View Full Version : Rumour: M8 Falls Short
vincenzo
08-17-2006, 05:48
I have heard from reliable sources that pre=production samples of the M8 have been presented to the most major and well know photojournalism agencies. These agencies have turned their noses up to the M8.
I can only presume this is because the cameras fall short technologically in some ways as these agencies normally recieve the cameras for free or at a heavily discounted price. Leica want to be associated with their brand and have their photographers use their kit so if its true, its a blow to their marketing.
Well, its just a rumour going around, we will soon find out....
Nachkebia
08-17-2006, 05:54
Every mangum guys going to get it free? yaamiee :)
Flyfisher Tom
08-17-2006, 05:55
what sort of 'reliable sources' are these ;)
Most pro photojournalists and news organizations use autofocus Canon and Nikon DSLRs, so I would not be surprised if the M8 does not suit their needs.
cheers
rogue_designer
08-17-2006, 05:56
It could also be due to legacy adoption of Nikon and Canon kits at this point - with heavy workflow tools in place for their files on location already.
Who knows... too many variables, and not enough information.
I for one am tired of reading and listening to all the rumours floating around out there. It seems that some people just want to see themselves in print or lsiten to themselves talk. It's only a few weeks or so till the announcement and reviews.
As you said Vincenzo, " we will soon find out."
Well, in the light of two <highly gaurded because of embargo> but lyrical reports we had in this forum by knowledgeble members who have actually handled the camera, this sounds like err.... just a rumour, and a malicious nonsensical one at that. Indeed why should Leica offer the camera to news agencies that will have, at best, limited use for it? Let's wait and see, I am sure that a month will be long enough for many rumours to turn up.
I guess it's part of the preliminary rumour lifecycle that some of them are "bad" and others are "good".
Philipp
I'm sure it would be a feather in Leica's cap if they could advertize that photojournalists have re-adopted the M camera but I doubt that they are counting on that group to become a market for sales. It's not like the mass of current photojournalists ever used Leicas and only just retired them in the last few years because of pressure to "go digital". Photojournalists/news photogs had been using Af Canon/Nikon SLRs for years before digital entered the picture. However all Leica needs is a few "veteran" news/journalists to let themselves be seen with an M8 hanging around their necks, to boost their ad campaign to the true market for the M8, which is guys like us :D
In that case they'd probably pay them so much to be seen wearing the camera, that they would never turn their nose up, no matter how bad the camera....;)
Leica is a brand that is very very little used by profesionals phtogaphers. So it would be no suprise
Todd.Hanz
08-17-2006, 06:59
I'm sure the M8 would be better recieved if it was equipped with a 17-35mm Af Zoom :)
Todd
Flyfisher Tom
08-17-2006, 07:04
I'm sure the M8 would be better recieved if it was equipped with a 17-35mm Af Zoom :)
Todd
Or if it was made of kevlar and bullet-proof :) That would be a selling point for photojournalists.
telenous
08-17-2006, 07:05
I wouldn't be surprised if most PJ's had a rangefinder soul - be it Leica, Nikon, Canon, Contax, Voigtlander or ZI. I would be even less suprised if some of them forked some of their own cash to own one of the M8s, especially if the big photoagencies do not buy the camera for them.
If we, as a bunch, are enthusiastic for the M8, they must be rapturous.
anselwannab
08-17-2006, 07:35
That's not a rumor, its an accusation. Well, its not really an accusation, because the rumor just says its bad, with out any assertions. No mention of ergonomics, work-flow, or image quality, or who even looked at them.
I know a lot of reporters were clammoring for a digital rangefinder during the last election cycle here. Maybe people are so spoiled by AF that the reporters will have a hard time going back. Or maybe some of the high end P&S cameras have good enough high ISO and image stability for quick grab shots for online and magazines that the dRFs missed a window.
I think the only thing you can say is that the M8 will be expensive.
Mark
Rich Silfver
08-17-2006, 08:59
I have heard from reliable sources that pre=production samples of the M8 have been presented to the most major and well know photojournalism agencies. These agencies have turned their noses up to the M8.
What agencies and what are the 'reliable sources' that you heard it from?
Pretty ridiculous rumour if you have no way of backing anything up and as far as I know it's not a rumour 'going around'.
John Camp
08-17-2006, 09:42
Photojournalists, aside from a few Leica enthusiasts who will use it part time, and a few dilettantes, will not use rangefinders. If they were going to use rangefinders, why didn't they use M7s instead of film F5s and Canons? The answer is that SLRs are far more flexible; try to put a 200-500 zoom on your rangefinder; or shoot 1-to-1 macros, for that matter. Try to find dedicated lighting systems for a Leica.
Leicas are specialty cameras; modern photojournalists would no more adapt Leicas and they'd adapt 4x5s or microscopes.
The other aspect is cost. When F5s were big, a lot of my friends carried F5s as frontline cameras, and N90s when they wanted something lighter and handier for routine shots. Same lenses, mostly the same features, and cheap enough that you could break two or three of them for the cost of one F5. Same is becoming true of digital. You could have a $4,000 D2x and back it up quite well with a $1,000 D80; same lenses, files good enough for any photojournalist application.
Leicas are not photojournalism cameras anymore. They once were, they aren't now. The replacement of film with a sensor makes no difference.
JC
Mark Norton
08-17-2006, 09:44
The fact that agencies may or may not be interested in adopting this camera is as much a reflection of their existing investment in equipment and processes as it might be about the quality of the M8.
The Epson R-D1 sets an absolute baseline of performance and many would say the pictures from it are pretty darn good when you stick a decent lens on the front. The Leica will improve on that, better sensor, much greater commitment to the product's success, higher manufacturing budget, more competent people and on and on and on. The DMR shows what Leica can achieve and I fully expect the M8 to improve even on that. Add the essential Leica M qualities and this thing is going to fly off the shelves and no amount of unsubstantiated troll-derived rumours will shake my conviction of the fact.
Call me blind, call me stupid, but I have two on order, sight unseen and I cannot wait.
photogdave
08-17-2006, 09:49
Congratulations on your appointment as Official Spokesman for Photojournalists!
Just kidding.:p
Not too long ago I was a photojournalist and would have used a Leica if I could have afforded one. (I used a second-hand F801 with cheap Tamron and Sigma zooms for most work and a Canon AE-1 with fast primes for low-light work.) Many PJs I knew around here carried a Leica M with them at all times. I'm pretty sure one or two NG and Magnum photogs still shoot with Leica M.
Leicas ARE still photojournalism cameras, even if not all photojournalists use them!
Check this:
http://www.magnumphotos.com/c/htm/FramerT_MAG.aspx?Stat=SearchImages_SearchThumb&V=CSearchT&SID=JMGEJNTIHCP9J&E=S_2V6DH6VRJZ8I6
Cheers!
Mark Norton
08-17-2006, 10:21
Clear as mud! I think it's incredible that in spite of the various dealer briefings, professional briefings, rep briefings, not a single picture of the M8 has leaked out....
Where there's smoke, there's fire. I fully expect the M8 to be subpar in the image quality category... It'll be the build and brand heritage that win most buyers.
I just don't expect a weak company like Leica to all of the sudden realistically challenge the big dogs in the digi cam world when it comes to improvements in image quality. In the digi world, Leica is a follower not a trend setter.
That's the great thing about rumors: we can believe the ones that say what we want to hear, and dismiss the ones that don't.
