibilities. For 645 format your focal lengths would be pretty wide-angle, for 110 it would be tele. For your information, the only "zoom"lens for rangefinder on the market, the Tri-Elmar, has the focal lengths of 28-35-50, which means the field of view is better fitted to a 27 mm sensor (like the M8) than to a 35 mm sensor.

Rich Silfver

07-24-2006, 01:24

I must admit that the thought of a digital Leica M is growing on me and I am increasingly curious to see how it will turn out.

I can't believe that Photokina is just 8 weeks or so away and that no photos of the camera has leaked.

fgianni

07-24-2006, 01:52

Not interested because I want a camera that I do not have to send my lenses off and have them modified in order to be able to use them. The big thing though is that I want a Black and White only sensor that uses 100% of the sensor for black and white capture. Is that so hard? Seems like it would be cheaper to produce one of these rather then dealing with color.

In theory a traditional Bayer sensor without the CFA becomes a B&W sensor, and it probably gains quite a bit in terms of sensitivity. The problem is: has anyone got the guts to release a camera that is unable to take colour pictures?

rxmd

07-24-2006, 02:07

Hi Francesco,

Kodak sold a black and white DSLR once. I don't think they were particularly successful.

Philipp

Peter Klein

07-24-2006, 22:23

In theory a traditional Bayer sensor without the CFA becomes a B&W sensor, and it probably gains quite a bit in terms of sensitivity. The problem is: has anyone got the guts to release a camera that is unable to take colour pictures?

Last October at the LHSA meeting in San Francisco, Stephan Daniels of Leica spoke to us about the digital M. He asked us how many of us might buy a B&W-only digital M if Leica made one. (This would indicate that they're at least thinking about it.) Quite a few of us raised our hands.

There would indeed be significantly more sensitivity, and a bit more resolution. Of course, "might buy" is somewhat distant from "will buy," but there is interest.

--Peter

nrb

07-25-2006, 02:07

??? At the present time a 35 mm sensor is technically impossible for a range-finder, until somebody finds a way to increase the acceptance angle of the edges.The lens is closer to the sensor than a DSLR, making the angle of incidence a lot more acute. Full-frame is an irritating misnomer, as it means maybe a 18x28 cm size sensor , as it implies that the sensor is the size of the final print.....
Focal length- the ones you mention are just hallowed by tradition, but by no means the only possibilities. For 645 format your focal lengths would be pretty wide-angle, for 110 it would be tele. For your information, the only "zoom"lens for rangefinder on the market, the Tri-Elmar, has the focal lengths of 28-35-50, which means the field of view is better fitted to a 27 mm sensor (like the M8) than to a 35 mm sensor.
IMHO full frame just describes a sensor that will allow 35 mm lenses to behave like 35 mm lenses, the exact way they were designed to behave, and not produce irritating cropples.

jdos2

07-25-2006, 06:10

IMHO full frame just describes a sensor that will allow 35 mm lenses to behave like 35 mm lenses, the exact way they were designed to behave, and not produce irritating cropples.
Claro, esta... Oops!

Of course, senhor, you are right. There are lots of folks fighting the "Full Frame Battle," right now, trying to distort the criticism of sensors smaller than the 135 film the sensors themselves have been used to replace. Distortion of the argument is easier than accepting the criticism that smaller-than-135-sized sensors force folks to buy new lenses if they want to take pictures with similar perspectives (and depth of field) to what they were used.

Ah, I see Leica is releasing a new wide angle lens for this camera. Wonder if it'll be as cheap as their 21mm? Or if their 35mm Summicron (ASPH) will be as cheap as their 50mm Summicron to make up for their lack of "standard lens" in the smaller sensor?

I'm guessing that the manufacturers are just tired of normal/wide angle photography and want us to start using the easier-to-make longer formerly "standard" lenses as now the "normal" lenses, forcing us to have a tighter perspective. :rolleyes:

Have a Pasteis de Nata for me, please, and a cup of "Chave d'Ouro" (Uma bica!), and take a nice picture of bronze Fernando Pessoa (Rua Garret). I miss Lisbon so.

jaapv

07-25-2006, 06:14

Claro, esta... Oops!

Of course, senhor, you are right. There are lots of folks fighting the "Full Frame Battle," right now, trying to distort the criticism of sensors smaller than the 135 film the sensors themselves have been used to replace. Distortion of the argument is easier than accepting the criticism that smaller-than-135-sized sensors force folks to buy new lenses if they want to take pictures with similar perspectives (and depth of field) to what they were used.

