View Full Version : I Want Nothing More in a Digital Camera
I can be happy with my M8 for the next 20 years (would the electronics last that long?).
Does anyone else feel the same way?
bmattock
06-18-2007, 20:38
Not even close. Digital cameras are in their infancy, not even close to a mature technology, and we're in for some of the most interesting times in photography in the next 10 to 20 years. It's going to be a rocket sled on rails. I'm looking forward to it very much.
I guess it dosn't take much to make me happy. I only need a simple digital camera that conforms to my shooting style and makes excellent raw files. I don't need something that can shoot a million frames per sec., and has all the bells and whistles. An M8 is a camera I could use for life!
Joe Mondello
06-18-2007, 20:45
Nah, I'll always want more. ;-)
Good as the M8 is, it certainly can be improved upon!
For me it is a lot about the "feel". I just like to have something solid in my hands when I take a picture. Full-metal or metal-leather body. Full manual settings. Great glass. And please do not forget the excellent viewfinder. If you have time, add a XP2 sensor. Thanks.
...If this already exists in the M8, I want it smaller and cheaper.Leica CL(d), could be the one. For a fixed lens version I would be happy with a Leica CM(d) or Olympus RC(d). Zoom as option.
But when I really think about it, I can stick with film....;)
bmattock
06-18-2007, 21:22
Old thinking, clean out your brains!
There will be more, much more, to digital cameras than just more. More megapixels, more storage, longer lenses, faster recording, and etc. Those are just improvements on what we already have - which is great, but it is just saying "Cameras will get better and faster and perhaps cheaper" like computers have.
But we are on the cusp of something wonderful. Cameras are about to start doing things that could not be done with any kind of camera in the past. Photography will be stood on its head. This will be revolutionary, not just evolutionary.
A bunch of things in the pipeline, hope they come to fruition:
* Liquid lens. Imagine a lens that is deformed into various shapes by an electrical charge. It changes to whatever shape is required for the optical characteristics you want. Want a pre-war 'cron? There's a button to emulate that optical formula. How about a post-war 'Lux? Same thing. Zoom? How about from ultra-wide to ultra-long, and all at the same aperture? How about nearly instantly, without any motors whirring or mechanical things moving about? What about a 'cron with some of the characteristics of a lens baby as well? Just for fun, how about some of the optical experiments in camera lenses that never got built because human mechanical engineering couldn't build them to those tolerances? Differential focus that leaves large format movements in the dust?
Now, for the sensor. Not just high ISO or low ISO, but a single sensor that can move smoothly between say 50 ISO and 10K ISO, bringing with it things you never saw before, like available light photos with real depth of field, because you can shoot in near darkness at f/16. But that's just evolutionary technology. For revolutionary, how about a single sensor that can have different sensitivities on the same surface for the same photo? HDR like you never saw it. Multiple exposures from the same photo capture, not just PS manipulation after the fact. Real-time IR, UV, and visible light captures, all at once, from the same shutter press, and without special lens filters?
How about some older technology that never worked that well dredged up and fixed? Like Canon's eye motion technology, the camera focusses where we move our eye in the frame. Shutter actuation upon sensing the muscle firing for the trigger finger.
How about an LCD screen that can display a histogram in real time prior to making the shot, and an LCD that can be removed and worn on various parts of the body, connected wirelessly but still live and in realtime? A flip-down widget over the eye that allows you to see what the camera sees for over-the-head shots so you can take photos in crowds.
Intelligent color recognition that allows you to do B&W conversion and group colors as you wish them to be represented in gray tones, not just according to their luminance, no need for conversion or color filters.
Portraits that recognize what should be sharp and what should not be sharp on human skin, make allowances (intelligently and with input from the photographer) for variations in skin town, blemishes, and so on.
Photos that are automatically tagged with geo tags and time/date stamps that will allow (if you permit it) future historians to know with certainty what happened and when at different points in history.
Cameras that cooperate with news services (under the control of the photographer) to feed still and video directly into news services to cover news events as they happen - full credit and payment given of course. If you happen to be at an event, and you take photos and you have elected to be part of the group that can feed data into the news net stream, an editor can select one or more of your photos as they come streaming in, use them as if you were a photojournalist, give you credit/copyright, and issue micropayments into your paypal account on the spot - in real time. Go to a lot of parades - make a couple of bucks. Happen to be where there is a bad wreck? Get a byline and a buck or two performing a public service. Another Rodney King? With dozens of citizen journalists covering from every available angle, the truth will soon be known - could be bad cops, could be bad guy - but more cameras are better, right?
I'm telling you, digital cameras are about to go off in directions we never thought of, because there was no way to do it with film. NOT KNOCKING FILM.
But no, the M8 would not satisfy me. I want it all.
Bring on the eschaton, baby.