Leica-idolators have been happily recycling every snippet implying that the M8 will provide extraordinary image quality, or incorporate amazing technological breakthroughs, or grant the user unlimited power over time, space and dimension, or whatever -- invariably claiming these factoids originate from unimpeachably authoritative sources.
Now the Leica-bashers (and digital-haters) have their own rumor to cherish. Yes, the whole thing is silly, but at least we now have equal-opportunity silliness.
PS -- Am I missing something, or are the Magnum photos linked above pretty much utter kack? Sometimes it seems that if you shoot in black & white and avoid holding the camera level, you can persuade some people you've got a unique vision...
>>These agencies have turned their noses up to the M8.<<
The rumor seems improbable.
For one, mainstream photojournalism abandoned the Leica M in the 1960s and 1970s ... making it digital doesn't solve the advantages of SLR to daily PJ work.
A second point to consider: If Leica Ms were really given to press photographers for field testing, we'd be seeing them; people would be using them at public events, and the trade journalists would be writing about them. People in the news business are all about openness and public disclosure.
Gabriel M.A.
08-17-2006, 10:52
>>These agencies have turned their noses up to the M8.<<
The rumor seems improbable.
For one, mainstream photojournalism abandoned the Leica M in the 1960s and 1970s ... making it digital doesn't solve the advantages of SLR to daily PJ work.
A second point to consider: If Leica Ms were really given to press photographers for field testing, we'd be seeing them; people would be using them at public events, and the trade journalists would be writing about them. People in the news business are all about openness and public disclosure.
Yay! Somebody said it.
I also heard from a reliable source (my imagination is very reliable) that Jimmy Hoffa is taking some shots of Elvis with the M8 as we speak.
I wouldn't be surprised if most PJ's had a rangefinder soul - be it Leica, Nikon, Canon, Contax, Voigtlander or ZI. I would be even less suprised if some of them forked some of their own cash to own one of the M8s, especially if the big photoagencies do not buy the camera for them.
If we, as a bunch, are enthusiastic for the M8, they must be rapturous.
All the PJs I know personaly have never used a Leica RF, one had a R6.2 and three lenses.
Hm, at the last count Hermi and Markus (Citybeat) with Nikon D1, Matze and Michael with D2x (Bremer Magazin and Prinz), another Michael with Canon 1D MkII (Freelancer, rally and racing with a monthly column in two national magazins), Marcus with "c" (Bild Zeitung) with Canon 20d, Roland (Bremer Tageszeitungs AG) with Canon 20d and Canon D2000 (still in use).
Those are the PJs I call my friends :), there are a couple more who's names I can't remember now who use anything from Canon 20d to Nikon D2x.
The last pro photographer I met with a Leica M, or better two, was shooting celebs at the local bicycle race in january 2003 for a glossy magazine, haven't met him since.
I met one guy with a black Leica M with M3 style rewind and a CV15 shooting the town hall. He is a retired teacher :)
Mark Norton
08-17-2006, 11:39
Lots of negativity here, thank goodness Leica have had the vision to invest in this product.
J. Borger
08-17-2006, 12:17
Magnum does not employ the average Photojournalist .... it's a corporate image thing for Leica to have a couple of Magnum photographers adopting an M8 .. just as they shot the m6.. m7 ........ never exclusively .. and often just for their personal work and not for all general work.
It has the same impact as showing Michael Jordan wearing Nike shoes.
Nothing more .. nothing less.
I also expect Eggleston & Ralph Gibson to adopt the m8, i think they have already tested one :)
J. Borger
08-17-2006, 12:24
Lots of negativity here, thank goodness Leica have had the vision to invest in this product.
Agree .. everybody is trying to find arguments for himself not to buy .,... the usual forum talk with any new product..... look at it from the sunny side .. there will be no waiting lists if everybody hesitates :)
photogdave
08-17-2006, 12:25
I was at a Ralph Gibson presentation last year. He didn't sound very keen on digital.
He's a jerk anyway...
J. Borger
08-17-2006, 12:50
I was at a Ralph Gibson presentation last year. He didn't sound very keen on digital.
He's a jerk anyway...
Well that probably does not mean he will not show off with one if Leica pays him .. those guys are sponsored ..... big time!
I am interested in the jerk in him .... ?
photogdave
08-17-2006, 13:07
Full of himself
Seems unwilling to discuss his own work in any detail
Won't speak to you unless you're a young lady with a large chest...
I could be wrong. He may be a great guy if you do a workshop with him...
not a single picture of the M8 has leaked out....
Not true. I could photograph a prototype with a spy camera when I creeped in the Leica factory one night recently:
http://mogool.com/transfer/digitalM.jpg
;-Didier
Nachkebia
08-17-2006, 13:25
:D :D :D
It wont be hard for journalists to adobt new M8, looks like my D200 :D
I've met quite a few PJs & news photographers in DC & NYC who use, or used to use Leica M's, although if they still use them, it's for mostly personal work, long-term essays, etc. where film is still acceptable. These aren't friends or anything, just guys who've struck up conversations w/me after spotting 1 of my Leicas or other RFs.
All the PJs I know personaly have never used a Leica RF, one had a R6.2 and three lenses.
Hm, at the last count Hermi and Markus (Citybeat) with Nikon D1, Matze and Michael with D2x (Bremer Magazin and Prinz), another Michael with Canon 1D MkII (Freelancer, rally and racing with a monthly column in two national magazins), Marcus with "c" (Bild Zeitung) with Canon 20d, Roland (Bremer Tageszeitungs AG) with Canon 20d and Canon D2000 (still in use).
Those are the PJs I call my friends :), there are a couple more who's names I can't remember now who use anything from Canon 20d to Nikon D2x.
The last pro photographer I met with a Leica M, or better two, was shooting celebs at the local bicycle race in january 2003 for a glossy magazine, haven't met him since.
I met one guy with a black Leica M with M3 style rewind and a CV15 shooting the town hall. He is a retired teacher :)
I agree w/your main points. However, I don't think *only* Leica enthusiasts & dliettantes use Leicas or other RFs now, but RFs are definitely a niche tool for most photojournalists if only because they don't take really long lenses & few PJs nowadays have the kind of access where you can routinely get away w/using anything shorter than 200mm.
Photojournalists, aside from a few Leica enthusiasts who will use it part time, and a few dilettantes, will not use rangefinders. If they were going to use rangefinders, why didn't they use M7s instead of film F5s and Canons? The answer is that SLRs are far more flexible; try to put a 200-500 zoom on your rangefinder; or shoot 1-to-1 macros, for that matter. Try to find dedicated lighting systems for a Leica.
Leicas are specialty cameras; modern photojournalists would no more adapt Leicas and they'd adapt 4x5s or microscopes.
The other aspect is cost. When F5s were big, a lot of my friends carried F5s as frontline cameras, and N90s when they wanted something lighter and handier for routine shots. Same lenses, mostly the same features, and cheap enough that you could break two or three of them for the cost of one F5. Same is becoming true of digital. You could have a $4,000 D2x and back it up quite well with a $1,000 D80; same lenses, files good enough for any photojournalist application.
Leicas are not photojournalism cameras anymore. They once were, they aren't now. The replacement of film with a sensor makes no difference.
JC
Mark Norton
08-17-2006, 14:05
Not true. I could photograph a prototype with a spy camera when I creeped in the Leica factory one night recently:
http://mogool.com/transfer/digitalM.jpg
;-Didier
Gosh, isn't she gorgeous? Like a cross between a beached whale and the Star Ship Enterprise. A real scoop...
on a second though, the PJs I call my friends are probably too young, between 25 and 35. They all started with SLRs and stick to those.
