To the wisest among us...

[Bill Pierce]

First off, apologies for not being around for awhile. On the road and one unexpected additional job really trashed the schedule.

I've been trying to think why I use a Leica M8 for so much of my personal work, when the Canon 5D's that I use for "professional" pictures do so well. I know that many on this forum are in a similar situation.

RF's used to have the advantage of better focusing accuracy, especially with high-speed wide-angles and normals used wide open. Current DSLR auto focus accuracy is dependant on a lot of factors, but it certainly is adequate for most work - especially if it is occasionally supplemented with a little manual focus.

The RF viewfinder gives you important information on what's outside the frame - and, at least in the finder, everything is sharp and observable. Sometimes that's an advantage; sometimes, a distraction. But, when needed, I tend to use bright line finders in the accessory shoes of DSLR's (with fixed lenses) and zooms can be quickly racked to a wide position if you don't want to take the camera from your eye.

As much as I would like to come up with some significant, important reason for using the M8, it really comes down to the fact that it is small (and DSLR's with zooms or high speed, fixed lenses are big, very big).

Now there are other small camera, but the sensor size and the lack of anti-aliasing filters give the M8 outstanding image quality.

That's it. I use the M8 because it's the small camera with the high quality. No other reason... But, to me, at least for personal work, those qualities override all the other things about the M8 that annoy the hell out of me.

So, there have got to be more intelligent and overriding reasons for using an extremely expensive camera than my "It's small." Would those who are the wisest among us tell us why we should use the M8?

Bill

[Double Negative]

Just some random musings on choosing an M8 (and slightly less so, an R-D1):

1) There's little adjustment going between film/digital bodies.
2) You get access to a VAST lineage of fine lenses, some of which are quite unique
3) As mentioned, small and high quality

The other choices are a lousy P&S camera - or a larger DSLR. If you have a good investment in M/LTM lenses already, choosing an M8/R-D1 saves you from having to buy into a new lens system and/or accessories.

[Steve Bellayr]

No. You are right, I, too, like the rangefinder because of its small size. When you are not working the camera is not intrinsic to your life as it is on a job. For example if you are invited to a function not to photograph but as a guest why carry a heavy camera with a large telephoto lens?

[Shadowplay]

While I don't count myself among the wise here I can say that in addition to your comments about the small size I prefer the feel of the body in my hand, the rugged exacting engineering that has created such a marvelous photographic tool. I am also so sick of autofocus and the uncertaintly I have felt about my camera's ability to obtain an accurate focus lately after having been an early adopter of the 1D/1Ds III. Because I don't like to manual focus using an SLR viewfinder, I choose a rangefinder and now my 1Ds and 5D sit, quickly depreciating, in a great big heavy domke F1x :).

[MacDaddy]

Hey, Shadowplay! Just noticed you're from my old stomping grounds of Davenport Iowa! Alright! *o)
I went back to RF film photography for the same reasons as Bill Pierce uses his M8 for personal work-small size, astonishing lenses and amazing image quality. I shoot a D300, but am frustrated with the huge size and complicated menus that get in the way of simply shooting! I just found out I can get an M8 through work at a VERY significant discount, so...8o)
P.S. Anyone near Atlanta, GA willing to let a homeless photographer set up a pup tent in their backyard for awhile? Because that's what I'll be if I buy that Leica!

[Avotius]

I am with you on this one, I got into rangefinders because of size and also because I highly value seeing what I won't have in my picture as much as what I will. Also I used dslr's a lot and two bodies with two zooms, well... I am 23 and now I have terrible neck pains when I have a camera strap on my neck and I have tried different straps and what not, in the end I needed some professional massage work on the neck and upper back and a half blind Chinese fellow ringed me out. Now it's not so bad but I am very weary of the weight of my gear.