...so what. Do you think the pictures will be better than. You will have more options on your tool and can maybe, just maybe discover new areas of light. But more or less everthing can be photographed today. So the good picture has to do with something else. Sorry (not personal!!!).
What you discribe about the speed of transfer, is very interesting indeed.
Congrats on your ability to be happy with a camera for 20 years!
I won't be. I trade up and down all the time. M8? Eh. It's okay. 5D? It was okay. MP? it was okay. Mamiya Universal? That's a good camera, worthy of staying in the bag for all these years.
Love your perspective, too, Bill. These are exciting times!
Bmattocks
Whoooh Nelly!! Your talking about my next Canon, not my next Leica! What you are talkiing about is all very fine but not for the Leica. A revolution about every half century is all Leica is good for. And they have just had there revolution for the first half of the 21st century.
Leica needs to refine the M8 to smooth out some of the wrinkles, especially the IR filter thing. I would like to see less reliance on the menu system, that is direct display and control of ISO and exposure compensation. A smaller body AKA the CL would be nice, possibily in conjunction with even smaller 1.3 crop factor M mount lenses. I think that the M8 could evolve into serving a niche market which desires a ultra compact camera system but with a no holds bar approach to the quality of the image.
Meanwhile, the M8 is fine, actually pretty darn good.
Rex
I can be happy with my M8 for the next 20 years (would the electronics last that long?).
Does anyone else feel the same way?
no. not nowadays. no way.
:)
Yeah absolutely! Digital and all those functions will be in handy, but will it stop our brain from thinking. Will we let those tools set stop us from our critical, and creativity thinking? In my opinion both film, and digital are good in it own way. Conclusion is about how the users use their tool. This type of argument can go on forever. Just be critical to yourself.
Rex: You're old school.... real old school, but that's cool, to each of their own. I mean people today are enjoying those technically crappy lomo LCAs right?
Andy Aitken
06-19-2007, 00:33
I think/hope the answer is "yes". Sure there are rapid developments in digital technology but all we seem to get are more Mps. The M8 simply delivers a very high image quality and that can't be made redundant. Sure we will, in future, probably get higher frame rates, built in IS and more Mp's but none of these will stop your "old" M8 making top quality pictures. I mean does anyone really think 10Mp isn't enough?
Having said that IS and better ISO/noise performance should mean that is easier to make good pictures in poorer conditions.
I can be happy with my M8 for the next 20 years (would the electronics last that long?).
Does anyone else feel the same way?
Same here; all sci-fi developments described in this thread will undoubtedly happen, plus a few we can't even imagine, but that is not for the basic type of photography we RF types practice. After all, oil paint has not changed since the days of Rembrandt, despite our current imaging revolution.
Leica going digital has been quite enough for me to handle. No more, please ;)
Bobfrance
06-19-2007, 01:48
Lots of optimistic stuff...
I have a far more cynical view of the advance of technology.
The gizmos that will end up on the cameras of the future will be the ones that appeal to joe public. ie. designed to the lowest common denominator.
The likely features will be cleverer modes such as a portrait mode that automatically makes the subject look slimmer and removes their spots.
Meanwhile hobbyists like many on these boards will still be gnashing their teeth and wondering why manufacturers can't use this wonderful technology to produce the kind of camera we want.
In my experience new tech isn't designed to improve out life, it's designed to improve mass sales.
Take the progression from video to DVD for example. It takes me longer to start a DVD recording then it ever did with a video tape. the quality is no better and DVDsi record on my machine don't work on many other peoples. I see this a lot with new consumer goods (phones etc.) lots of bells & whistles are added but the fundamental basic funtionality falls by the wayside.
Remember in the 60's when man landed on the moon they thought we'd all be living there, eating food pills and riding around with jetpacks by now.
Bob the luddite. ;)
paisatge
06-19-2007, 05:10
for me, it would be a full frame with clean iso 3200.
most probably comes with a live view and self cleaning sensor with battery life for 2000 shots. :rolleyes:
bmattock
06-19-2007, 05:14
You guys crack me up. There's this new thing out, it's called 'fire'. I hear it's pretty neat, you can 'cook' with it.
But raw meat killed with a stick is probably much more pure to the art of being a hunter, so I understand why you refuse to use it.
Tell me, do you still watch a B&W 10 inch screen TV? Do you still drive a horse and buggy? Is electricity a fad?
The future of digital cameras is going to be great. But you guys wait here, I know you fear change. I'm moving on.
Bobfrance
06-19-2007, 05:23
Yeah go, and take you crystal ball with you!
*throws crystal ball*
All I can say is, the M8 is the digital camera I dreamed about, more or less 5 years ago, before I even got into rangefinder's. It does everything I need it to do, and only that. The only other thing I could ask for on this camera would be a quiter shutter. : ) I find the M8 to be an almost perfect blend of manual RF shooting style with the digital world. Expecting 20 years from my M8 may be a long shot. Actually I'd be happy with being able to shoot it 10 years from now. I can't think of anything electronic I still use from 10 years ago. I'm hoping my camera will be an exception.
