M8 Vs Xpro/NEX/X100/OMD etc....

[JohnnyRyall]

Hi everyone,

I've been lurking around here for a while, looking for advice.

I inherited a Leica M6 and four lenses around 1 year ago- a 28mm Summicron, a 50mm Summicron, a 35mm Summilux and a 90mm Summicron.

I don't usually shoot a lot of film, so I'm looking for a digital camera to go with my lenses- selling any of the equipment was out, due to sentimental reasons, but I was considering upgrading my Nikon D90 kit that I've been using for a few years. I've got about £700- £1000 worth of Nikon/ Nikon compatible lenses.

There's been a lot of debate about mirrorless cameras, including rangefinders, and what the best solution is for Leica lenses.

After a lot of research, I've come to the conclusion that, in the £1000 to £1500 price category, the best solution is the M8. There seems to be a lot of talk about the limitations of the camera (and I realise I'll have to invest in UV/IR filters), but it seems to me that:

1) It is better than all of the other mooted alternatives because it is the largest sensor bar 'full frame'. The APS-H sensor size is equivalent to a Canon EOS 1D MK III. It's the next best thing to a full frame, basically.

2) The sensor was designed with Leica lenses in mind.

3) I have to say that the Leica rangefinder experience is the most instantaneous, in the moment photographic style I have ever experienced and if the M8 is as simple as the M6, there will be nothing between me and the image- no fancy electronics/ settings/ auto anything to worry about.

The only thing that puts me off a little bit, is the impression I've gained that this is not a camera to shoot beyond 640 (?) ISO, but this doesn't bother me too much- I've got smaller cameras to take into nightclubs/ family parties etc.


I've been wavering between the M8 and all of the other current crop, but it's the M8 that seems to me the most logical answer to the problem of what to use the fabulous lenses on.

I'm not looking to be told what to spend my money on, just some logical advice. I'm also not too bothered about age of camera- I recognise that M8's are getting older, but as long as it works.

Can anyone with any experience of using Leica lenses on other mirrorless cameras tell me whether the newer technology of the Xpro 1/OMD/ NEX etc creates an advantage over the M8 in terms of image quality enough to negate the reasons I've listed for (almost) deciding upon the M8?

I've read a lot of people saying that the M8 is a poor choice because of it's 1.3 crop, but that's a much better crop than APS H/ Micro 4/3, isn't it? Or is the 1.5 crop on the NEX7/ Xpro 1 not that much worse, and made up for in image quality/ detail?

I like to take still life, landscapes, and I also like to spend a lot of time in one place in the street taking photos of life there.

Thanks in advance.

[kshapero]

IMHO a NEX7 or Xpro 1 would be the way to go. No experience with the XPro1 but the NEX7 works quite nice if you like a kluge (focus peaking) which I don't.

[tomtofa]

I think you've done enough research to get the facts right.

As far as IQ, probably not many people will say that other cameras outdo the M8 - until you go over 640 ISO . . .

1.3 crop is better than 1.5 or 2 for most purposes, unless you're looking to get a long tele with a short tele (and if you're looking for tele than M8 is probably not the way to go).

So really it comes down to things like convenience, versatility, ergonomics. No general right or wrong answer that I can see,

[rbelyell]

if it was me, i'd wait to see what the new M adapter from fuji can do with the xpro1. if it improves the user experience and IQ with RF lenses, that could be a real competitor! its only a week or so away...
tony

[Phil_F_NM]

I've owned the M8, M9 and now an X100.
Looking back, I'd have to say the M8 made the absolute sharpest, detailed photos I've ever seen from a "miniature format" (smaller than medium format) camera. More detailed still than the M9 but also lacking a good percentage of sensor size.
The M9 is still better than the X100 in all regards excepting high ISO, but we already knew that. They are different tools.
I haven't used the others, so I can't say but the M8 will give you the largest sensor, direct ability to use your lenses and a true optical viewfinder with optical real-time focusing system. If you do landscapes and ever wanted to venture into shooting IR, the M8 is the ticket, too.
I think it comes down to the way the camera feels for you. These days the playing field of sensors and the like is fairly level, so you may be better served picking a camera you like to hold and shoot. Something that has a menu that is easy to navigate for you.
Go try them out and see.

Phil Forrest

[viboons]

I have M8 and try using the lens with my new Xpro1. Compare the images, all m lens do better with M8 even 90mm Elmarit-M. Wider the lens is the more soft edge. For now, Xpro1 is still better with Fuji lens. I am still waiting to see whether the Fuji adapter solve my Kipon adapter soft edge issue.