When we visit the Photokina I'm the lonely one at the Zeiss and Leica booth and they play with the long Canon lenses :-)
Marcus with "c" does a lot of paparazzi work and he is only 5'12", he can hide behind the 1200/5.6 Canon lens looks too funny when he is the first where the realy long lenses are displayed. His most valued possession is a 400/2.8 with 1.4x and 2x TC.
Gosh, isn't she gorgeous? Like a cross between a beached whale and the Star Ship Enterprise. A real scoop...
More like a Klingon Bird of Prey, the Enterprise is probably made by Canon, judging from the color that is.
Check this:
http://www.magnumphotos.com/c/htm/FramerT_MAG.aspx?Stat=SearchImages_SearchThumb&V=CSearchT&SID=JMGEJNTIHCP9J&E=S_2V6DH6VRJZ8I6
Cheers!
and this (http://www.magnumphotos.com/c/htm/TreePf_MAG.aspx?Stat=Photographers_Portfolio&E=29YL53UWJC1).
Ywenz: I suspect if the M8's image quality is spectacular you won't agree.
ZeissFan
08-17-2006, 18:00
Oh no! The ever-reliable unreliable "reliable source."
Anyone remember the guy on pnet constantly quoting an "industry source" that said the Zeiss Ikon was delayed indefinitely and continued to trumpet this as "fact" even after people had bought the camera?
I place no faith in an anonymous reliable source. It might be true. It might not be true.
and this (http://www.magnumphotos.com/c/htm/TreePf_MAG.aspx?Stat=Photographers_Portfolio&E=29YL53UWJC1).
Ywenz: I suspect if the M8's image quality is spectacular you won't agree.
You are incorrect sir.
John Camp
08-17-2006, 20:05
I have an M7 and an RD-1 (and an M8 on order), so I have no problem with Leicas and think rangefinders are great cameras for specific uses. I have a good photojournalist friend who would love to have a Leica for her personal work. My point about Leicas is not that they're not capable, but that a real PJ, as opposed to a stringer or a part-timer, never knows what he/she is going to have to shoot next, and there are things that you just can't do well with a rangefinder. Some folks who haven't been employed fulltime as a PJ seem to think that the job is one great assignment after another; but it's not that way. You shoot a political picnic and then a portrait, and then you're sent out to do a piece on fingernail art or a skydiving show. If you show up with a Leica for the last two, you're in tough shape.
But I think that a serious artist with a particular vision could do very well with a Leica. Or even better: serious artists already have done well with Leicas, and will continue to do so.
JC
Bob Ross
08-17-2006, 20:35
Where there's smoke, there's fire. I fully expect the M8 to be subpar in the image quality category... It'll be the build and brand heritage that win most buyers.
I just don't expect a weak company like Leica to all of the sudden realistically challenge the big dogs in the digi cam world when it comes to improvements in image quality. In the digi world, Leica is a follower not a trend setter.
That is an interesting point of view. Image quality doesn't seem to a problem with the DMR and the M8 will no doubt be built on what Leica learned in accomplishing that. You need to frame what you mean by Leica being a weak company. They could be called that if compared to the digital comodity operations and that was the case over the decades, including the film era. You can't call Leica weak in term of creating a fine quality product a notch above the average commodity. Leica doesn't run with the big dogs, they are a mink. You are right that in the digital world, they are not the trend setter, they have instead waited until the technology matured to a point that they could risk their M-class form to the new media. I doubt subpar image quality, but there may be the quandry over the rangefinder form as a useful tool. The DSLR is a more universal, do everything, tool that can be used adequately by even the untrained, if necessary. Photo mills aren't going to invest in specialty tools that need to be learned. The rangefinder, like the view camera is "old generation" for individuals who think it makes a difference.
Bob
chrisweeks
08-17-2006, 20:41
no one at the ap or reuters has been presented with it.
interesting to see which "major services" actually received one.
>>and then you're sent out to do a piece on fingernail art <<
Close-ups were the hardest part when, in a mood of nostalgia, I started doing most of my PJ assignments with (Nikon) rangefinders around 1990. You learned to love the 135mm lens, because it could fill a frame with a sheet of writing paper and, if you cropped down to half the negative, could pass for a 200 or 300mm lens in a pinch. All the same, I was on salary for a newspaper staff, doing feature and newsfeature work that focused on writing accompanied by a few well-matched photos, so I wasn't doing straight PJ work. And I wasn't competing for cover photos. The few times I found myself in a mob of PJs trying to compete for a winning news shot, I usually didn't do very well, even with SLRs ... it's tough work, and I had too contemplative a personality to excel at it.
NIKON KIU
08-17-2006, 21:57
I have heard from reliable sources that pre=production samples of the M8 have been presented to the most major and well know photojournalism agencies. These agencies have turned their noses up to the M8.
I can only presume this is because the cameras fall short technologically in some ways as these agencies normally recieve the cameras for free or at a heavily discounted price. Leica want to be associated with their brand and have their photographers use their kit so if its true, its a blow to their marketing.
Well, its just a rumour going around, we will soon find out....
C'mon people,
The man admits he is spreading rumors! If we can't spread rumors on the internet, on a discusion forum, what are we suppose to do??
You Leica guys take this too personal! bad mouth my Nikons all you want, I am not gonna take it personally....I SHALL defend.
Kiu
IGMeanwell
08-17-2006, 22:19
If Leica is smart they will try to get this camera endoresed by the a few professionals (it doesn't have to be many)
Nikon's major ad campaign is the inserts they put into photomags that show usually three professionals (the normals are Mike Colon, Vincent Versace) and they talk about what lenses they prefer and bodies... it shows their work and then talks of upcoming Nikon photo trips and classes. .
Canon's most lucrative ad is just one picture of all these photographers at a Track event... showing aaaaallllll the white lenses (with one Nikon mixed in there) and it simply says its obvious to see Canon is number one with sports photographers.
I think if Leica could get some endorsements they would boost the excitment over the camera. Obviously I am speaking towards non-leica owners... not the people on the wait list.
John Camp
08-18-2006, 07:27
I'll endorse it, if they'll give me a free camera; or even a free hat. :D
anselwannab
08-18-2006, 07:30
Leica, I think, could do well by emulating Mercedes a few years back with their nostalgia and heritige ads. A chevy and a Mercedes will both get you there, but what you use depends on style.
Leica, I think, could do well by emulating Mercedes a few years back with their nostalgia and heritige ads. A chevy and a Mercedes will both get you there, but what you use depends on style.
This is very good idea. The brand heritage of Leica is more marketable than any bullet points of advantages of RF cameras that Leica can scrunch together...
Leica, I think, could do well by emulating Mercedes a few years back with their nostalgia and heritige ads. A chevy and a Mercedes will both get you there, but what you use depends on style.
Yeah, but you'll notice that Mercedes has now dumped that theme. Its current ads position it very aggressively as a contemporary, technologically advanced, performance-oriented company whose products appeal to young, hip people.
I think Leica's situation might be similar. After all, many of the people who most appreciate Leica nostalgia and heritage are people who detest all things digital and feel betrayed that Leica would even introduce a digital RF camera. (Just read some of the posts on RFF to see what I mean!)