Personally I don't like the direction most digital camera's are going these days. Like some have said before, the photographer ceases to be and the camera starts to do all the thinking. Pretty soon, all we'll have to do and have our camera's pointed in the general direction of the subject and the camera will be able to compute a perfect Magnum Photo shot everytime.
You guys crack me up. There's this new thing out, it's called 'fire'. I hear it's pretty neat, you can 'cook' with it.
But raw meat killed with a stick is probably much more pure to the art of being a hunter, so I understand why you refuse to use it.
Tell me, do you still watch a B&W 10 inch screen TV? Do you still drive a horse and buggy? Is electricity a fad?
The future of digital cameras is going to be great. But you guys wait here, I know you fear change. I'm moving on.
I fear that you are confusing basic advances (like the digital rangefinder) with technical refinements that may have marketing reasons besides the technical considerations, add very little to the result and may even be undesirable in some situations (like autofocus). You know, we have very nice Senseo coffee machines nowadays. But I prefer my La Pavoni which has not changed since the early twentieth century.I'll be happy to see you move on. But with DSLR's camera phones and point and shoots. I might even walk with you part of the way. But not for rangefinder photography.
bmattock
06-19-2007, 06:56
The market always serves the lowest common demoninator, that's very true. Most of the money is made by those single-use cameras and el cheapo point-n-shoot digicams that do all the thinking for you. Yep, I totally agree.
But I note - I can buy a huge LCD or Plasma TV now - with all the tweaks any videophile could ever want - much better in every measurable way from my 12 inch Admiral B&W TV that was my first.
My car's electronics are pretty much point-n-shoot, so to speak, but there are all kinds of tweakers out there making all kinds of products to allow those who want it to have incredible levels of control over every aspect of their vehicle performance. They can monitor and respond to changes in milliseconds, much better than I ever could with a stick shift and a tachometer in my '69 Dodge Charger.
Digital cameras will be no different. As the technology improves, many of the advances will be to even further dumb down the human interface so that all the Joe Sixpacks out there can point the thing in the vague direction of their soccer-playing kid and snap a half-way decent photo - at least in terms of proper focus and exposure. SO WHAT?
That part of the market would continue to be served, no matter if digital cameras had never been invented.
But, there exists and will continue to exist, a market for those who want control over their tools. And new tools bring new levels of control. New skills will have to be learned, wah, too bad for the sticks-in-the-mud.
I love the future. I also love my Canon FX from 1962, but I won't be doing most of my shooting on it ten years from now.
You got on this rocket sled when you got an M8. The ride ain't over yet. Sit down and enjoy it.
Same here; all sci-fi developments described in this thread will undoubtedly happen, plus a few we can't even imagine, but that is not for the basic type of photography we RF types practice. After all, oil paint has not changed since the days of Rembrandt, despite our current imaging revolution.
Leica going digital has been quite enough for me to handle. No more, please ;)
hilarious.. on one hand you guys beg for a digital Leica RF, and once it arrives, everyone proclaims it is the best thing since sliced bread and promptly dumps all your Leica film gear (..my film vs. digital 100% crop comparisons has me convinced! some of you would say..). Now you're talking down all the possible technological advancements that could come in the future for photography.. talk about wanting one's cake and eat it too.. end the contradictions please!
MichaelW
06-19-2007, 07:31
I'm still waiting for my robot maid & flying car.
bmattock
06-19-2007, 07:33
I'm still waiting for my robot maid & flying car.
Jane, stop this crazy thing!
Naos: I can see that you really want an M8, and that you will not regret the purchase after the M8b or M9 comes out. You are just looking for someone to agree with you, so you can feel you have permission to go ahead with it. But the M8 is a very fine camera. The quality is obvious, even in the 600 x 900 pixel images I see posted on the web. But if you ask a question to 3 Leica owners, you will get five opinions. So I say follow your own sense of what you want and need, without seeking anyone's permission. After all, some of the most respected and gifted of our members here and on Photo.net have already bought one.
bmattock
06-19-2007, 07:55
Financially gifted, you mean.
giellaleafapmu
06-19-2007, 07:57
for me, it would be a full frame with clean iso 3200.
most probably comes with a live view and self cleaning sensor with battery life for 2000 shots. :rolleyes:
Add an image stabilizer, a 10f/s capability and a few tilt-shift lenses and I buy it...
In fact once you have a very good live view and a mirror lock up I do not see anymore the difference between an SLR and a rangefinder... They should only manage to make those things a bit lighter and smaller. I have the feeling that for once Olympus is going to the right direction (except that they do not make the tilt-sihft stuff I think and that they do not use a full frame at the moment but I cannot see too much difference in quality anyway)...
