new m8

[WoolenMammoth]

Well, for better or worse its looking like there is a new M8 in my immediate future. Still very much on the fence about shooting video, but I suppose that is a different discussion all together.

I obviously have a bunch of reading to do, but is there any obvious new user stuff that I should know about?

Im on a Mac and using CS2 with system 10.4, any reccomendations on the best way to import and deal with things?

I wish I was excited about this, I feel like I totally just sold out... sigh.

[johnsonjj22]

Hm, I struggle with this myself. I'll have the money in a few months to get a new/upgraded camera system and I'm torn between the M8 and a 5D MkI with a lens or two.

Practically speaking the 5D wins hands down, especially considering it is full frame and has great performance. The downside of course is size and weight.

Emotionally, the Leica wins. I had a great time in Vietnam with my Leica M6 and a few primes. I really enjoyed carrying a small camera bag (BareBones Bag) with another lens and a few other items. The camera was so small and never failed. The downside is that it is slower and can't take the longer lenses.

I own a 30D, which makes the possibility of an M8 easier for me to consider.

Currently I'm thinking I'll go with the M8 and if it doesn't work for me, sell it at a loss and get a 5D. I think the M8 will hold its value better than a 5D and I'd rather go for the emotional purchase and regret it than go for the practical purchase and always wonder.

[Bassism]

As far as software goes, I highly recommend using either Aperture or Lightroom. Each has its own small niggles, but I find that the overall workflow and ideology of Aperture suits me much more. They're both available as a free trial, so download both, use each one for two weeks and see which works better for you.

These RAW workflow-type apps are incredibly effective. You don't have to deal with file structure, they have non-destructive editing, and the typical things that you do to a photo are more easily accomplished than in CS2. For whenever you need to do some specific photoshopping, both allow you to seamlessly edit in photoshop.

[WoolenMammoth]

my personal strife is between film and video not an m8 and some other video camera, slr's are not a possibility for me.

[WoolenMammoth]

please bear with my newbness on this...

If (assuming) the most recent version of photoshop with handle a raw file, is there much of a reason to deal with aperature or lightroom at all? I should check these out and see what makes the most sense for my the workflow Im used to scanning film.

Regardless of where the DNG file winds up, you are still using the leica bundled software to do the initial import?

I am soooo behind the curve with all this stuff. Welcome to like, 2004, haha.

[Bassism]

The early reviews of Aperture and Lightroom do a pretty good job of explaining the things that differ from a traditional digital workflow.

You use Aperture to import the DNG originally. It imports it into a database, much like iTunes does. From there, the DNG never gets modified. Every time you view or edit a photo, it does all of the edits in real time as you view it. In effect this means that you have unlimited undo without being constrained to the order of your edits. You can also easily make a new "version" of a file. You can have an infinite number of versions of a photo without using up any extra disk space.
I really like this way of working. As I'm editing a photo, I can split off a new version to test out a different crop or convert to black and white; if I don't like it, I just delete the version and go back to where I was. It's a very organic way of working that I much prefer over the standard "open it in photoshop and do these things then hit save" approach.

The typical edits you do to a photo are also much easier in Aperture. Photoshop is a big, complicated program that a photographer typically uses about 3% of in editing a photo. Aperture pares it down to just the stuff you need and lets you do it faster and easier.

Personally I hated digital editing until I started using Aperture. Now I even import all of my scans into Aperture and edit them there too.

The early reviews of Aperture do a pretty good job of explaining the differences in workflow compared to the traditional method, I think.

[WoolenMammoth]

I didnt realize aperture was an apple program, if its database is anything like itunes, I'll loathe it. I gotta DL the trial and give it a peek. Ive been using photoshop since its first version whenever that was, a million years ago, so its a natural environment Im comfortable with, I cant stand the idea of software doing file management for me.

Is anyone using the bundled leica software or going directly to third party?

[johnastovall]

Just plug in and SD reader and drag the DNG files to a folder and then open it Bridge. Just let OS-X do the heavy lifting.

Just mange files like you do now.

I have used Lightroom and went back to Photoshop. Not enough third party plug-in that I use for it.

Of course ACR does DNG, Adobe developed DNG.

[WoolenMammoth]

Just plug in and SD reader and drag the DNG files to a folder and then open it Bridge.

ok, thats too easy. I need to upgrade photoshop anyway, this makes a good excuse.

Is there anything unique about lightroom in regards to photoshop? From what I can tell skimming the website it looks fairly redundant to have CS4 and lightroom, is there a good reason to be working in both?