To get a return on its investment, Leica is going to have to go after NEW buyers with this camera. And while many of those buyers might appreciate "heritage" in the sense of "we've been doing this for so long that we've gotten really good at it," they're only going to respond if the product itself is seen as modern, significant, and responsive.
back alley
08-18-2006, 11:15
even dylan went electric...
Exactly. As Flyfisher Tom, Ben Z, & you have already pointed out, any lack of enthusiasm for the M8 among PJs almost certainly has more to do w/the fact that it's an RF, & not an SLR, than any of the M8's shortcomings as a digital device. It's been @ least 40 years since the heyday of RFs (& even then, plenty of PJs used TLRs, Speed Graphic's, etc. as their main cameras).
I have an M7 and an RD-1 (and an M8 on order), so I have no problem with Leicas and think rangefinders are great cameras for specific uses. I have a good photojournalist friend who would love to have a Leica for her personal work. My point about Leicas is not that they're not capable, but that a real PJ, as opposed to a stringer or a part-timer, never knows what he/she is going to have to shoot next, and there are things that you just can't do well with a rangefinder. Some folks who haven't been employed fulltime as a PJ seem to think that the job is one great assignment after another; but it's not that way. You shoot a political picnic and then a portrait, and then you're sent out to do a piece on fingernail art or a skydiving show. If you show up with a Leica for the last two, you're in tough shape.
But I think that a serious artist with a particular vision could do very well with a Leica. Or even better: serious artists already have done well with Leicas, and will continue to do so.
JC
J. Borger
08-18-2006, 12:29
even dylan went electric...
This says it all ...... the best analogy i read in a while :)
Gabriel M.A.
08-18-2006, 12:31
even dylan went electric...
And the Beatles went Baroque, and Nixon went to China --which is very off the point.
The point is: believe! Take that leap of faith. Try new things. Ah buleev! Ah see d' lite! Ah buleeev!
DaveKennedy
08-18-2006, 12:53
Well I have to say I'm disappointed at the low opinion of working news photographers here. I've had a Leica nearly my entire career and haven't been able to use it because of the total switch to digital. Most of the working pro news photos I know have Leica's but THEY CAN'T USE THEM because no one uses film anymore in the news business.
You think I like using a "soul-less" Canon MkII? Nope.... I'd much prefer a small quiet camera that I can make photos with. Rather than the 20 pounds or so of great I have to carry around every day.
I'd gladly put down the $$$ if I knew that image quality was there. I don't need a zoom on every body but I do need a fast, sharp, wide lens and I'd love it to be on a Leica Digi-M.
DaveK
If I could have only one camera, it would have to be a DSLR because of its flexibility. There is really no other choice, especially for a professional.
If I could add a second camera, it would be a digital rangefinder which I would use 80% of the time. Hardly bigger than a pointn'shoot, it would serve as the regular. day to day camera . Its more limited capacities rarely come up for normal stuff. And the DSLR is ready for the soccer games, etc.
No pro is going to give up his DSLR for an M8. But a lot of them would sure like to have one.
Rex
Harry Lime
08-19-2006, 11:19
Leica is a brand that is very very little used by professionals photographers. So it would be no suprise
Says who? Obviously news photography has been mostly digital for the past 5-10 years, but there still are plenty of pros shooting with Leicas and there are many more out there clamoring for a digital M.
Recently I had a chance to talk to Gray Knight (VII Photo) and he was telling us about a recent shoot he did on poaching in a African national park. He ended up shooting it with his Leica M cameras, because his big Canon DLSR, drew too much attention and immediately identified him as a journalist.
There is a lot of pent up demand out there among pros for a high quality, compact and low key digital cameras and unless the M8 turns out to be a piece of junk it will fit the bill very nicely.
Harry Lime
08-19-2006, 11:22
No pro is going to give up his DSLR for an M8. But a lot of them would sure like to have one.
Rex
Exactly and that's how things worked for a very long time.
Simon Larbalestier
08-19-2006, 12:17
Photojournalists, aside from a few Leica enthusiasts who will use it part time, and a few dilettantes, will not use rangefinders. If they were going to use rangefinders, why didn't they use M7s instead of film F5s and Canons?
SNIP
Leicas are specialty cameras; modern photojournalists would no more adapt Leicas and they'd adapt 4x5s or microscopes.
SNIP
Leicas are not photojournalism cameras anymore. They once were, they aren't now. The replacement of film with a sensor makes no difference.
JC
Funny to read this a few of my PJ friends were debating this the other night in Bangkok and we split 50/50 in our preferences.
For what i do the Leica is the most reliable tool for the job and the M8 will fit in nicely with the film bodies i have- allowing for the best results in both formats as it were. If i had the cash i would, like Mark Norton, order two and like him i'm very excited by its arrival ......:)
[quote=Harry Lime
There is a lot of pent up demand out there among pros for a high quality, compact and low key digital cameras and unless the M8 turns out to be a piece of junk it will fit the bill very nicely.[/quote]
When I leave the house and grab a camera , it is almost always the RD1 bag. Why? Because it's a small kit with a couple of lenses. The "no hassle" factor cannot be overemphasized. The RD1 fills the role of a Pointn'shoot and a real camera. Thats what its really all about, small size with no sacrifice in quality. The M8 will do the same as the RD1 but better.
I expect a few older PJ's will glom onto the M8 even if the have to pay for it themselves. What I expect to happen is that they will find they are actually using it for their professional work. That's what I found out after I bought the RD1. I never expected to be using it 90% of the time, but when you think about it how many times you leave the house do you actually expect to need an SLR. Better to leave the house with a mere rangefinder than no camera at all.
Rex
Canon's most lucrative ad is just one picture of all these photographers at a Track event... showing aaaaallllll the white lenses (with one Nikon mixed in there) and it simply says its obvious to see Canon is number one with sports photographers.
Winchester ran an ad like that years ago. An old group picture of a couple dozen Texas Rangers, armed to the teeth, ready to fight the forces of evil. All but one of them were holding Winchester rifles. (probably got his salsa from New-York City...)
Way back in the late sixties people paid me to take pictures. I gained a bit of experience with Leicas. I was low chicken in the pecking order and nobody else wanted to use them. Pros droped range finders like a hot potato.
Funny to read this a few of my PJ friends were debating this the other night in Bangkok and we split 50/50 in our preferences.
.:)
I started high school in 1960 and jumped on the SLR bandwagon right away with the puchase of a Beseler Topcon. I used that camera until 1964 when I went to UC Berkeley just in time for the Free Speech Movement and the Vietnam anti-war protests. I was the Chief Photographer for the Daily CAL , the largest (25000 circ) daily college newspaper. I traded in my Topcon for the newly introduced, compact Nikormat. With just 3 small prime focus lenses, I covered events for 4 years. Remember this was before zoom lenses were any good. So my kit consisted of the 105mm Nikor (very compact) the 58mm F1.8 and an off brand 28mm (can't remember). The point is, this kit was about the same size as my current RD1 outfit. I was extremely daring in those days and the mobility provided by my kit was useful.
Flash forword 30 years and I got my N90 with about 5Kg of zoom lenses. I hadn't really noticed this creeping weight and bulk issue but.....
Flash forword to 2005 with my new Canon 20D and 10kg of zooms and primes.
By now I have multiple camera bags for different uses. There is no way everything could fit in an actually camera bag. Takes a Pelican for that.
Thats when I bought the RD1 on a whim. Little did I know that I was actually returning to my roots of lightweight, compact kit. Much to my surprise, have found that for day to day use, the rangefinder suits my needs better than the DSLR. No, I'm not selling my 20D, its a great camera when its needed.