GLF
It's nice to know you're happy with the M8, but, I always want more. In 20 years sensors will have much better noise performance and detail. The M8 sensors isn't even that great compared to today's standard.
hilarious.. on one hand you guys beg for a digital Leica RF, and once it arrives, everyone proclaims it is the best thing since sliced bread and promptly dumps all your Leica film gear (..my film vs. digital 100% crop comparisons has me convinced! some of you would say..). Now you're talking down all the possible technological advancements that could come in the future for photography.. talk about wanting one's cake and eat it too.. end the contradictions please!
I don't use sliced bread - too modern. I tear it. :D I'll look at technological advances as they come and upgrade if it makes sense for to do so - let's see them first. Some are talking about pie in the sky and claim they can eat that. I'll stick with my red-dotted cake until something better comes along, thank you. As it seems now, that may well be for a long,long time.
Btw, I don't see any contradiction in obtaining a tool that fulfills ones wishes and then being sceptical about hypothetical new developments that will *maybe* be an improvement in theory - when and if they occur- but seem unlikely to add anything to the use of that tool. There is a word for that: content.
Add an image stabilizer, a 10f/s capability and a few tilt-shift lenses and I buy it...
In fact once you have a very good live view and a mirror lock up I do not see anymore the difference between an SLR and a rangefinder... They should only manage to make those things a bit lighter and smaller. I have the feeling that for once Olympus is going to the right direction (except that they do not make the tilt-sihft stuff I think and that they do not use a full frame at the moment but I cannot see too much difference in quality anyway)...
GLF
Might I suggest that you look at Canon's lineup? I can think of one or two cameras there that will meet your criteria, although they fall short of mine....
It's like a film company bringing a brand-new film to the market. If it's better than the current offerings, you will switch. Kind of ridiculous for someone to proclaim that everything I have today is good enough for me, especially when no one knows what advancements will come with time.
Don't you have a rap to write or something???? Ywenz, what you have to learn grasshopper is balance. There is room for more than one technology when it comes to photography. As you said to me last night, if you want to dream new and better technology great, but for those that are content with the M8 or whichever medium they use then let them be so..................
Now go back to "gettin skilly" with it or whatever you do :D
Interesting discussion about old vs new technology taking place between persons separated by thousands of miles on this contraption called the "interweb".
no one knows what advancements will come with time.
Thank you for making the point for me.
It's like a film company bringing a brand-new film to the market. If it's better than the current offerings, you will switch.
You mean like quality-conscious photographers kept on shooting Kodachrome for sixty years, despite things like Agfa RSX,Velvia,Sensia etc...?
Being in Tech business for more than 20 years, I know Bmattock is right 150%.
In fact, if Leica does not come with a new Mx and cheaper (even a digi CL) it will go out of business.
Our niche does not supports a company like Leica (I for instance rather spend 5000 € on the new Nikon D3 (coming up) then on the M8), we do not buy enough of them (see RD-1) to keep it (the company) going.
And this applies to lens as well.
Even Nikon, Kwanon and Olypus only "survive above water" because they have the mass market cameras (good ones btw), and now they face Sony and Samsung. Leica has only M8 and the Panasonic expensive P&S kinda.
Besides in 10 years time we will be strugling for Batts of our old (Digi or Film) cameras...
OK, throw the rocks.... I can handle!:eek:
Being in Tech business for more than 20 years, I know Bmattock is right 150%.
In fact, if Leica does not come with a new Mx and cheaper (even a digi CL) it will go out of business.
Our niche does not supports a company like Leica (I for instance rather spend 5000 € on the new Nikon D3 (coming up) then on the M8), we do not buy enough of them (see RD-1) to keep it (the company) going.
And this applies to lens as well.
Even Nikon, Kwanon and Olypus only "survive above water" because they have the mass market cameras (good ones btw), and now they face Sony and Samsung. Leica has only M8 and the Panasonic expensive P&S kinda.
Besides in 10 years time we will be strugling for Batts of our old (Digi or Film) cameras...
OK, throw the rocks.... I can handle!:eek:
Nobody is doubting that advancements will come. What some of us are wondering at what point of time these advancements will make technical and economic sense in this particular niche. Mass market cameras are not something Leica can or should get into. They could not survive. The giants would eat them alive.
Ask yourself what your reasons are to buy a Nikon D3. I bet you dollars to dimes that your decisive features won't be of any interest to die-hard rangefinder photographers.
Once Leica went to Digital (and it had to) there is no turning back.. they need to move faster (like everybody else) to survive... in fact the sensor they use in 3 years time will be cheaper but, but, the manufacturer will have another one.. and does not wanna keep the old line of sensores.... simple as that.
I think understand what you mean.. I will enjoy my S's while I can but I know I better enjoy the Dark side of photography too (I mean Digi stuff).