Ah, I see Leica is releasing a new wide angle lens for this camera. Wonder if it'll be as cheap as their 21mm? Or if their 35mm Summicron (ASPH) will be as cheap as their 50mm Summicron to make up for their lack of "standard lens" in the smaller sensor?

I'm guessing that the manufacturers are just tired of normal/wide angle photography and want us to start using the easier-to-make longer formerly "standard" lenses as now the "normal" lenses, forcing us to have a tighter perspective. :rolleyes:

Have a Pasteis de Nata for me, please, and a cup of "Chave d'Ouro" (Uma bica!), and take a nice picture of bronze Fernando Pessoa (Rua Garret). I miss Lisbon so.
Nobody is forcing you to buy anything you don't want to...

RIVI1969

07-25-2006, 16:00

Well, the Leica Digilux-2 even when is "old" considering the new products flow, is the only digicam that after 3 years or so of its launch still retains a top-retail value. I just saw one go for $1500.00, basically the same for a new Nikon D200.

I guess the M8 will be a top seller so if we expect one for less than 4 grand, maybe we will wait for 4 years or so.

JapanExposures

07-25-2006, 23:38

I intend to buy the Zeiss DigIkon which will/should/might come out 1-2 months after the Digital M and cost half the price (hopefully a tad less than the RD-1 now). :angel:

Mark Norton

07-26-2006, 01:15

Given Zeiss's habit of shouting about new products from the roof tops before they are available, I think we would have heard about it by now.

Eddyboy

07-27-2006, 16:57

Well, I don't think it takes bat-like hearing to appreciate the qualities of an analog recording as preserved on vinyl.

Larry

If I gave the impression that I thought CD was better than vinyl, that was not my intent. Just because I can't hear a difference means very little. I can't hear my wife most of the time. My sole intention is to convey my opinion that digital capture will supersede film. And, like the CD, it will happen very fast.

Larry Kellogg

07-29-2006, 08:53

If I gave the impression that I thought CD was better than vinyl, that was not my intent. Just because I can't hear a difference means very little. I can't hear my wife most of the time. My sole intention is to convey my opinion that digital capture will supersede film. And, like the CD, it will happen very fast.

With enough amplification, a good turntable , and good speakers, you won't be able to hear your wife. :) That's the point....

I think vinyl is different than CD, not always better or worse, just different. I think too much is made of declaring something as the winner. I don't believe vinyl playback or film is going to disappear from the planet tomorrow. These things will be around for years to come. I do agree with you that digital capture will continue to cut into the market share for film. Maybe the best films will be left around because there will be enough demand for them while the lower quality ones will be discarded. That is not always a bad thing. The quality of turntables is probably better now than ever probably because there isn't any profit margin in building low quality turntables...

Regards,

Larry

edlaurpic

07-30-2006, 06:57

I have already made deposits for two M8's.

edlaurpic

07-30-2006, 07:25

I should have added that, prior to putting my down payments on two M8's, I sold my Canon 1DS MII, as I have hardly used it since I got my R-D1. I never was comfortable with a DSLR compared to how good it feels to use a light, small RF with everything that comes with RF photography. I also sold some other gear that was gathering dust. I will keep, for the time being, a 5D for macro and long telephoto. The reason I am buying two M8's is because I want two digital M RF bodies. If I like the M8 well enough, I will get rid of the R-D1. However, if it turns out that I decide to keep the R-d1 as the second RF body for M lenses, then I will sell one of the M8s (and probably make money to boot).

bluepenguin

08-01-2006, 12:08

in my opinion 5k is too much for M8. i can't affort it ....

nrb

08-02-2006, 02:49

5 K is too much, especially considering the much shorter life expectancy of digital cameras

Kevin

08-02-2006, 03:56

jaapv

08-02-2006, 04:51

5 K is too much, especially considering the much shorter life expectancy of digital cameras
Considering the amounts of money other people squander on -in my eyes- worthless stuff, surely this is purely subjective... What about the top-of-the-range Canon and Nikon
DSLR's, btw? Those run up to something even more hefty that the humble ;) M8.

in my opinion 5k is too much for M8. i can't affort it ....All is relative.. I would love to spend some holiday time in my old haunts in Botswana. At $ 1000,-- a person a night that is destined to remaina pipedream forever.:(

Ben Z

08-02-2006, 07:53

5 K is too much, especially considering the much shorter life expectancy of digital cameras

Hmmm. The Canon 1DS-II seems to be built to the same standard as the 1V, good for 150,000 shots before a $200 shutter replacement and then on to another 150,000. If the M8 can do that, I don't see much of an argument here.