I expect that as PJs become aacquainted with a digital rangefinder, they will see what I have seen. The M8 will not displace the DSLR's of the world. The M8 will serve as a suppliment, not a replacement for the DSLR. Some will use it more than others for their professional work, but I think that the M8 will be a part of many PJ's kit at least for personal use.
Rex
Simon Larbalestier
08-19-2006, 13:39
Rex
i'd see it as a suppliment to my film cameras but until it's in my hands and i've completed some projects with it - i think it's a bit early to say.....
Rex
i'd see it as a suppliment to my film cameras but until it's in my hands and i've completed some projects with it - i think it's a bit early to say.....
I do film too. My little bio ommitted the fact that I have and use 3 CV rangefinder bodies that I use with my M mount lenses. That's actually how I got back into rangefinders. What was surprising is that the RD1 not only supplanted my film useage but also that of my SLR.
The film vs digital thing is actually a seperate issue for me. My basic feeling is for any commercial uses, film is dead. But that doesn't mean that film will die. It will just become a artistic, craft thing that will always have users. I don't expect to close my darkroom anytime soon but I don't use it very often anymore. However, nothing beats holding a real negative in your hand and printing a real print in a real darkroom. Unfortunetly, it takes hours of setup and cleanup and about 4 stiff drinks to get through it.
Rex
Harry Lime
08-19-2006, 23:14
When I leave the house and grab a camera , it is almost always the RD1 bag. Why? Because it's a small kit with a couple of lenses. The "no hassle" factor cannot be overemphasized. The RD1 fills the role of a Point n' shoot and a real camera. Thats what its really all about, small size with no sacrifice in quality. The M8 will do the same as the RD1 but better.
I don't work as a PJ for a paper or agency, but instead shoot documentary type work, photo-essays and cover events and people as required.
This spring I shot a photo-essay on post Katrina New Orleans. I took two M bodies with 35&50mm lenses and my Xpan. I left the 5D at home and was glad I did. At the moment NO is a pretty rough place and being able to work without a camera bag and with a camera that looks like a point and shoot or antique that could disappear in to my jacket was at times vital to my continued health. In a place like that a fancy DSLR with a 24-70mm zoom sticks out like a sore thumb and screams: "Hey look at me! I'm a walking cash machine!"
Another observation I have made is that some people get spooked by a large SLR, even if it is mounting a compact prime. The clack of the shutter, whirring of the motor (not to mention flash) all seem to contribute to them being 'on camera', thus making them feel ill at ease, especially in close quarters. I've never had that problem when I'm shooting with my M's. There is something very disarming about them, perhaps it's their old world charm or small size, but whatever it is people do not seem nearly as threatened by them as by a SLR.
I also find the amount and type of noise generated by an SLR can be very intrusive and even offensive, when working in a delicate, intimate situation. The subdued 'snick' of a well oiled M is very inoffensive and non-intrusive. A few years ago I was in Germany and attended a service in a large cathedral. Standing on the side I was able to discretely take a few shots with my M7 at about 1/30th, without being noticed and intruding on the ceremony, which would have been a very offensive thing to do. Try doing that with an SLR/DSLR.
I expect a few older PJ's will glom onto the M8 even if the have to pay for it themselves. What I expect to happen is that they will find they are actually using it for their professional work. That's what I found out after I bought the RD1. I never expected to be using it 90% of the time, but when you think about it how many times you leave the house do you actually expect to need an SLR. Better to leave the house with a mere rangefinder than no camera at all.
All I can say is that I pray nightly that Leica had the sense to properly seal the body against dust and moisture.
:rolleyes:
IGMeanwell
08-20-2006, 00:48
I find it funny when someone says DSLRs with a zoom scream "hey look at me I am a walking cash machine"
When anyone who knows anything about cameras and sees that little red Leica badge knows what it is and how much they cost
being discrete is about your etiquette... I did an entire wedding with my D50 and two primes (no flash) ... the minister glowed about how little he noticed me and asked if I would be interested in doing any other of his ceremonies
granted a leica would have been quieter but your still a person holding a camera
its not like your a ninja with a 50mm
canonetc
08-20-2006, 02:35
I believe many PJ;s used the Leica for lens-quality as well as unobtrusiveness. It came from an era where you were forced to rely on your own compositional skill and visual reading of light instead of letting the camera do it for you. SLR's made things "easier" and "faster" (no need to use framelines, what you see is what you might get, plus a motordrive). With a digital RF from Leica, it could be a dream come true for many PJ's in today's digital media marketplace. You get the "purity" of the Golden Age of Journalism to supply today's digital demands.
Special M8 models could look like an M3....... or the Leica "O"... :)
Chris
canonetc
David Murphy
08-20-2006, 02:58
I was under the impression that photo journalists have pretty much been using Nikon (e.g. F) and then later Canon since about 1958. When did they ever use Leica's ? Before that I think they used press cameras. Was there ever a mass adoption of Leica by the news media anywhere at any time ? I doubt it.
I was at a lot of press conferences in the early 1970's (helping to shoot 16mm film) and the *only* still cameras I saw were Nikon F's. It was not a bias towards Nikon, it was total dominance by Nikon.
I was under the impression that photo journalists have pretty much been using Nikon (e.g. F) and then later Canon since about 1958.......
I was at a lot of press conferences in the early 1970's and the *only* still cameras I saw were Nikon F's.
David
Your right, the Nikon F came out in 1959 and within a few short years totally dominated photojornalism. When I started high school in 1960 I was the first kid to have an SLR, a Beseler Topcon D. I used that camera for the school newspaper, yearbook as well as my own personal use. I sold the schools medium and large format stuff to purchase a Durst 606 enlarger and other 35mm equipment.
When I started college at Cal Berkeley four years later, their was still a few Speed Graphics, but the 35mm SLR had basically taken over. As the Vietnam War wound up, the Nikon F became an icon of photojornalism.
But in the previous war, the Korean War, the icon was the rangefinder. David Douglas Duncan and other war journalist made sure of that, Ironically, with Nikon lenses discovered by Duncan a few months before in Japan! But still, rangefinders where the only tool suitable for wartime conditions.
If Leica's M8 lives up to expectations, I wouldn't be surprised to see one in a lot pf pros bag of tricks.
Rex
Going further back to WWII, the rangefinder was also the best choice in many situations. Again, ironically the German Leica was the camera of choice. The Soviets were cranking out copies of rangefinder cameras thruout the war and continued on till the end of the cold war.
Meanwhile, back in civilian-land most of the photags were using their Speed Graphics because size was not important. Contact printing was used more often for speeds sake and you could crop an enlargement radically to get a "telephoto" shot. Also, remember, as always, editors always want more "megapixels" than they need! Basically you had to be a bit of a rebel to use a rangefinder but there were plenty off them.
Today, the case for the rangefinder can be made because the shear weight and bulk of a fully equipped DSLR kit is getting overwheming. The fact is, some combat photoghraphers are using Pointn'shoots as there main camera! In fact, its gotten to the point that almost all photoghraphers take a Pointn'shoot with them wherever they go.
I don't need to take an extra camera with me when I go out with my rangefinder, My bag is small, a camera and a couple lenses. Just the ticket for the working pro or PJ in a lot of situations.
I was under the impression that photo journalists have pretty much been using Nikon (e.g. F) and then later Canon since about 1958.......