Nikon Bob
06-19-2007, 10:02
I heard Bill was back, now I knows he is. Strange, I am more inclined to agree with him than disagree in this instance. I could never be satisfied with an M8 for 20 years if it would last that long. I am constantly amazed at how will 1930/40 and 50's lenses work today. I think a lot of the reason is that the sensor, ie film, has been constantly improved. Just try swamping out your sensor on a digicam. If that does come to pass and it might then once you find a body that you like you may well enjoy it for 20 years. In the meantime I intend to enjoy both.
Bob
sunil mehta
06-19-2007, 14:15
[quote=Bobfrance]
In my experience new tech isn't designed to improve out life, it's designed to improve mass sales.
I would imagine that the only way products can improve our lives is if we purchase them in the first place. My theory is that people will only buy a product if they perceive it as improving some aspect of their lives. Improving the quality of our lives via product enhancements must go hand in hand with mass sales though the converse is not true. Mass sales dont always result in quality of life improvement.
For us to get to the level bnattock forsees we have to buy a bunch of M8s and beyond so companies will have the resources to spend on the R&D. We'll only get to those advanced technological stages if many of us want to go there. After all, why the heck would anyone bother spending on R&D unless they determined there was a demand for it?
For us to get to the level bnattock forsees we have to buy a bunch of M8s and beyond so companies will have the resources to spend on the R&D. We'll only get to those advanced technological stages if many of us want to go there. After all, why the heck would anyone bother spending on R&D unless they determined there was a demand for it?
Those technologies can and will most likely originate from other form factors of digital camera. Once it matures there, Leica can adapt it for its digital RF, but that would mean Leica is again behind the curve in the digital world.. :( It's a vicious cycle.. Leica will probably no longer be around in 20 years <- that's not to say digital RF will be extinct by then though.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I welcome the day when Leica gets bought by a larger, more sustainable giant like Canon or Nikon.. At least they can afford the continuation of the niche brand.
sunil mehta
06-19-2007, 15:55
Those technologies can and will most likely originate from other form factors of digital camera. Once it matures there, Leica can adapt it for its digital RF, but that would mean Leica is again behind the curve in the digital world.. :( It's a vicious cycle.. Leica will probably no longer be around in 20 years <- that's not to say digital RF will be extinct by then though.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I welcome the day when Leica gets bought by a larger, more sustainable giant like Canon or Nikon.. At least they can afford the continuation of the niche brand.
My guess is Leica is more like Porsche. In the early 90s Porsche was having financial dificulties and there were rumors of VW or Toyota getting ready to snap up Porsche. Their technology and products were outdated and revered by a small group of believers. However, they have come back real strong with all their new models including a move away from air cooled engines to traditional water cooled engines that everyone else was using. Just like Leica finally moving to digital. Porsche now is more successful than ever and in fact own 30% of VW. Don't be surprised if in 10 years Leica end up owning a good chunk of Canon or Nikon as opposed to the reverse. You'd never have thought this possible of Porsche in 1990 but look at where they are now.
My guess is Leica is more like Porsche. In the early 90s Porsche was having financial dificulties and there were rumors of VW or Toyota getting ready to snap up Porsche. Their technology and products were outdated and revered by a small group of believers. However, they have come back real strong with all their new models including a move away from air cooled engines to traditional water cooled engines that everyone else was using. Just like Leica finally moving to digital. Porsche now is more successful than ever and in fact own 30% of VW. Don't be surprised if in 10 years Leica end up owning a good chunk of Canon or Nikon as opposed to the reverse. You'd never have thought this possible of Porsche in 1990 but look at where they are now.
Yeah but Porsche's product offering is high performance cars. Little boys and grown men alike dream of fast sports cars. This brand is a niche by its price alone and it has much more universal appeal than the RF way of photography.
No one asks "Why is Porsche so expensive?". However, we constantly need to explain to other non-RF shooters of why a Leica commands such a high premium for such a low tech camera.
Yeah but Porsche's product offering is high performance cars. Little boys and grown men alike dream of fast sports cars. This brand is a niche by its price alone and it has much more universal appeal than the RF way of photography.
No one asks "Why is Porsche so expensive?". However, we constantly need to explain to other non-RF shooters of why a Leica commands such a high premium for such a low tech camera.
ywenz,
Once again you should stick to rap. :D Take a look at what Ford did since the begining of the year. They sold the Aston Martin brand off to a niche builder and the Jaguar brand is for sale right now. By your definition Aston Martin is a niche that couldn't support itself, now I know it's not a Bentley like all your rapper homies drive but a Niche nonetheless. And as far as explaining to other people about Leica, why do you need to do this? Are these people that you're talking about paying for your hobby?? Do you really need to justify it to them?? Who gives a rats a** what other people think as long as you're happy shooting with your M6 every six months or so..................
ywenz,
Once again you should stick to rap....
What am I missing here? This is the second time you time you've said this. Is ywenz a rapper, or is there something else going on? :D
.