[Bassism]

Lightroom doesn't do anything that PS can't (aside from the non-destructive editing), the difference just lies in the workflow and how you do things.

[astroman]

Ive been using aperture for over a year and find it excellent.

[dfoo]

Lightroom for photo editing is incredibly easy to use compared to photoshop. What is lacking, however, for film scan editing is the inability to clone out scratches. Of course, for the m8 that isn't an issue :)

[peterm1]

Having tried it, I like Lightroom but mainly for basic editing, like sharpening, noise reduction, contrast and colour, prior to conversion to JPG. I use Corel Paint Shop Pro as an alternative to Photoshop and find that I would still need one or other if I had Lightroom full time. This is because most of my photos will get a fair bit of working over (dodging /burning etc) that can't be done in Lightroom. Never the less Lightroom is very easy and intuitive to use. It probably depends on your style of photography. If you only tweak your photos and do not exensively modify them, Lightroom may be perfectly adequate.

Having said that my purpose in using Paint Shop Photo Pro x2 rather than Photoshop is that while it hase most if not all of Photoshops high end capabilities like Layers you can do a great deal of editing without the need for complex steps (it has a lot of assisted editing tools and some nice filters. Photoshop has some high end capabilites but the truth is I almost never use them and find them damn difficult to use when I do.)

[enochRoot]

not sure if it applies, but CS4 requires intel-based macs to run.

[Doug]

Lightroom doesn't feature dodging/burning? How about Aperture? That would be important, but I don't care about their file management/cataloging, as that's what the Mac's Finder is for. I really dislike the idea of "importing" files into a database like iPhoto. Both PS and GraphicConverter have graphic browsers, so that's taken care of, but (like WoolenMammoth) I've had (but little used) Photoshop since the Stone Age.

As suggested, I slip the SD card into a USB reader, plug it into the Mac, and copy the folder over to my folder of graphics awaiting work. I treat the contents of the card like a roll of film, and rename the folder and its contents accordingly, with reference to a tech data file done in FileMaker, one record per "roll". I open the new folder in a browser window in GrahicConverter and get started editing, using Save-As to put edited files in other folders. GC is pretty satisfactory but is short on certain abilities, thus my interest in Aperture and Lightroom as maybe easier to use than PS...

[boy_lah]

re Lightroom - version 2 now has dodge and burn. This feature was the 'most' requested enhancement from version 1 users.

I originally used LR1 sparingly for my casual candids and left heavy lifting to Photoshop but I now pretty much use LR2 for 80-90% of my work. It is such a time saver (I prefer shooting not sitting in front of a pc) and encourages you to take the shot you want in the first place - since it can't make a desert shot look like it was taken in the ocean. For that, use Photoshop/Paintshop Pro etc...

re 5D vs m8 - I had the 5D but and went for a used m8 instead of the 5Dmk2. The decision for me came down to 1 - the m8 made me take more time and more care and therefore i got better photos; 2 - because of the size/weight I had a camera with me everyday/everywhere and i now get shots i wouldn't have otherwise; 3 - i could borrow a d-slr if i needed it e.g. weddings etc.

I've not looked back since although when snapping my fast moving 14month old i could do with AF but that's about it.

I definitely 'prefer' the output from my m8 although 5D's output is pretty amazing already.

[johnastovall]

Lightroom's Color Management for printing is not up to Photoshop.

[eef]

Aperture has dodge and burn, and a plug-in architecture that now hosts Noise Ninja, Nik sharpener, and a bunch of other tools (that I do not use). You can choose to do some of the file management yourself, but you have to tell it which files to put into "projects" and "albums", not a big deal.

I like being able to do everything from import to export to print in one relatively intuitive application. That said, I always hated Photoshop.

[runny]

I have been using Aperture right from V1 - in spite of the issues with that release. Now at version 2.2 it is simply excellent and works well with both the M8 and R-D1s files I have. I have Photoshop CS4 for the very rare times I need to do something more complex - like remove barrel distortion or stitch a panorama together. Aperture is simple, complete and has good backup and recovery features. The non-destructive editing (does 99.9% of what you need) enables me to play around with photos to my hearts content. The tools themselves mimic what you would do in a darkroom with film.

Bear in mind that you will end up with GIGABYTES of RAW files from your shooting and trusting them to chance would be a disaster. My Aperture library is now over 250GB - so having a proper backup system (called Vaults) in Aperture gives me some level of security.