I was at a lot of press conferences in the early 1970's and the *only* still cameras I saw were Nikon F's.
David
Your right, the Nikon F came out in 1959 and within a few short years totally dominated photojornalism. When I started high school in 1960 I was the first kid to have an SLR, a Beseler Topcon D. I used that camera for the school newspaper, yearbook as well as my own personal use. I sold the schools medium and large format stuff to purchase a Durst 606 enlarger and other 35mm equipment.
When I started college at Cal Berkeley four years later, their was still a few Speed Graphics, but the 35mm SLR had basically taken over. As the Vietnam War wound up, the Nikon F became an icon of photojornalism.
But in the previous war, the Korean War, the icon was the rangefinder. David Douglas Duncan and other war journalist made sure of that, Ironically, with Nikon lenses discovered by Duncan a few months before in Japan! But still, rangefinders where the only tool suitable for wartime conditions.
Going further back to WWII, the rangefinder was also the best choice in many situations. Again, ironically the German Leica was the camera of choice. The Soviets were cranking out copies of rangefinder cameras thruout the war and continued on till the end of the cold war.
Meanwhile, back in civilian-land most of the photags were using their Speed Graphics because size was not important. Contact printing was used more often for speeds sake and you could crop an enlargement radically to get a "telephoto" shot. Also, remember, as always, editors always want more "megapixels" than they need! Basically you had to be a bit of a rebel to use a rangefinder but there were plenty off them.
Today, the case for the rangefinder can be made because the shear weight and bulk of a fully equipped DSLR kit is getting overwheming. The fact is, some combat photoghraphers are using Pointn'shoots as there main camera! In fact, its gotten to the point that almost all photoghraphers take a Pointn'shoot with them wherever they go.
I don't need to take an extra camera with me when I go out with my rangefinder, My bag is small, a camera and a couple lenses. Just the ticket for the working pro or PJ in a lot of situations.
I was doing newspaper work in the late 1980s and was overwhelmed by the ever-increasing size of professional SLRs, which was why I rebelled and went backwards to a rangefinder outfit. One of the driving factors was, I carried two and four to six lenses and carried my camera back all the time, on duty and off, and my back was starting to go out in my late 20s. Before the switch to digital, a lot of photographers were using only FM2s or Olympus OMs with a few prime lenses in order to save weight (and their backs).
The main reason I liked RFs (and continue to use them) is that they don't intimidate the person/people being photographed. They have very small size and yet are at least as capable as SLRs in 90 percent of photojournalism situations. And yes, I'm the crazed soccer dad out there taking pictures of his kids on weekends with an RF, a 135mm lens and lots of prefocusing.
You are incorrect sir.
Good... glad to hear it.
Recently I had a chance to talk to Gray Knight (VII Photo) and he was telling us about a recent shoot he did on poaching in a African national park. He ended up shooting it with his Leica M cameras, because his big Canon DLSR, drew too much attention and immediately identified him as a journalist.
It probably is the other way around. I've been taking photographs in African national parks for more than 15 years now, and the thing that really draws attention is using a lens that is shorter than 300 mm. You should have heard the number of comment that I got when pulling out a Leica M beside my (D)SLR. It ranged from: "can you get the shot with that old thing?" to "you can borrow my second body with my other 500 if you want"...
Greater Kudu in evening light
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e32/jaapv/Kudu.jpg
It probably is the other way around. I've been taking photographs in African national parks for more than 15 years now, and the thing that really draws attention is using a lens that is shorter than 300 mm. You should have heard the number of comment that I got when pulling out a Leica M beside my (D)SLR. It ranged from: "can you get the shot with that old thing?" to "you can borrow my second body with my other 500 if you want"...
Never was on a safari, but as far as I'm concerned it takes more than cojones to shoot a closeup of a lion or rhino with a 90 :)
Never was on a safari, but as far as I'm concerned it takes more than cojones to shoot a closeup of a lion or rhino with a 90 :)
Rhino is fine, I have walked to within 2 m of them, but Lion- well, they walk wto within 50 cm of you as long as you are in a (totally open:eek: ) vehicle, but on foot:maybe better not closer that 15 m.(sorry, I poste Old Scrappy before...)
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e32/jaapv/Old-Scrappy-1.jpgd
This one was on foot. I didn't dare to come closer than 200 mm on an APS sized DSLR (=300 equivalent):
Young male on Kill, North Luanga, Zambia
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e32/jaapv/lion200.jpg
I can't wait to try out my Noflexar 400 on Visoflex and M8....:):)
I find it funny when someone says DSLRs with a zoom scream "hey look at me I am a walking cash machine"
When anyone who knows anything about cameras and sees that little red Leica badge knows what it is and how much they cost
With Leica prices growing thus fast, even Leicaphiles often have no idea how much they cost today :)
But seriously, I think you overestimate camera expertise of an average thug. A Leica (esp. a brassed one) looks far less expensive than these huge, pro, shiny clicky Canikons.
Nachkebia
08-21-2006, 04:11
Check this out, http://www.dpreview.com/gallery/ricoh_grd_samples/
Yammie, M8 would be a blessing with my 21mm biogon :)
amateriat
08-21-2006, 04:12
I find it funny when someone says DSLRs with a zoom scream "hey look at me I am a walking cash machine" For a lot of the folks on the other side of the lens, size often equates expense.
When anyone who knows anything about cameras and sees that little red Leica badge knows what it is and how much they cost See above.
being discrete is about your etiquette... I did an entire wedding with my D50 and two primes (no flash) ... the minister glowed about how little he noticed me and asked if I would be interested in doing any other of his ceremonies To a degree. IMO, SLRs (film or digital) are a handicap in these instances, but hardly impossible to work with.
granted a leica would have been quieter but your still a person holding a camera its not like your a ninja with a 50mm Again, IMO, the RF leaves one less thing to sweat being discreet over.
- Barrett
IGMeanwell
08-21-2006, 23:00
Maybe I am giving everyday Joe's too much credit....
I still feel that in a journalistic setting if you have a camera to your eye you will draw attention to yourself.
It will be interesting to see how the M8 is marketed and if they are able to win over any photo-journalists.
The other factor in all this is FPS ... the one reason the Nikon D2h is still a popular camera among newspapers is despite it being only 4 mp it has a rapid shot of 8 fps. Canon's pro cameras are even faster.
A maual focus rangefinder with say only a 3fps will limit it's ability in the field.
OK, my wish for the N1 (N=Numerical) it follows the alphabet after M, and
differentiates it from all the other "D" cameras.
My personal application:
The N1 to be used with a 35mm 98% of the time and on occasion 50mm and 90mm ONLY.
- Ideally a FAST 35mm lens, f/1.4 or faster.
- The SLR for regular every day work, wide angle and telephoto applications.
- The RF as a camera ALWAYS with me for PJ or "discreet" work and ALWAYS
as a sidekick camera while shooting DSLR.
Must be compact like an M2/4
- with the 35mm Summicron must fits in a pocket.
Must be black or dark aspen green, Leica logo discreet, not flashy!
- must be a matte finish, not glossy, no dumb red Leica logo in front!
Metal body not an issue, metal under a carbon fiber shell is fine.
- this allow rough handling, and camera feels less cold in winter.
Weight is not really an issue, as more mass means less vibration.
A very quiet shutter, titanium??
If the camera is $$$, then a "Rado" style glass for the rear display.
Auto advance up to 4-6 frames per seconds mandatory.