Bob Ross

08-02-2006, 18:44

People should spend money on commodities after they have been properly tested by one or more unbiased parties, meaning this discussion should be taking place at the end of the year when the camera has become available to those parties.

Talk is cheap. Or is there some kind of ego-thing going on here, like at Flickr?
That is the proper course for the wise, cautious and prudent person, but it sounds kind of dull to me:D
In the case of the M8, we have a product based on a successfull line of products made by a firm with a reputation for excellence. The M8 is actually simpiler than today's DSLRs, with the absence of AF, sophisticated matrix metering, mirror dampening & viewfinder brightness issues. The field testing by mature, experienced & professional photographers done by Leica is extensive. You can argue about independence, but these are people who want the camera and want right, because they will be using it hard for years. The field testers aren't looking at the camera academically like some on-line review site expert who will move on to the next interesting new product. I do like cameras where the professional photographer has a say in the design and features, because they will be using it. They wont give us charts and samples to oggle over and nit-pick and we might not ever know who they were, but we'll feel their contributions when we use our M8s.
Bob

w3rk5

08-02-2006, 20:09

I don't think I would buy one even if I had the money. I think it costs too much for what it is, and what it will eventually be in a couple of years.

Mark Norton

08-02-2006, 22:29

That is the proper course for the wise, cautious and prudent person, but it sounds kind of dull to me:D

Thanks Bob for a little light. It's certainly possible to sit on the fence forever and wait for other people to tell you how good this camera is. I prefer to buy one and make up my own mind.

There's a lot of talk about this camera being over-priced but I don't understand why, for example, the D2x at the same price or higher doesn't receive the same criticism. If anything, we're expecting the image quality of the M8 to be better than the D2x.

Leica are a premium brand and their camera and lenses are expensive because of the time and trouble they take to make them, the quantities in which they make them and to some degree, the country in which they make them. Would I like Leica to make them to a lower standard in order to reduce the price? Not at all.

Dougg

08-02-2006, 22:46

There's a lot of talk about this camera being over-priced but I don't understand why, for example, the D2x at the same price or higher doesn't receive the same criticism. If anything, we're expecting the image quality of the M8 to be better than the D2x.I think some are already arguing (as they did with the Epson) that the M8 is simply not competitive with today's pro dSLRs... I'ts missing TTL viewing, zoom lenses, auto-focus, program-AE, a dozen or more scene-type modes, etc. How can one take Leica seriously in the face of this scant capability?

"Not competitive"? Of course not, that's the point; it's a rangefinder, thus with quite a different user interface. If one needs all the features of a dSLR then that's what one should get and the RF's are overpriced; if one prefers the Rangefinder Way, isn't it great to have a couple of those on the market too... :D

nrb

08-03-2006, 01:17

Hmmm. The Canon 1DS-II seems to be built to the same standard as the 1V, good for 150,000 shots before a $200 shutter replacement and then on to another 150,000. If the M8 can do that, I don't see much of an argument here.
Life expectancy of digital can not be counted on the number of images produced. Long before it gets mechanically worn out their built-in obsolescence in terms of number of pixels and sensor size will give them away.
How much will be worth a 2 year old M8 the day a spanking new M9 shows up displaying a 20 M full-frame super steady shot sensor and being able to use a 35 summicron lens at its proper 35 mm angle of view ?

jaapv

08-03-2006, 01:30

Why not? Plenty of pro's are still shooting the Canon 1D,Canon and Nikon are happily replacing worn shutters, and I cannot see myself replacing the Canon 10D or my Digilux2 in the forseeable future. I'll just add a M8. What is great now doesn't suddenly turn into cr@p overnight because some engineer dreams up something <new-better>. It is not digital that is the problem, it is the "I wanna keep up with the advertising"mentality. 95% of the so-called "upgrades"on new technical products (not just camera's) are gimmicks anyway. Real improvements are few and far between.
I think most Leica M buyers with their affinity for vintage equipment will be far less affected by this virus than the average DSLR affectionado.

taffer

08-03-2006, 02:10

Have a Pasteis de Nata for me, please, and a cup of "Chave d'Ouro" (Uma bica!), and take a nice picture of bronze Fernando Pessoa (Rua Garret). I miss Lisbon so.

Pasteis de Nata ! Oh si. My very first food a few minutes after landing in Lisbon (and taxiing to Oriente to jump on the first Alfa to Porto) together with a bica at the station bar/store. Delicious!