David

[tom.w.bn]

As far as I know you don't have to import the files completely in the aperture or iphoto library. There is an option that only the changes are recorded in the database and the files are outside the database. This prevents the database from growing too big and getting potential backup problems.

[nemo12]

i was thinking about buying a canon 5dmkii or a (used) m8. since i have a leica m6 and wanted to switch to fullframe digital, the canon was an option. well i went for the m8 and i'm happy i did. i read thousands of pages about image qualitiy and couldn't make a decision. finally i made it simple and asked myself, if i had both the canon dslr and the m8, wich one would i take with me and every time it was the m8.

i'm a mac user and have aperture 2.2 and ps cs4 wich is an excellent combination.

[benkelley]

john is right about color management for printing. i personally prefer lightroom for file management and most edits (you can burn-dodge and i find it simpler than in photoshop...) and then just export to ps for printing or more specific edits.

i expect, though, that they'll improve the (currently non-existent) soft-proofing in LR in the near future. With the fancy inkjets around and tons of papers to choose from, it seems silly to leave that feature out for much longer.

[palker]

If you can afford the M8 buy it, anything else you buy will not be the same.
Once you pick it up to the moment you see the first results you'll not be disappointed.
If you are like me and you eyes are not as sharp as they were, or your handling is slow (8 thumbs and only 2 fingers) then you need to be fully aware that you cannot be as fast with a manual camera as you can be with a dim witted dslr.
To that end I sadly sold my M8 - and I miss it like a good mistress.
I felt less self conscious with a lot of $$$ of Leica gear round my neck than i do with half the price of Nikon gear, but my % capture rate is higher with the Nikon .. age .. who needs it?

As for software - I'm an Aperture fan - with the Nik plug-ins.

I don't need more - i guess really i prefer film and all the bodges you can do with post processing leaves me cool. so for me ' less is more'

good luck, be brave, you will not regret it.

[kipkeston]

Photoshop is hands down better for everything but file management. I personally import and manage w lightroom and go though ps for output.

[WoolenMammoth]

thanks for the input everyone. I scan every frame I shoot and shot several hundred feet of 35mm last year, so I have my own file management, storage and backup program for years now as a film user, none of this is daunting going over to digital, nothing for me, changes.

I had no idea that you could just use photoshop directly. Im not too sure why anyone would not want to do that but I guess photoshop can be a little daunting if you havent studied it for a while.

I wish I was more excited about the M8, especially after spending all that money but I guess I'll see when it gets here.

Is there anyplace on line that charts lightroom's features against cs4? Im suprised that the adobe site doesnt have an easy to reference feature set comparison between the two. Im still unclear as to why you'd bother with lightroom if you have photoshop. Can anyone shed any light on that? Is it just faster for you since it has less features to navigate through?

thanks

[dfoo]

The reason why they don't really compare them, is because they are not the same type of application. Photoshop is really only for doing edits of digital images. Lightroom is for managing digital images, and doing most of the edits that photographers want; level adjustments, cropping, cloning dust spots, and so on.

[Bassism]

I don't really know of any charts that outline the differences. Possibly because the "feature sets" of both of them are about the same. They can both do pretty much exactly the same things. The difference just lies in how it's done. I could do most everything I want to in Photoshop, but it's so much easier and faster in LR/Aperture that it doesn't make sense to me to use Photoshop except for in cases where it's really necessary.

It's hard to understand the difference from just reading words on the web though. It's really the little things that make it a great piece of software, much in the same way that it's the little things that make rangefinders nice cameras to use. I would suggest you download the trial of LR and test it out, importing some scans to get a feel for how things work. Then when the M8 arrives, import a set into both apps and go through the entire editing process twice. I think that you'll find a preference for one or the other.

[dfoo]

How do you manage, catalog, keyword, rank, color code, flag your images in photoshop? Bridge perhaps, but not photoshop...

[WoolenMammoth]

It's hard to understand the difference from just reading words on the web though. It's really the little things that make it a great piece of software, much in the same way that it's the little things that make rangefinders nice cameras to use. I would suggest you download the trial of LR and test it out, importing some scans to get a feel for how things work. Then when the M8 arrives, import a set into both apps and go through the entire editing process twice. I think that you'll find a preference for one or the other.

this is probably the best advice.

How do you manage, catalog, keyword, rank, color code, flag your images in photoshop?

I dont do any of this stuff, maddening to me. Im all on folder management. We'll see what lies in the future.