What am I missing here? This is the second time you time you've said this. Is ywenz a rapper, or is there something else going on? :D
.
No idea either. :confused: I assume not everything is straight over there and I just let him be.
bmattock
06-19-2007, 21:57
I can bust a mad rhyme. True, that. Word.
Hehehehehe.
No idea either. :confused: I assume not everything is straight over there and I just let him be.
aah...OK.... I know you're a photographer, but wasn't sure about the "rap" thing. I've been fairly active here, but I was hoping that I might have missed something.
I can bust a mad rhyme. True, that. Word.
Hehehehehe.
a tad long, but yeah you can bust 'em out on occassion. :)
.
Bill, I'm with you on this.
There's no way I could be satisfied with my R-D1 in 20 years time. That, however, doesn't mean it won't be a nice camera to use (if it still works at that time). The same with my M2 and my Eos 300D.
I would love to see the technical developments taking place in my time, and become affordable to me. I'd love to use them too. Then again, there'll be times, places and circumstances I'd want something else. Maybe an M2, or that (then) clunky Eos 300D, or a Holga.
BTW, did you hear they stuck a flash on a Holga?! Things are getting weirder by the minute.
No one asks "Why is Porsche so expensive?". However, we constantly need to explain to other non-RF shooters of why a Leica commands such a high premium for such a low tech camera.
Well, maybe the analogy with expensive sports cars is a little weak. I think that the Leica M8 is more analogous to a Patek Philippe mechanical watch. Superb quality in a traditional package while being highly functional to boot. Leica doesn't need (nor can) keep up with the latest technology as long as the image is superb and arguably as good or better than anything else. Because of the excellent optics, a simplier, less processed RAW image can be offered to the photographer. The whole idea is simple elegance in machinery and image. As a big side benefit, it doesn't break your back to carry it around. And of course, fondle value is high in importance. Not to mention snob appeal.
Lets face it, if you have the money, it's worth it. Actually, even if you don't have the money, it's worth it. Just don't let the wife find out how much you have spent or your life won't be worth it.
Rex
Chris101
06-19-2007, 23:45
... BTW, did you hear they stuck a flash on a Holga?! Things are getting weirder by the minute.But in the Holga Way I had to put tape on part of the hot shoe in order for it to work.
What am I missing here? This is the second time you time you've said this. Is ywenz a rapper, or is there something else going on? :D
.
Maybe because of his previous avatar?
Well, maybe the analogy with expensive sports cars is a little weak. I think that the Leica M8 is more analogous to a Patek Philippe mechanical watch. Superb quality in a traditional package while being highly functional to boot. Leica doesn't need (nor can) keep up with the latest technology as long as the image is superb and arguably as good or better than anything else. Because of the excellent optics, a simplier, less processed RAW image can be offered to the photographer. The whole idea is simple elegance in machinery and image. As a big side benefit, it doesn't break your back to carry it around. And of course, fondle value is high in importance. Not to mention snob appeal.
Lets face it, if you have the money, it's worth it. Actually, even if you don't have the money, it's worth it. Just don't let the wife find out how much you have spent or your life won't be worth it.
Rex
Agreed! I know a good argument when I see one.
No idea either. :confused: I assume not everything is straight over there and I just let him be.
Yang,
Everything is fine over here, but I do appreciate your concern;) Young Master Wen fancies himself a rapper/gangster in so many of his photos and he does some work for a get this, Hindi Rapper called "Kid Skilly" this is why I make reference to the rap genre when I reply to yenz, yang, wen or whatever...........
I've attached a photo of our budding rapper below for your review. I'm sure ywenz isn't confused just being coy ;)
Sherm
I can bust a mad rhyme. True, that. Word.
Hehehehehe.
Go! Go! Go! El Guapo !
I knew there was somethin special goin on!:)
wow sherm, quite the research there. I don't know whether to be flattered or creeped. Looks like I was correct in my previous assessment.
bmattock
06-20-2007, 12:11
wow sherm, quite the research there. I don't know whether to be flattered or creeped. Looks like I was correct in my previous assessment.
Aw, you've got a stalker! Is this your first? The first stalker is always special.
bmattock
06-20-2007, 12:13
Fo chizzel my nizzel.....:D
I said that to my neice and she punched me on the arm and said to stop embarrassing her. So I said "Wassup wit dat, homes? Where you at?"
Then she ran away screaming.
I guess she be hatin' on an OG.
Aw, you've got a stalker! Is this your first? The first stalker is always special.
Ywenz,
You shouldn't be creeped at all, just wanted to explain how I got the rap comparison.
Sherm
Old thinking, clean out your brains! . . . .