Sorry for the OT. I just had a memory-trigger episode.

As for the M8, I'm afraid I won't :( RD-1s or Digikon, that's to be seen but I see it more feasible.

jaapv

08-03-2006, 02:38

As for the M8, I'm afraid I won't :( RD-1s or Digikon, that's to be seen but I see it more feasible.

Don't worry, mate your time will come! At your age I was shooting an EXA II ! Ain't I a fossil?:bang: :D

taffer

08-03-2006, 03:03

Don't worry, mate your time will come! At your age I was shooting an EXA II ! Ain't I a fossil?:bang: :D

LOL !

Cute camera though :p

http://members.tripod.com/Nigel_Richards/Othercameras/exa_ii.htm

Kevin

08-03-2006, 03:49

It often happens that products are recalled because of mechanical, electronic or software defects. Sometimes you just cannot test everything before a product is shipped.

Paying to be an alpha tester just doesn't sound right to me.

I would rather shoot with my film rangefinders for a year longer and then know all of the problems before I buy into the new technology.

Even though money does grow on trees, my small branch will not be spent to perform functional tests on someone else's product, no matter how legendary the company which made it might be.

nemjo

08-03-2006, 04:44

Hi all,

reading this thread makes me wonder : is it really necessary to explain something even not planned to do?:eek:
There must be something very attractive then.:rolleyes:
So if I could afford, I'd buy one - but can not:bang:

nemjo

Mark Norton

08-03-2006, 05:44

Paying to be an alpha tester just doesn't sound right to me.
...no matter how legendary the company which made it might be.

I don't think we're going to be alpha testers at all. The camera has likely been out there for a while in various guises and the last year will have been spent refining the firmware and getting it production ready. Sean Reid here is more than likely to have been one such tester which gives me great confidence the camera is going to be as good as we hope.

Kevin! Don't know if you're German - Kevin doesn't sound a very German name to me - but I would have thought that you'd be more supportive of this effort by your compatriots. Leica is indeed a legendary company and they deserve to succeed.

Kevin

08-03-2006, 07:06

I don't think we're going to be alpha testers at all. The camera has likely been out there for a while in various guises and the last year will have been spent refining the firmware and getting it production ready. Sean Reid here is more than likely to have been one such tester which gives me great confidence the camera is going to be as good as we hope.

Kevin! Don't know if you're German - Kevin doesn't sound a very German name to me - but I would have thought that you'd be more supportive of this effort by your compatriots. Leica is indeed a legendary company and they deserve to succeed.

Oh I am very supportive of Leica (I have two M6 bodies and 3 of their lenses) and I believe this camera is going to be a great shooter. I just know that bugs creep through, even though a company has tried everything possible to spot them before first shipment.

I suppose that I am bit more patient than most here ;-)

jaapv

08-03-2006, 07:16

Well, nobody hammered Mercedes for recalling 1.5 million (figures from Auto Motor und Sport) E-class vehicles in 2005, so in analogy I guess Leica is going to make good on any glitches.

Kevin

08-03-2006, 07:38

Sure thing, but the expectation of finally getting a great tool and then to be disappointed by the glitch is just too much for me to bear.

It is probably like a mother holding its newborne for the first time when suddenly the nurse comes to take it away for a few weeks until it heals.

jaapv

08-03-2006, 07:58

Actually, I had one of the earliest Digilux 2's and a C-lux1 from the very first batch from the factory - no glitches at all. And these camera's were tested to a far lower level than the M8 will be. Add to that: built in small series in Germany, by a workforce that is highly trained in in the mechanical part of high-end camera's, tested mechanics and with the experience of the DMR, that is fairly similar in the digital part, well, I don't really expect any of the foul-ups that some DSLR's exhibited over the years. Most of those had to do with AF and the like, which the M8 doesn't even have. It is noticable, by the way, that the newest generations of all major digital camera makers attract very few to no negative reports in this respect.

Kevin

08-03-2006, 08:12

Hmm, you almost have me convinced.

But I am a firm believer in Murphey's Law!

Of course you know what that is, oder?

jaapv

08-03-2006, 08:31

Yesterday my bread and jam fell on the floor facing the right side up! :D

akitadog

08-03-2006, 14:18

I would love to have one, but until I win the lotto I will have to stick with my Leica M6 and lenses and Mamiya 6 and lenses.

HHK:

Bob Ross

08-03-2006, 14:23

Sure thing, but the expectation of finally getting a great tool and then to be disappointed by the glitch is just too much for me to bear.