[Lord Fluff]

If you can get past your current addiction to folders, then asset management programs like LR can allow you unprecedented access to your work.

Non destructive editing requires more discipline in PS and for most jobs LR (or Aperture for that matter) will take hours less than PS. This is the reason that so many pros, myself included, rely on it.

[oldoc]

Aperture is not much of an investment, and the organization of workflow is automatic in a sense. I just export form Aperture and make fine corrections or do the heavy layer adjustment in PS. As an aside, may of the sharpening and digital work I used to do...I don't need with the M8...

[Gabriel M.A.]

Is anyone using the bundled leica software or going directly to third party?

Capture One LE is what comes bundled with the M8. You can upgrade to the latest version with the same license code that comes with it. A lot of people like it. I like the "Pro" version better than LE because it allows you to do batch operations. But although it's been "streamlined", it is not for those who aren't technically inclined.

Lightroom is far better in this regard. Performance-wise, you better have an eight-core Cray supercomputer. Ok, I'm exaggerating, but Lightroom is still riddled with performance issues here and there, but is very usable now.

I've seen Aperture at work and it is far better performance-wise, but I didn't get to use it, so I don't know if the noise reduction algorithm is as good as Adobe's. This is the main reason why I'd stick to Lightroom.

I've seen people jump through a lot of hoops, and they really shouldn't if they embraced Lightroom. But again, you better have a super-fast, pumped-up computer to use Lightroom satisfactorily; in the past few years, Adobe has decided to take the Microsoft route and bloat their code.

[dfoo]

Its interesting to see you say that... Last time I used aperture (version 1) it was horribly brutally slow. In particular, rotate was basically unusable. That was the reason I actually switched to lightroom, which was very snappy on my hardware at the time.

[noimmunity]

are you all actually using Lightroom to export/convert DNG files from the M8? Or first process with Capture One?

[dfoo]

Its interesting to see you say that... Last time I used aperture (version 1) it was horribly brutally slow. In particular, rotate was basically unusable. That was the reason I actually switched to lightroom, which was very snappy on my hardware at the time.

... however, I remember when I upgraded to LR 2.0 on my macbook it also got horribly slow. On my macpro it works nicely ;) Ok, perhaps I agree with the OP! OTOH, LR 1 still works nicely on slower hardware.

[tom.w.bn]

Capture One LE is what comes bundled with the M8. You can upgrade to the latest version with the same license code that comes with it. A lot of people like it. I like the "Pro" version better than LE because it allows you to do batch operations. But although it's been "streamlined", it is not for those who aren't technically inclined.


You don't need C1 Pro for Batch processing. You can develop/export multiple files at ones with the "normal" C1.

[AlphAlphA]

Last week I attended a sombre event. An aunt was buried. I traveled by bus overnight and spent the day with the family. I shot 3 rolls at the funeral and the reception with my M6. I wanted to recall the day. I felt comfortable. I would not have done it with any other camera. That family gathering decided it for me. This morning I took all my lenses to the dealer and tried them out on an M8. After an hour, I put down the deposit. I should have an M8.2 in my hands at 2 pm tomorrow.

[afineman]

it's not about photoshop being daunting. it's that using a program like lightroom speeds up one's workflow to a degree that no amount of photoshop know how will equal.

that said, if you are a m film shooter - buy the m8 and fix the frame lines and you will be thrilled. then you can decide if you want to use lightroom or photoshop.

ps. photoshop does not actually open dng files - it's adobe camera raw plug in that does. and then it goes to photoshop - which is why lightroom speeds up workflow so much - in my opinion.

[Cindy Flood]

I had a 5D when the M8 came out. The 5D made me happy when it had Leica R glass on it. Most Canon glass left me cold. Once I got the M8 (in November of 2006), the 5D sat. Finally, I sold it. The 5D is a fine camera and can do things that the M8 can't, but it doesn't have the M8 magic.
If you are on a Mac, you will really like Aperture for Raw processing and cataloging. I've had a filing system in place for years, but using Aperture sure makes sense.
Capture one LE should come with your M8. C1 is superior for processing high iso files on the M8. As has been stated here, you can upgrade to the current version free of charge. I put my Raw files in my file structure, read them into Aperture and keyword. I use Aperture to process. If I have any really nice files, high iso, or am doing a job, I process those files with C1.
I take all my files into CS3 for final work no matter where the raw file was processed.
Buy the M8-- you won't be sorry when you see the result.