[marke]

I am with you on this one, I got into rangefinders because of size and also because I highly value seeing what I won't have in my picture as much as what I will. Also I used dslr's a lot and two bodies with two zooms, well... I am 23 and now I have terrible neck pains when I have a camera strap on my neck and I have tried different straps and what not, in the end I needed some professional massage work on the neck and upper back and a half blind Chinese fellow ringed me out. Now it's not so bad but I am very weary of the weight of my gear.

Yup! I loathe the days when I need to hang that DSLR around my neck with my 100-400. Sure, it has it's purpose, and there are things I can do with the DSLR that I can't do with the RF. But when I hang that "lightweight" MP over the shoulder, I feel like I'm on vacation! :p

[MacDaddy]

Bill:
One thing I firmly believe is that a DSLR, no matter how sophisticated or powerful, somehow creates a disconnect between the photographer and their subject. Even using manual mode, the whole thing just doesn't have "soul" compared to the use of a RF camera, whether it's a film RF or an M8.
I may be all wet and certainly don't have even the tiniest levels of your incredible experience, but honestly ask yourself why, when shooting for your own enjoyment and not for a paycheck, that you pick up the M8 and not the 5D. My gut reaction is that it's because there is some deep soul-satisfying connection created when your hands wrap around that RF camera that simply isn't there with the DSLR.

[Freakscene]

My main reason for using film Ms is because the control set is so simple. This carries through to the M8 in a relative sense. A Leica M6 or any other manual film Leica has four major controls you use before you press the button to take a photo: shutter speed, aperture, film speed and focus; a Nikon F4 has maybe 10 times as many controls. I haven't counted how many controls the M8 has, but the Nikon D3 has bewilderingly more. I like simple things. I think part of the reason that i like my M8 less than my M7 and Mp is that the M8 is necessarily more complicated and fussy. But it is still about the simplest capable digital camera around.

Marty

[eli griggs]

[QUOTE]So, there have got to be more intelligent and overriding reasons for using an extremely expensive camera than my "It's small." /QUOTE]

There is and it's simply that you derive pleasure from using your M8 and if that is part of what is needed for you to live a joyful life, what more rationality do you need? All the arguments for and against, logic, specs, peer preasure, status... whatever... are nothing more than ashes raised up in the winds of self-doubt and idle thought to vex and confuse us and we forget that our own small pleasures are both permissible and necessary to live our lives well, no explanations needed!

IMO, you should forgo trying to explain why you like the M8 and share with us the images you make with it, along with the who, what, when, where and why behind them.

Cheers

[tmfabian]

I think an interesting point to be made about the camera is that even with all it's annoyances and quirks, it is a perfectly capable machine. If it's a capable tool that allows you to create your images plus it's small, then in all honesty, it has one up on DSLRS.


There is and it's simply that you derive pleasure from using your M8 and if that is part of what is needed for you to live a joyful life, what more rationality do you need? All the arguments for and against, logic, specs, peer preasure, status... whatever... are nothing more than ashes raised up in the winds of self-doubt and idle thought to vex and confuse us and we forget that our own small pleasures are both permissible and necessary to live our lives well, no explanations needed!



I think this is also a very valid and honest thought to have. If you have the option of using a tool that gets the job done, but does not provide you pleasure vs a tool that gets the job done while providing you the pleasure of using it you will choose the one that gives you pleasure.

it's the same concept behind choosing to eat something that gives you nutrients and tastes really good vs something that provides the same nutrients but is completely tasteless.

there is a lot to be said for getting pleasure out of using something and it certainly should not be looked upon as an afterthought or a point thats less valid than technical aspects...people like to feel good.

in the end, i use the m8 because it's a joy for me to use, it's small (i carry 2 with me every day in a small, every day bag that one DSLR would be really quite difficult to fit in), and it is a perfectly capable machine that, when handled properly can produce images as good or better, from a technical standpoint, as any other camera.

The real question is...why wouldn't you use one (aside from some of the technical aspects like not being great for macro or super tele and what nots...)