Expectations are wishes....be careful about what you wish for........you know how it goes;)

Kevin

08-04-2006, 02:07

Yesterday my bread and jam fell on the floor facing the right side up! :D

I think there is some law of physics that explains why the jam-side will face the floor more times than not.

Therefore you were just lucky this time ;)

jaapv

08-04-2006, 02:54

Murphey's law clearly implies it will fall face down each and every time! ;)

ffttklackdedeng

08-04-2006, 06:54

I think there is some law of physics that explains why the jam-side will face the floor more times than not.

This tells us that jaapv's table is very high (so the bread had anough space/time for a full looping)! :D

johnastovall

08-04-2006, 10:05

I'll be buying it sooner than later. Just got to sell off some trap guns I don't use anymore.

jaapv

08-04-2006, 10:11

Welcome Johnastovall. Let's hear you introduce yourself! :)

etrigan63

08-07-2006, 20:34

I have my name on the waiting list at Cameras West. I plan on trading in my beloved Canon 1D Mk II + harem of lenses for the Leica M8 plus a 50mm f 1.4 to start. The Canon takes great pics but it is a tremendous load to have to drag around especially to trade shows.

Stephanie Brim

08-07-2006, 20:41

I'll be spending my $5,000 on a car, unfortunately. But the car will get me out of town to a better job, and that job will get me money for school, and school will get me a better job, and that job may get me the camera of my dreams. I don't think it'll be the M8, though. By the time I can get one, it's more likely to be the M10. :D

frobson

08-09-2006, 07:12

Yes,

Another poll. With the digital world becoming the mainstream, I am curious how many woll but this new digital rangefinder camera.
It is not a question of whether to buy the new M8 but how many bodies you need to buy to ensure always having one available. My Digilux 2 was returned to Solms for warranty repair in June it will not be returned until mid September at the earliest . The problem is Solms have been waiting for new CCD boards. and they are two and a half month late! This is the worrying part of Leica developing digital cameras they will always be buying in the most important parts. If the supplier decides to stop production of certain items you could have a non-usable very expensive camera.

rvaubel

08-10-2006, 14:41

It is not a question of whether to buy the new M8 but how many bodies you need to buy to ensure always having one available...... If the supplier decides to stop production of certain items you could have a non-usable very expensive camera.

Hopefully, the M8 will be less suseptable to this problem. A adequate supply of parts and a dedicated service staff is supposedly a given with the M8. This is not a throw away point and shoot.

BTW, it is precisely Epsons lack parts and service that drives most of us RD1 users to the Leica. There is nothing wrong with the camera, per se. Actually its a great camera, but corporate backup is sorely lacking.

I'm going to use my RD1 as a backup to the M8. In fact, if I had the M8, the Epson would be at DAG having a wonky rangefinder aligned. I'll be zone focusing till then.

Rex

OldNick

08-11-2006, 12:55

I voted for "not interested" because I can't justify the investment in a camera that will soon be made obsolete by new developments. I still get satisfaction from using Barnack Leicas. Is it my imagination, or do others find that the late model Leicas need a lot more service than the LTM Leicas? I can't see an advantage to making a larger investment to gain less reliability. Just my two cents!

Jim N.

nrb

08-12-2006, 06:01

You're absolutely right, Jim.
The word LEICA stands for 35 mm film in simple and reliable cameras, served by the best glass money can buy.
nuno

John Robertson

08-12-2006, 16:22

Not remotely interested, to dear, and will be out of date in a few years!!

GeneW

08-12-2006, 17:09

I don't know that I could ever justify the cost of one, but it certainly interests me. I'll be keenly following the reviews. One part of me worries that if this cam isn't successful, Leica, as we know it, may not survive much longer.

Gene

J. Borger

08-12-2006, 21:38

What i find realy amusing is that people who shoot 30 year old Leicas, Canonets etc and want a digital camera to be as basic as can be .. with zero to none facilities if possible...... are the same people who are afraid the M8 will be obsolete in short time?

It will be just the same camera as an M7 with some digital facilities ... meterig will be the same in a couple of years, the histogram will look the same, the viewfinder will look the same too.
The sensor is just a filmtype ..... and 10MP will outperform scanned film in a couple of years too.

I am ready for the M8 .. sold my Canon 1Ds and assorted L glas last week ... my hands are free now!

I am sure the M8 will be a huge succes ..... i just hope Leica can fullfill demand in a reasonable time.