Hand shutter one stroke crank fine, to conserve power.
Weatherproof.
Remote release with Pocket Wizard for field work.
Long lasting battery.
4-8 gig card capacity, CF to keep the same standard as my SLR
Built in Arca Swiss lips on the bottom plate
UV/IR capable!!! Suits the RF camera better than an SLR.
BTW, the nature of the digital sensor does not allow Super Angulon type lenses, ergo 35mm with an RF, and the DSLR for wider and/or longer lenses for WYSIWYG.
I always shot my IR pictures with a Leica. Less heat problem with film, and the SLR finder is a waste with IR. So the RF is the camera of choice. Great for novel wedding applications. I shot M4 at night with no IR filter, but a red IR gel on the flash istead..... Great shots, albeit my range was about 10 feet in those days. Discreet and unique.
OK, my wish for the N1 (N=Numerical) it follows the alphabet after M, and
differentiates it from all the other "D" cameras.
Doubtful, that was the name of the aborted Contax AF SLR system. In any case, the first M was the M3, there was never a M1. M for "messucher" (rangefinder), 3 because it had 3 sets of framelines.
IGMeanwell
08-23-2006, 22:21
I always shot my IR pictures with a Leica. Less heat problem with film, and the SLR finder is a waste with IR. So the RF is the camera of choice. Great for novel wedding applications. I shot M4 at night with no IR filter, but a red IR gel on the flash istead..... Great shots, albeit my range was about 10 feet in those days. Discreet and unique.
Just an FYI ... Fuji rereleased their S3 in a special IR + UV edition (http://www.dpreview.com/news/0608/06080904fujifilms3prouvir.asp)
Its aimed towards law enforcement than art... but interesting none-the-less
patrickjames
08-23-2006, 23:12
Leicas have become in relativity a contemplative camera. They are no longer a photojournalistical machine like in the olden days. Anyone who thinks that PJs are going to line up for an M8 are mistaken. Sure some will buy them because they are going to be good for some things, but out in the real world they just don't add up. I wish everyone would stop thinking that just because Cartier-Bresson and all of those old PJs used Leicas they are still doing so. That is a romantic pipedream. Try using a Canon with incredible autofocus and reactive speed. They are the best machines available to make pictures in the fast paced world. Are they romantic? Do they give you the warm and fuzzies like a Leica? NO. But they do the job better than any other machine available. That is why PJs use them and will continue to do so. The Leicas market is for those who have the warm and fuzzies and can blow $5000 on them. Pure and simple.
Leicas have become in relativity a contemplative camera. They are no longer a photojournalistical machine like in the olden days. Anyone who thinks that PJs are going to line up for an M8 are mistaken. ....... The Leicas market is for those who have the warm and fuzzies and can blow $5000 on them. Pure and simple.
Well. I'm lined up and hope to get a warm and fuzzy feeling about my new M , but its not all about that. I simply like rangefinders better for most uses. My poor old RD1 is getting a little frazzeled after 10,000 frames. The rubber grips are falling off, the rewind knob is heavily dinged where I dropped it, the paint is wearing off, and any warm and fuzzy feelings I get from her is like the feeling I get from my wife after 30 years of marriage.
If I could get a $1000 replacement, I would. But the M8 is the only game in town. Not that I don't lust after a Leica acquisition, but sex isn't everything.
Rex
Harry Lime
08-24-2006, 13:06
I find it funny when someone says DSLRs with a zoom scream "hey look at me I am a walking cash machine"
It has nothing to do with brand names and everything with perception. A large DSLR with a coffee can sized lens looks expensive. It looks like the big cameras that people see professionals use in the movies and on TV. In a lot of peoples minds big = expensive. Also anything digital is worth $$$ these days.
A Leica is small, concealable and to 99% of the public looks like an antique or point and shoot, as long as it's not in a $300 Luigi case.
A few years ago I was shooting at a demonstration and security wouldn't let me in to the press area, despite having a pass. When I asked him why he pointed at my three M cameras and said: "That's not a professional camera. This area is only for professionals." Luckily a newspaper shooter with a big Nikon DSLR came to my rescue and cleared things up. Eventually the security guy let me in but had a difficult time wrapping his head around the fact that my dinky looking M7 with the Leicavit and 35 Lux ASPH cost more than a 1Dx.
When anyone who knows anything about cameras and sees that little red Leica badge knows what it is and how much they cost
Most people who are thinking about where to get their next meal wouldn't know a Leica from a cheese-grater. But just to be on the safe side I put tape over the red dot.
being discrete is about your etiquette... I did an entire wedding with my D50 and two primes (no flash) ... the minister glowed about how little he noticed me and asked if I would be interested in doing any other of his ceremonies
granted a leica would have been quieter but your
Yes, but no one questioned your presence at the weeding or was surprised by it. It was a controlled, closed event that you were invited to and obviously you were very discreete and kept a low profile.
When I was shooting in that church I was a stranger witnessing a religious ceremony. It could have turned in to a very awkward situation, if I people had perceived my presence as being disruptive.
your still a person holding a camera its not like your a ninja with a 50mm
True, a Leica doesn't make you invisible, but there is a reason why Ninjas wear soft shoes instead of clogs.
A few years ago I was shooting at a demonstration and security wouldn't let me in to the press area, despite having a pass. When I asked him why he pointed at my three M cameras and said: "That's not a professional camera. This area is only for professionals." Luckily a newspaper shooter with a big Nikon DSLR came to my rescue and cleared things up. Eventually the security guy let me in but had a difficult time wrapping his head around the fact that my dinky looking M7 with the Leicavit and 35 Lux ASPH cost more than a 1Dx.
Luckily this works the other way around, too. When I showed my pictures from the local train station to a PJ friend lately he was totaly upset how I could get those shots when he was turned down when he asked for permission.
I hadn't asked anybody but nobody thought my Contax Gs where anything professional while he is aproached by security every time he enters the trainstation with his Canon equipment.
Just why nobody seems to be threatened by rangefinders, is a mystery to me. All the talk about the small size and all ,while true, doesn't fully explain the invisibilty aspect . What I notice is that people actually see the camera but for some reason dont get freaked out like they do with SLR's. Its not like they say "there's a guy with an old Leica" . They wouldn't know a Leica from a small tactical nuclear weapon which, for all they know, I could be holding. Whatever the reason, it certainly is a big advantage to be able to shoot pictures without annoying everyone.
Rex
IGMeanwell
08-25-2006, 00:55
I have shot with DSLRs, smaller SLRS (my minolta X-370 is actually smaller than my Yashica Electro), a few P&Ss, and a few small/large rangefinders
to be honest... the least attention out of all of the cameras I have used is anything with a waist level finder
People just don't neccesarily know what your taking a picture of and that is strangely more comforting
keithwms
08-25-2006, 06:08
You know, these threads border on the messianic. We willl all be doing (and enjoying) rangefinding whether the M8 appears or does not. So I just don't think we should let Leica control our neurochemistry this much.
My dream DRF: zeiss ikon body (or similar), full frame S/R sensor. Anything less than that, I don't see what the advantage is relative to film. Turnaround? Well it isn't like I am uploading my stuff to Reuters by WiFi or something, but some of you may be.
I am intrigued that a slightly reduced frame sensor might take us beyond 135mm though. Perhaps the things I dislike about crop factor in SLRs might actually work for me in a DRF. So I guess I won't diss the M8 just yet.