[Rayt]

Many years ago I decided to shoot an opera that was going on outdoors in a public space. Everyone else were snapping away with their point and shoot and I brought my EOS 1v with 135L. Security stopped me pretty quickly saying no photography allowed. They didn't seem to care about the little point and shoots. Before I got a real jobs I shot events for spare change (literally) and people don't mind you shoving huge zooms in their faces but for street shooting people react badly when you are armed with large white zooms. I shoot candid street photos but often when I see an interesting person I ask for permission. They seem to be OK when photographed with something that looks like a point and shoot. The M8 is a pro camera, yes a pro camera that looks like a toy and this is what I need.

[amateriat]

I switched to RFs because I simply got tired of the AF SLR gestalt, with with the menus, custom modes and stovepipe zooms. And I'm talking film SLRs here, leaving digital largely out of the equation. The first shot across the bow for me was when I got hold of a Hexar autofocus around 1996. That camera got progressively more use over the following five years, while I started hauling out one or both of my Minolta 9xi SLRs either for working gigs or when I just felt I needed the range of a big zoom. In early '02 I just chucked all the SLRs (and, reluctantly, the Hexar AF) for a pair of Hexar RFs and three lenses. That's what I've used as my main system ever since, and I've had no regrets.

It's not just one "thing." Yes, there's the size/weight thing (not so much the camera bodies as the lenses, which are far smaller and lighter), there's the VF experience, which is a big deal to me (Minolta once had a wild and crazy function on their 7xi and 9xi bodies where, when used with certain xi-series Minolta zooms, pulling back on the zoom ring would give you a "preview" in the viewfinder, the lens essentially zooming out to offer a 140% view of the scene, with an LCD overlay frame of the live area; an idea that got more laughs than accolades). Then there's the relative simplicity of operation: load film of choice, set ISO (or set to DX and let the camera do it), and get on with the taking-pictures thing. There's the ease of carrying the whole kit without back strain, and without fretting over what to take and what to leave home: the bag stays packed and ready to go all the time now. Just drop some film in one of the pouches ad go. It's all these things wrapped up together.

Frankly, I feel the pro-dSLR world is due for something of a technological sea-change to address what I feel are the major drags on the format: size, weight, noise and an overly-complex layer of controls. (No, I don't think the RED prototype is it: it merely consolidates still- and moving-image capabilities, something Nikon already offers now with the D90). Meanwhile, for digital shooters, there's the M8, and, hopefully, others to follow. Of course, for now, I'm sticking with film (breaking out the Olympus C-8080 for digital duty whenever needed).


- Barrett

[photomoof]

I was thinking about this the other day, when I passed Best Buy, and frankly part of the love of RFs (and old Nikons in general) for me is they are not sold at Costco, or Best Buy, or any of those horrible electronics stores.

I think that is why I still like Apple too.

Buying anything at these places simply depresses me, and forever taints the object purchased. Probably why I still stick to the smaller camera stores. When I buy digital cameras I still go to Adorama or even Amazon. If i had to buy anything at Best Buy, I would just do without it.

I know this seems a strange thought...

[amateriat]

I was thinking about this the other day, when I passed Best Buy, and frankly part of the love of RFs (and old Nikons in general) for me is they are not sold at Costco, or Best Buy, or any of those horrible electronics stores.

I think that is why I still like Apple too.

Buying anything at these places simply depresses me, and forever taints the object purchased. Probably why I still stick to the smaller camera stores. When I buy digital cameras I still go to Adorama or even Amazon. If i had to buy anything at Best Buy, I would just do without it.

I know this seems a strange thought...
Not strange to me...I hate the big chains with an odd passion. My last purchases of big-ticket photographic gear were at smaller specialist stores, one of which, sadly, no longer exists. Adorama and B&H are my main source for film and chemicals, as well as ink and paper for my photo printers (Staples comes in handy for paper and ink from time to time, however).

Of course, right now, about the only new camera I could imagine buying in the near future would be a ZI. Not going to find that at Best Buy.


- Barrett

[Shadowplay]

I was thinking about this the other day, when I passed Best Buy, and frankly part of the love of RFs (and old Nikons in general) for me is they are not sold at Costco, or Best Buy, or any of those horrible electronics stores.