[thegman]

I've tried focus peaking only a little, and I like it. I don't see it as a kludge at all, in fact I think it's probably the cleanest engineered solution out there. You're getting a true indication of focus, regardless of whether the lens back focuses, or any other faults.

RFs need adjustment for very fast lenses, SLRs often need the focus screen shimmed, EVFs with focus peaking just work. If I was buying digital, I'd go with something with an EVF, as it's probably the best solution for manual lenses, including range finders.

The M8 for me is obviously a very attractive camera, but extra filters, ageing electronic, and crop factor means I'd probably give it a miss.

[Lss]

If you are primarily looking to use the Leica lenses you have and you like rangefinders, M8 wins easily.

[Lss]

Originally Posted by thegman

I've tried focus peaking only a little, and I like it. I don't see it as a kludge at all, in fact I think it's probably the cleanest engineered solution out there. You're getting a true indication of focus, regardless of whether the lens back focuses, or any other faults.

This is not really the case. What you get could basically be described as the areas of highest contrast (over a threshold) at current focusing distance, which is not at all the same as finding the highest contrast in the (selected) image (area) throughout the focusing range. The latter is contrast-detect AF in action.

Yes, focus peaking often works in practice. And it sometimes fails miserably. Personally I find it a very useful feature, but I don't really trust it. This is mainly based on the NEX-5N implementation. When you want a true indication of focus on a TTL digital, go with high magnification.

[rbelyell]

Originally Posted by Phil_F_NM

If you do landscapes and ever wanted to venture into shooting IR, the M8 is the ticket, too.
Phil Forrest

may i ask why that is?
tony

[noimmunity]

Originally Posted by JohnnyRyall

Can anyone with any experience of using Leica lenses on other mirrorless cameras tell me whether the newer technology of the Xpro 1/OMD/ NEX etc creates an advantage over the M8 in terms of image quality enough to negate the reasons I've listed for (almost) deciding upon the M8?

Since your question is focused on image quality, not the process by which you get there (like the view and focus mechanism), the Ricoh GXR with M mount module may be your best single choice. The sensor is designed for M lenses, it too has no AA filter like the M8, and it has much better ISO performance above 320.

I love the X-Pro1, but the sensor isn't optimized for M lenses, and I don't see any indications that the official M adapter will ameliorate the corner issues. But we will see soon enough...

Landscape with wides is finally the reason that I am keeping my M8 -- at least until I see what the Fuji 14 can do when it is released.

That's a pretty awesome collection of lenses, by the way. If selling them is not option, I think I would go for an M8 now, and pick up a used Nex-5n a little further on down the road for high ISO work.

No matter what body you choose, it may be hard to resist getting an ultra-wide in the 12-18 range to compensate for the crop factor (*provided you like using FOV wider than 35 equivalent for landscape).

[---f]

I started with a Micro 4/3rds Lumix G1 and my M lenses, it was okay, but I enjoy the rangefinder experience and got an M8 and I've very very pleased with it. I do accept the limitations but I get great results.

See attached: NSFW

[f16sunshine]

With your budget and the lenses you have, the M8/8.2 . Clearly the right choice for the shooting style you described. High ISO would rarely be an issue.
Use the lenses on a camera exclusively designed to exploit their qualities.

A second choice would be the Ricoh GXR. So far from samples I have viewed, the results from that camera using M lenses is only rivaled by the M8/M9.
It is an odd little duck with the external VF and focus peaking. A RF would be a much more desirable method to focus that wonderful set of lenses you have.

BTW Welcome to the forum

[Phil_F_NM]

Originally Posted by rbelyell

may i ask why that is?
tony

Infrared. The M8 has no IR/UV filter over the sensor and is sensitive just past 1000nm. The visible spectrum stops about 750nm so the sensitivity of the M8 sensor opens up some creative avenues for true infrared photography.

Phil Forrest

[JohnnyRyall]

Thank you everyone for your responses. It certainly seems that, for image quality in normal lighting conditions, if using Leica lenses, the M8 comes out on top. It's frustrating that it's not possible to buy into a new, non full frame digital rangefinder system ( it strikes me that around £2000 would be 'reasonable' for such a body), but evidently Leica see the evolution of the M system differently. Still, it's saying something that a 6 year old Leica M8 continues to be the best solution for many.

[jippiejee]

The M8 will not disappoint you. It's not the camera I bring when going to a dim-lit party with fast movement, but for everything else, when being able to stay at iso640 or below, it is still the greatest tool with m-mount lenses. But the best is the lack of shutter lag... clicking it is shooting it.