. A nice piece. Humbling. It won't influence my decision making one bit, but it will certainly temper my rationalizing. Interesting, how my Nikon Coolpix 990 broke major ground a zillion years ago. It's still a very serviceable p&s. My Canon 1D Mk II was likewise a leap . . . . and the Mk III. Leaps coming at us from all directions. I'm on my way to a M8. Looking forward to being around when it's out of date even more than it already is.
(last time I cleaned out my brain, it was immediately occupied by squatters from Saturn).
etrigan63
06-20-2007, 21:04
Old thinking, clean out your brains!
There will be more, much more, to digital cameras than just more. More megapixels, more storage, longer lenses, faster recording, and etc. Those are just improvements on what we already have - which is great, but it is just saying "Cameras will get better and faster and perhaps cheaper" like computers have.
But we are on the cusp of something wonderful. Cameras are about to start doing things that could not be done with any kind of camera in the past. Photography will be stood on its head. This will be revolutionary, not just evolutionary.
A bunch of things in the pipeline, hope they come to fruition:
* Liquid lens. Imagine a lens that is deformed into various shapes by an electrical charge. It changes to whatever shape is required for the optical characteristics you want. Want a pre-war 'cron? There's a button to emulate that optical formula. How about a post-war 'Lux? Same thing. Zoom? How about from ultra-wide to ultra-long, and all at the same aperture? How about nearly instantly, without any motors whirring or mechanical things moving about? What about a 'cron with some of the characteristics of a lens baby as well? Just for fun, how about some of the optical experiments in camera lenses that never got built because human mechanical engineering couldn't build them to those tolerances? Differential focus that leaves large format movements in the dust?
Now, for the sensor. Not just high ISO or low ISO, but a single sensor that can move smoothly between say 50 ISO and 10K ISO, bringing with it things you never saw before, like available light photos with real depth of field, because you can shoot in near darkness at f/16. But that's just evolutionary technology. For revolutionary, how about a single sensor that can have different sensitivities on the same surface for the same photo? HDR like you never saw it. Multiple exposures from the same photo capture, not just PS manipulation after the fact. Real-time IR, UV, and visible light captures, all at once, from the same shutter press, and without special lens filters?
How about some older technology that never worked that well dredged up and fixed? Like Canon's eye motion technology, the camera focusses where we move our eye in the frame. Shutter actuation upon sensing the muscle firing for the trigger finger.
How about an LCD screen that can display a histogram in real time prior to making the shot, and an LCD that can be removed and worn on various parts of the body, connected wirelessly but still live and in realtime? A flip-down widget over the eye that allows you to see what the camera sees for over-the-head shots so you can take photos in crowds.
Intelligent color recognition that allows you to do B&W conversion and group colors as you wish them to be represented in gray tones, not just according to their luminance, no need for conversion or color filters.
Portraits that recognize what should be sharp and what should not be sharp on human skin, make allowances (intelligently and with input from the photographer) for variations in skin town, blemishes, and so on.
Photos that are automatically tagged with geo tags and time/date stamps that will allow (if you permit it) future historians to know with certainty what happened and when at different points in history.
Cameras that cooperate with news services (under the control of the photographer) to feed still and video directly into news services to cover news events as they happen - full credit and payment given of course. If you happen to be at an event, and you take photos and you have elected to be part of the group that can feed data into the news net stream, an editor can select one or more of your photos as they come streaming in, use them as if you were a photojournalist, give you credit/copyright, and issue micropayments into your paypal account on the spot - in real time. Go to a lot of parades - make a couple of bucks. Happen to be where there is a bad wreck? Get a byline and a buck or two performing a public service. Another Rodney King? With dozens of citizen journalists covering from every available angle, the truth will soon be known - could be bad cops, could be bad guy - but more cameras are better, right?
I'm telling you, digital cameras are about to go off in directions we never thought of, because there was no way to do it with film. NOT KNOCKING FILM.
But no, the M8 would not satisfy me. I want it all.
Bring on the eschaton, baby.
You forgot to mention plenoptic cameras that can adjust the focus after the shot has been recorded....
bmattock
06-20-2007, 21:09
You forgot to mention plenoptic cameras that can adjust the focus after the shot has been recorded....
Sorry. But I did put it on my website.
http://www.cameramentor.com/node/136
I stay on top of this technolo-gee thing, yup.
bmattock
06-20-2007, 21:11
A nice piece. Humbling. It won't influence my decision making one bit, but it will certainly temper my rationalizing. Interesting, how my Nikon Coolpix 990 broke major ground a zillion years ago. It's still a very serviceable p&s. My Canon 1D Mk II was likewise a leap . . . . and the Mk III. Leaps coming at us from all directions. I'm on my way to a M8. Looking forward to being around when it's out of date even more than it already is.
(last time I cleaned out my brain, it was immediately occupied by squatters from Saturn).
Ah stop it. Yeah, I use my old digital cameras too. My wife has a Coolpix 995 that I'd have to pry out of her hands to upgrade her - never happen, she loves it.