I think that is why I still like Apple too.

Buying anything at these places simply depresses me, and forever taints the object purchased. Probably why I still stick to the smaller camera stores. When I buy digital cameras I still go to Adorama or even Amazon. If i had to buy anything at Best Buy, I would just do without it.

I know this seems a strange thought...

Apple are sold at horrible electronics stores.

Hey, Shadowplay! Just noticed you're from my old stomping grounds of Davenport Iowa! Alright! *o)
I went back to RF film photography for the same reasons as Bill Pierce uses his M8 for personal work-small size, astonishing lenses and amazing image quality. I shoot a D300, but am frustrated with the huge size and complicated menus that get in the way of simply shooting! I just found out I can get an M8 through work at a VERY significant discount, so...8o)
P.S. Anyone near Atlanta, GA willing to let a homeless photographer set up a pup tent in their backyard for awhile? Because that's what I'll be if I buy that Leica!

Hey hey Davenport... I hate this place. Honestly. If it weren't for a stellar career I'd be out of here!

[photomoof]

Apple are sold at horrible electronics stores.



Only the iPods and not much more these days, since Apple has their own stores.

Best Buy is going to try one more time, but this is their 4th try, it is not likely to work. No one, who is sane, is going to go to Best Buy if they can go to an Apple store.

[tmfabian]

Only the iPods and not much more these days, since Apple has their own stores.

Best Buy is going to try one more time, but this is their 4th try, it is not likely to work. No one, who is sane, is going to go to Best Buy if they can go to an Apple store.

lets let this be the end of this particular offshoot and get back on topic.
Apples are sold in the bestbuy here in boston and at compusa in tampa...and i'm talking the full range from monitors to laptops to desktops, however any of these may be isolated deals, as I certainly do not see this at all the stores in all the cities i've been to. That being said...get back on topic.

[Keith]

I do like my M8 for the reasons stated previously ... it ties in with my film bodies and it attracts little attention and doesn't scream 'professional photographer' to all around you!

I believe there will be a major renaissance in camera design in the future and a mirror flapping around in the camera body and the associated space it requires will become a thing of the past ... and we'll look back on it and laugh. Smaller cameras with very high quality sensors (not necessarily full frame) and effective electronic viewfinders will be the norm. Actually I find the term full frame kind of amusing in that we still hold that 24 x 36mm light recording patch as the 'holy grail' for some reason ... based around lens availability and we need to let go of that!

Samsung are due to release a totally new camera in 2010 with EVF and a range of high quality lenses made to suit whatever the sensor size is and I believe that whether it turns out to be a good camera or not is rather irrelevant because it's more an indication to me as to where camera design is heading and I think it's down this path. I think the DSLR is as doomed to becoming a bit player as much as the rangefinder now is. The camera of the future will not be a rangefinder and it won't be a DSLR ... it's roots will be in both but it's design will come from current technology!

[photomoof]

lets let this be the end of this particular offshoot and get back on topic.
Apples are sold in the bestbuy here in boston and at compusa in tampa...and i'm talking the full range from monitors to laptops to desktops, however any of these may be isolated deals, as I certainly do not see this at all the stores in all the cities i've been to. That being said...get back on topic.

You rather miss my point, which is that things like the size of the M8 are being mentioned and yet as a recent M8 user (borrowed one for a month) the one thing that hit me, was how really HEAVY and Large the M8 was compared to the small Olympus digital SLRs I normally use.

And yet I did have a warmer illusion, expressed in the first post by Bill: "That's it. I use the M8 because it's the small camera with the high quality. No other reason..." when in fact unless you compare it to cameras like the D3 is is not all that small. I just bought a new Olympus 420 with the new 25mm, and it is about 1/3 the weight, half the size of an M8, and yet for sure it does not have the satisfying feel.