[crispy12]

Have you considered the M9? If you are truly looking to replicate your M6 experience then even the M8 is not a fair comparison due to the crop factor. Perhaps a used one, I've seen prices as low as $4.5k usd for an M9. I need to use ultra-wides on my M8 like 15 and 21 to get a wide angle view on the M8. IMO the quality is good for the age of the camera, still makes competitive photos and most importantly has the wonderful RF experience of photography. However I would only get one now with a refund policy or in-person, after being able to test the sensor with a laptop.

Another option no one has mentioned is the Epson RD1, a very film-camera like experience but with a 1.5 crop factor. Otherwise for digital view cameras, I've tried the Ricoh GXR and like it very much. Much, much better than the focus peaking of Sony NEX.

[rdeleskie]

Another vote for the M8. I also shoot my M mount lenses on a Sony NEX5N. Nothing wrong the NEX - it has a wonderful sensor. Technically, I'm sure it's much better than the M8 -- but I prefer the images from the Leica over the Sony. Much prefer working with the M8 as well.

[Jubb Jubb]

I shoot with the M8, it is a very nice camera with incredible image quality. You already have the lens to make an incredibly nice kit, go for it, you should be able to get one for a steal now.

[Stephen G]

M8
The only non-Leica with proper sensor micro-lenses to accommodate wide angle Leica lenses would be the Ricoh GXR.
Note this is important as you will likely be using primarily wide lenses on a 1.5x crop camera.
Fuji X-Pro1, while a nice camera with its own lenses, has already proved unfortunately to be not a great camera for using Leica lenses. No updated adapter or firmware can fix.. that is wishful thinking.
The Sony NEX-7 is known to be fairly bad with Leica lenses, especially wides. Plus it is no high ISO/low noise superstar itself.

I have the M8, tried the GXR. It was a nice second camera, but its just not as fast in practice as an M.

You said yourself "I have to say that the Leica rangefinder experience is the most instantaneous". You won't get that with focus peaking/focus light indicators/zoom-to-confirm focus, etc. Rangefinder is what you want.

If you want to use your (excellent collection) Leica lenses, the Leica M8 or if budget fits, M9 is the way to go.

[mikenic]

I have used the M8 (standard) with a 28mm Elmarit 2.8 pre-asph for landscapes to good effect. Used an "L" bracket to shoot stitched panos in vertical mode. I was very happy with this camera/lens combination. Now have an M9-P, but not expecting to be gobsmacked with the difference between the two. Would obviously need to migrate to my 35mm Summicron for similar results. Buy the UV/IR filters for landscape work and I'm sure you will be very happy. Because the M8 is not full frame, the stitching program will have less vignetting to deal with in the stitch process. FWIW
Mike

[damonsong]

I have been wondering the same thing for a while, I read tons of reviews and comparison between Nex, Gxr, OMD and M8/9, I believe if you are using M lenses mainly, M8/9 is the way to go, the Leica rf experience is irreplaceable!

[semordnilap]

I think it really depends on how you like taking pictures... if you really prefer the RF and manual focus, the M8 is the way to go. So think about what you want and like to shoot. If an EVF is your thing the Ricoh could be fine, and focus peaking is fine in the EVF on the NEX 5n, and more workable for longer lenses, so now I'll sometimes go out with my 28 on the M8 and a 50 on the NEX–that's a really nice combo, and small. And the NEX sensor is pretty great.

I guess I'm pretty used to the 1.33 M8 sensor, so a 28 on a 1.5 seems just a bit too narrow, but YMMV. I also wish there was a new alternative with the same sensor size and better IQ, but I'm not holding my breath.

Anyway if you buy the M8 and aren't happy you likely won't lose too much selling it again, whereas the newer cameras will likely not hold their value as much, lacking the red dot and with the more rapid iteration schedule.

[jazzwave]

I'm using M4P and M8 now with several M lens

I don't have plan to change M8 to Micro 4/3 or Xpro, Nex..why?
Because, M8 has bigger sensor than above cameras.Croping factor 1.3x better than 1.5 or 2 x. I'm not using rangefinder for tele shoot, 90 (eqi 120mm) more than enough for me.If I want to shot sport or bird I will bring DSLR ..

I never get issue regarding M8 ISO capability and IR/UV filter, 90% I shoot in daily light only 10 % in low light (ISO 640 still good).Ask yor self how often you shoot in very low light?

I have B+W IR/UV , but for me it's not "must have" filter .

Agreed with other opinion M8 produce sharper/cripsy images than M9.

[roundg]

if you want to use your lens in the same way as with a M6, M8/9/RD1 is your only choice.

No matter how good Xpro/NEX/X100/OMD can handle MF lens, they are just for fun. It's not the native working mode they are supposed to be. I only use these cameras with AF lens.