Keith
phototone
08-28-2006, 08:24
Where there's smoke, there's fire. I fully expect the M8 to be subpar in the image quality category... It'll be the build and brand heritage that win most buyers.
I just don't expect a weak company like Leica to all of the sudden realistically challenge the big dogs in the digi cam world when it comes to improvements in image quality. In the digi world, Leica is a follower not a trend setter.
Well, as far as quality goes, we DO have a comparison that should be valid. What is the image quality from the DMR back on an R9??? Same sensor, Leica optics.
This should give a ball-park idea of what to expect image quality wise from the M8.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. I fully expect the M8 to be subpar in the image quality category... It'll be the build and brand heritage that win most buyers.
I just don't expect a weak company like Leica to all of the sudden realistically challenge the big dogs in the digi cam world when it comes to improvements in image quality. In the digi world, Leica is a follower not a trend setter.
Even a Jack Russel can buy a nice chewy bone... Leica has been smart enough to outsource sensor, processor and electronics to companies like Kodak and Imacon and such. Pretty Rottweiler-like in the digital world I would say.
For every change there is a doubt that can be found. As for me I have seen too many changes and exponentially too many doubts. Wait I say, see what is the reality of this new design. Incidentally I am on a waiting list for this digital and enthuiastically want to try for myself all that it will have to offer without the help of doubts and pre judgement
I read so much tripe from self evident experts on DSLR V's RF (digital or otherwise) that I wonder if those same 'experts' actually work with either.
Any photographer who earns his living from photography, as do I, does not need such 'experts' telling them what is good about 'x' and what is obsolete about 'Y'.
I happen to own comprehensive outfits of M/F (Blad), 35mm SLR (Nikon & Leica), DSLR (Nikon), 35mm Film (Leica) and DRF (Epson). Currently, my 3 Leica M's + the Epson RD-1 are my prime, almost exclusively, money earners. The other gear just does not cut the mustard. That is all to do with the way I work as well as the work I do. It offends me the way self styled experts make sweeping generalisations about how 'Pros' work when they have not even canvassed them, accurately.
Sorry about the rant, but reading so much tripe can be time wasting, but too late once you have read it.:(
Cheers,
Erl
amateriat
08-31-2006, 20:41
I read so much tripe from self evident experts on DSLR V's RF (digital or otherwise) that I wonder if those same 'experts' actually work with either.
Any photographer who earns his living from photography, as do I, does not need such 'experts' telling them what is good about 'x' and what is obsolete about 'Y'.
I happen to own comprehensive outfits of M/F (Blad), 35mm SLR (Nikon & Leica), DSLR (Nikon), 35mm Film (Leica) and DRF (Epson). Currently, my 3 Leica M's + the Epson RD-1 are my prime, almost exclusively, money earners. The other gear just does not cut the mustard. That is all to do with the way I work as well as the work I do. It offends me the way self styled experts make sweeping generalisations about how 'Pros' work when they have not even canvassed them, accurately.
Sorry about the rant, but reading so much tripe can be time wasting, but too late once you have read it.:(
Cheers,
Erl Chill, Erl, chill. I'm with you on this – you know the difference from experience, as, I think, do I (although I remember being chewed-out by a Famous Pro/Art Photographer Who Shall Remain Nameless for questioning his credentials regarding how "great" DSLRs were versus shooting film [this was before the Canon 1D, mind you. On USENET, no less]). Self-styled experts are everywhere – it's easy enough a sport these days. :rolleyes:
- Barrett
Erl, I too think about a R-D1 at the moment since with that, a 21 and a 35 I can do at least 80% of my shooting. I'm an amateur and less restricted in my choice of equipment, even 6MPixel are no limitation to me.
Only problem, it's everything but cheap and I'm not sure if I can live with an external viewfinder since I never used one :)
All those who I happen to know and who earn a living with their pictures use either Nikon or Canon DSLRs and those are fine mashines, no doubt about it, but I think my RFs lead to a different style of photography as any SLR does and I like what I do with RFs more than what I do with a SLR.
So, as far as I'm concerned, the experts are the experts and I am me.
Well, as far as quality goes, we DO have a comparison that should be valid. What is the image quality from the DMR back on an R9??? Same sensor, Leica optics.
No, we haven't. It's not the same sensor. Leica's cooperation partner for the DMR sensor was Imacon (of Hasselblad fame). The new partner for the M8 is Jenoptik (the same company that builds the Eyelike digital back). The Eyelike backs use DALSA and Kodak sensors, and I wouldn't be surprised to see one of them in the M8.
This is actually pretty ironic, because Leica is relying on a Carl Zeiss Jena spin-off.
Philipp
DALSA sensor ? yumm... :)
J. Borger
09-01-2006, 01:01
Only problem, it's everything but cheap and I'm not sure if I can live with an external viewfinder since I never used one :)
Well .. i can tell you it sucks .. if i can't shoot 21mm on the M8 without an external finder (24mm lines are probably good enough for me).. i strongly think about selling my 21mm.
1 with an external finder (except for the CV minifinder, but i would not suggest this finder if you wear glasses) the small looking RF suddenly looks bulky and weird and gets a lot of attention in the streets
2. All finders i used and tried suffer from severe barreldistortion .... so if you want to keep your lines straight .. it is almost impossible with an external finder. So for architecture, buildings ... it is very inconvenient
3 iF you want to use the 21mm strictly for documentary style/ people pictures is ok ... in that case i prefer just using the internal 35mm framelines and use these as rule of thirds guidelines for composing.........
Just my 2 cents
There was a discussion in a German usenet newsgroup some time ago about the M8 (some guys had been in Solms and were given some information; the thread is archived at Google Groups - link (http://groups.google.com/group/de.rec.fotografie/browse_frm/thread/c9f1152fceaaac44/060c1b02fbbdba91?lnk=gst&q=author%3Avierschilling+m8&rnum=1#060c1b02fbbdba91) - in German, of course, but you can still get some information from there). It looks like it's a Kodak sensor.
Philipp
Mark Norton
09-01-2006, 01:12
Yes, but look at the dates - this stuff (and don't they go off topic!) pre-dates the announcement of the 6 bit coding, so there's not a lot to glean from this. Usual banging on about how much it costs, how their EOS-whatever will blow it away and the rest.
Any usenet thread will go off topic after 20 postings or so. :)
Still, there's quite a lot of information in there. As far as the 6-bit coding is concerned, they were told that the lens communicates data back to the body somehow, but not how exactly this is done. And it's not that Leica is likely to have gone shopping for a new sensor since then, so the age doesn't make the data wrong.
These guys were in Solms visiting the factory and were actually shown an M8 (I know some of them personally). Even though much is speculation, there are some bits that have a factual basis.
Speculation is kind of pointless now, though, since people can just wait three more weeks instead.
Philipp
Mark Norton
09-01-2006, 03:09
Two weeks today, if we believe the 15th...
AndyPiper
09-01-2006, 10:56
No, we haven't. It's not the same sensor. Leica's cooperation partner for the DMR sensor was Imacon (of Hasselblad fame). The new partner for the M8 is Jenoptik (the same company that builds the Eyelike digital back).
Philipp
Uhhh - Imacon built the DMR electronics around a KODAK sensor. Someone else (Jenoptik is one guess, but so far only a guess, not fact) is building the M8 electronics around a KODAK sensor.
From Leica's own web page on the DMR:
"The high-performance 10-megapixel sensor developed specially for Leica by Kodak Image Sensor Solutions is a technical tour de force. "
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.