So there is something else going on here... if not origin, then history, shape, even the hefty feel? (although I do continue to believe origin has something to do with the whole experience of it being outside of the mainstream)

Notice Bill did not mention image quality, which frankly is not bad at all, but is certainly matched by many cameras. It does seem to be perceived user experience.

Or are we just being Luddites?

[photomoof]

I do like my M8 for the reasons stated previously ... it ties in with my film bodies and it attracts little attention and doesn't scream 'professional photographer' to all around you!

Interesting -- here on the streets of NYC, the mark of an amateur is a D5 with a huge white lens. They are everywhere, one a block in midtown, if you look carefully. Soon to be followed by the D700 users, but most of their lenses will be black, but will still have HUGE shades.

The M8 does tend to make you look like you have a point-n-shoot, and if you hold it away from your eye, and use a wrist strap, you could chimp a little and blend in, as long as you don't have the old man photographer look (bag, floppy hat).

Of course most "pros" who are on the streets in NYC have press passes, or they have wedding parties around them as they shoot photos in the park. These days I doubt there are any pros I know on the streets, at least in midtown with the crowds.

[kalokeri]

... a new Olympus 420 with the new 25mm, and it is about 1/3 the weight, half the size of an M8, and yet for sure it does not have the satisfying feel....

Talking about the feeling, Fred, I do admit, that holding the Oly with the 25mm is not the same as holding a Leica - let it be M8 or a film Leica. In comparison to a Leica the Oly doesn´t feel solid at all. But it is - considering the price - a though build camera as long as you take care a little bit. But - off course - it´s not a rangefinder camera :-)

Thomas

[sojournerphoto]

Or are we just being Luddites?

Fully realised:)

The ZI is much smaller than a 5D plus zoom, and quite a lot smaller than 5D plus 50. The 5D is closer to a 1Ds3 than the ZI package.

Equally, if not more important, it's different to use and I like difference.

As to 5D plus big white lens - I tend not to carry a white lens for general round twon use:)

vive la difference

Mike

[mabelsound]

I started really liking SLR photography when I dumped my Canon stuff and bought a Pentax ME Super, a Pentax K20D, and some old primes. The K20D with Pentax-M 50/1.4 is actually as small and light as my R-D1, and the ME is practically as small as a Canonet.

That said, I usually reach for a rangefinder. I think it's the lenses--I just love the lenses. They're like little jewels.

[benkelley]

... and yet as a recent M8 user (borrowed one for a month) the one thing that hit me, was how really HEAVY and Large the M8 was compared to the small Olympus digital SLRs I normally use.


...So there is something else going on here... if not origin, then history, shape, even the hefty feel? (although I do continue to believe origin has something to do with the whole experience of it being outside of the mainstream)

...

Or are we just being Luddites?

I wonder if it's not just weight but also depth. Physical depth, that is. My M8 weighs about the same as my Nikon D50 (I probably would never have a bigger dslr), yet the M8 doesn't stick out nearly as far. Could it be something about personal space or proportions?

For me there's a pleasure in using rf's, and that's why I bought the M8, and why I use it all the time. I'm accustomed to the process, and I enjoy that process more than the process of using either an slr or a point and shoot.

The question of Ludditism, I think, is valid in this whole rf world, though I think it's not exactly the right word. Nostalgia isn't either, nor is a kind of retro sensibility, though I think that all of these play into the psychology of it. And I think that the previous conversation about not shopping in chain stores encapsulates one aspect, while the idea of apple design lens on another. Rf's are not mainstream, and that is appealing to some people–part of the long tail argument, no? At the same time, RF design tends to prefer simple elegance (classicism, if you will) over the baroque, even rococo leanings of many other cameras. Sure, dslrs can and have been well designed, but the nature of that beast is many-buttoned, many-menued, and many-featured, while rfs with their optical viewfinders have kept toward simplicity. Simplicity and effective design are why I like apple products, more than where you can buy them... I actually hate apple stores, as I dislike seeing so much space devoted to so few products. Better than bestuby, I'll agree... yep, though the only thing I like about the apple store is taking pictures from under the staircases :rolleyes:

Anyway, to go back to Bill's (cheeky?) question... you should use the M8 because it's fun, (ain't that what photo-graphy's all about?) and because if you shell out for it and don't use it... well then you'll feel like a schmuck! :D

[Ronald_H]

Yesterday I was in the pub. A friend had her birthday there. Brought my M2, loaded with HP5+, rated at 1600. I took a few readings with my Gossen Digiflash and figured out the exposure. 1/30th-ish at f2 would have to do. I prefocused and managed a few social snapshots before people even noticed I was taking a shot. No struggling AF, no focus assist lights, no suddenly bright screen, and most definitely no blinding flash. Just look, frame, adjust focus slightly, snap.

The beauty and craftmanship of the M2 aside, this is something no other camera in my arsenal can do. SLRs would be too big and AF ones would struggle or switch on AF assist. Mirror slap would be an issue. Few lenses are as good at f2 as a Summicron. My Mju-II would have gotten the shot, but only with flash. With my Canonet I would have had too much trouble focusing in the horrible light.

I guess the M8 would have worked just the same. But to me it's too expensive for what it is...

[ferider]

I'm certainly not among the wisest ....

That said, pre-visualizing a scene, then using a rangefinder to put a frameline around it, feels like the ultimate photographic experience to me.

Best,

Roland.

[pesphoto]

I hear a nice M8 really impresses the girls.......

[craygc]

Not that I have an M8 - or anything digital for that matter - but apart from smallness of the M system + quality, one thing I really like is the ability to scale focus - or more specifically for me at times, guessing the distance even with an open aperture. Even with the best manual focus SLR lenses, the focus throw is short and offers no where near the level of accuracy for dialing in a distance. Might not be an issue for many but I tend to use it quite frequently.

[dcsang]

Wow.. I never thought I would say "I feel the same way as a pro photographer feels" - I can't add anything else that would make my thoughts more complete - Bill's done so for me already :)

Cheers
Dave

[photomoof]

I wonder if it's not just weight but also depth. Physical depth, that is. My M8 weighs about the same as my Nikon D50 (I probably would never have a bigger dslr), yet the M8 doesn't stick out nearly as far. Could it be something about personal space or proportions?

For me personally it was always the size, and the depth is a major part of that, due to the small lenses. I come from Nikon RF where some of the lenses like the 28 are really small.

The simplicity seem more attractive now, but in 1964, when I first used the Nikon SP, is was exactly identical in operation to the Nikon F (and in fact used many of the same parts). The only two differences were size and viewfinder. Frankly the Nikon F was easier to focus, but still I was drawn to the SP. I did not really give up on the SP until the Nikon F3 appeared, and the metering was just too hard to ignore.

I am now back to RFs on a limited basis, but I have not made the decision to buy an M8. Close, but still not there. The main reason I would want one is for trips, and I am still not completely convinced I could depend on it the way I could depend on the SP/S3's.

[dee]

Hmmm.

My M 8 was / is a once-in-a-lifetme inheritance [ lifeline ? ] decision .

I am in no way , a photographer , more a considered snapshooter .
i have an ASD glitch , and my M 8 creates the perfect , unchanging , constant window onto an out of phase world .

Somehow , i seem to be able to work out the framing of a 35mm and 50 mm lense - despite the magnification factor . I also love using old Lenses on it , combing history with modern convenience .

Unlke most modern cameras , it looks and feels as I expect a camera to , it also has what could once be considered a traditional interface , though many would argue that today's cameras are becoming universal , and therefore '' traditional ''
initially, I was a bit in awe of it - what have I done ?

Now , it's as if the digital debate is closed and my M 8 is simply an intuitive camera which happens to be capable of downloading onto my Mac ... it's just '' MY CAMERA ''.

I have a Leica Digilux 3 and L 1 body , for similar reasons , but that enormous zoom does few favours in street photography - a compact Rokkor 45mm pancake makes it more useable , but '' emma '' my M 8 is simply a dream come true .
dee