But the beat goes on. If you choose to get off the bus somewhere along the line, that's your bidness, but IMHO too bad for you.
I love the neo luddites - OK, I'll do digital, but only THIS MUCH and NO MORE!
Get real. You're in it already, start swimming. Geez.
Ah stop it. Yeah, I use my old digital cameras too. My wife has a Coolpix 995 that I'd have to pry out of her hands to upgrade her - never happen, she loves it.
But the beat goes on. If you choose to get off the bus somewhere along the line, that's your bidness, but IMHO too bad for you.
I love the neo luddites - OK, I'll do digital, but only THIS MUCH and NO MORE!
Get real. You're in it already, start swimming. Geez. I'll match my techno creds with most (except those who've replaced their TVs in the last, say, 10 yrs). My M8 decision (if it actually gets made) is not on anti-techno grounds any more than my cotton shirts or oriental rugs are acquired because I've got big issues with petro-synthetics. I just like the way some stuff feels, and if it's efficient-enough or cool enough to meet my modestly-high standards, I'll seriously consider it. My point (the one I was trying to make, if not the one that you read) is that folks are probably getting on and off the bus all the time-----or swimming and landing and swimming again, depending on your chosen metaphor.
The camera is a tool by which we reveal our imagination. The more gizmos and tricks it has the more we dilute our creative input.
I will keep the camera that puts my dreams on screen one-to-one. Right now the closest I've come to that has been with my 1968 Pentax Spotmatic (ergonomically still one of the best) and more recently, my Leica M8. Everything else, especially the technological wonders from Canon and Nikon, have ultimately disappointed.
I can be happy with my M8 for the next 20 years (would the electronics last that long?).
Does anyone else feel the same way?
I feel that way about my M6 and film, and the results I get from my Canon 20D are already perfect for my needs despite the fact everyone has "proven" the 5D is "better". If I get an M8 at some point I'm sure I'll feel the same way, even though the moment the M9 comes out there will be the usual flurry of people pronouncing it "better" and questioning the sanity of anyone "still" using an M8. So it goes. At some point you look yourself in the mirror and have to decide who dictates what satisfies your needs, you or someone else.
Tom Conte
06-21-2007, 09:07
I agree with the KISS comments. However, I do not want to go so far as to slam everything Canon has done.
In particular, I find the 5D to be a very nicely designed, not overly complex full-frame DSLR that reminds me of the just-before-digital crop of film SLRs of a decade ago.
It seems the entire industry took a huge back-step when digital sensors came out, and now have finally (some 9 years later) gotten back to where we left off in, to coin a word, 'cameraness'.
Could I wish for anything more from the M8? Hell yes! How about a better grip on the damn thing? How about a little less noise from the click-whirrl? I'd love to be able to turn off shutter cocking and instead have a button so I could cock it manually for those extra 'stealth' mode shots.
Also I'm finding I have a 'difference of opinion' about the frame lines vs. the actual framing.
Oh and the bugs, yes even in 103, the bugs.
Tom
MikeCassidy
06-21-2007, 10:42
As someone who owns a 42 years old M3 I can't say I can't live with a camera for 20 years BUT having handled and MP and a M8 yesterday and read the specs.... they are awfully nice.
Now to figure out how tell my wife I want to spend $20k on an MP and M8 and asorted lenses.
etrigan63
06-21-2007, 12:32
Sorry. But I did put it on my website.
http://www.cameramentor.com/node/136
I stay on top of this technolo-gee thing, yup.
Gang at Stanford built one. Called it the Light Field Camera.
http://graphics.stanford.edu/papers/lfcamera/
Morca007
06-21-2007, 20:32
BTW, did you hear they stuck a flash on a Holga?! Things are getting weirder by the minute. Heck, they stuck a glass lens on one!
Of course, it didn't sell, as was to be expected, we don't need to steenkin image quality!
Heck, they stuck a glass lens on one!
Of course, it didn't sell, as was to be expected, we don't need to steenkin image quality!
Can you define the verb, 'to steenkin'? Its not in the OED.
The only two things that got me about my M8's were the sound of the shutter (which is by no means "loud" but not what I expected,) and the blinking big bands that kept occuring when there were point sources of light at the edge of the frame. I constantly saw them as a lot of my work is indoors at high ISO's or with subjects that are backlit. If the banding was fixed or a definate fix was in the works I would have kept the camera. And too be honest I would have been really happy with it, both in its feel and IQ.
Is there any word on a fix for that problem?
bottley1
06-22-2007, 08:09
I thought the banding issue was fixed with the latest firmware update?
No it's still there. I believe they fixed the other faint banding that becomes apparant at high ISO, under exposed shots. Personally, I never saw that fault and it didn't bother be. The Banding I'm talking about is really obvious but not everyone has found it a problem either. It was for me because of the conditions I was shooting in at the time.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.