leica, what de hell!!

[jhcampbell]

Rangefinders are old news. Technology is so much better now than it was 50 years ago. Leica and the Leica clones are the last of their kind. Money aside, there isn't anything appealing to the M8 other than resolution and overall IQ. Their application is pretty much limited to street shooting. Not great for portraits because no ttl viewfinder causing spotty focus at wide apertures. Macro and telephoto lenses are out of the question for the same reason. That said, I think the Leica Digilux 3, Canon Powershot G7, Sony R1 and Olympus E330 are all better street shooters IMO. Rangefinders are best behind glass.

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

[DuncanM1]

Rangefinders are old news. Technology is so much better now than it
was 50 years ago. Leica and the Leica clones are the last of their
kind. Money aside, there isn't anything appealing to the M8 other
than resolution and overall IQ. Their application is pretty much
limited to street shooting. Not great for portraits because no ttl
viewfinder causing spotty focus at wide apertures. Macro and
telephoto lenses are out of the question for the same reason. That
said, I think the Leica Digilux 3, Canon Powershot G7, Sony R1 and
Olympus E330 are all better street shooters IMO. Rangefinders are
best behind glass.

They might be old news but they are still the best way to focus in available light. The fact that you have a 1DMk2 sized sensor packaged into a Pentax MX sized body sounds quite appealing. Macro is a problem but the RF viewfinder has huge advantages for medium telephoto shooting because you can see OUTSIDE the frame, and you can predict/track objects infinitely easier than TTL, where you are are always hunting for the target if it happens to be outside the FOV, which by definition it always is until aquired.

Duncan

 

[jhcampbell]

Interesting about the finder. It sounds allot like the sports finder found in the Sigma Digital SLRs. The Kodak sensor optimized for sharper corners is interesting too because you wouldn't think Leica lenses would need any help. Leica lenses are supposed to IT right? Last, hopefully Kodak will make an excellent sensor bucking the trend it made with the 14n and Pro SLR-C.

It's very interesting new technology. Hopefully it will work very well and then make its way into a more modern body.

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

[strikeback03]

on the new dSLR (and I guess it applies to the Panasonic too) - Is there any way to adjust aperture other than with the aperture ring on the lens? Or are they limited to using only the 14-50 "kit" lens for now as it is the only 4/3 lens with an aperture ring.
--
http://www.linelight.org/

 

[Chaitee Tandhanskul]

Dear Fotos,

Completely agree with you on the fact that some people are just buying Leica name on cameras made by Panasonic with Leica logo on. However, I have to disagree that this is not the case with M8 because it's purely Leica, not panasonic. The camera design hence is mostly Leica, and I don't believe Panasonic will come up with something like M8 under their name. The L1 is close, but I don't believe that it is an M8 equivelent.

Well, with regard to price, will I get the M8? Probably if the sensor isn't bad like the review I was reading. I have to handtest the camera to know this. Do I think it's worth the price, (assuming that the sensor is of an acceptable quality, say it's around as good as the EOS 1D mkII) then yes it's worth every penny.

I think we can agree on one more thing, Canon 350-400D range is the most bang for the buck. Amazing image quality if you didn't take it for granted, at a very very affordable price.

BTW, I heard someone mentioned about Lexus vs. Mercedes. Lexus is just quieter, I have the E-Class and I think that Mercedes are better built.

Well, I'm glad that this hasn't turned into a nasty argument, but
rather a discussion.

My point is this. If it's worth it to you to pay twice as much to
get the extra couple of seconds acuracy for the watch, then by all
means, spend the extra money. However, I don't feel that the price
bekons the in- consequential difference.

Yes, Lieca lenses probably do out resolve, but by how much? Worth
the price difference? I don't buy the argument that since it is
the best, the price is fair.

As far a sensors go, Leica's prior Digital SLR sensor didn't cut
the butter. Too noisy. The only review that I've seen so far of
the M8 pretty much said the same thing. The 5D was superior. This
may change based on other's reviews. Who knows.

It is my opinion that sensor quality and Processor quality are
extremely important, it's not just the glass anymore.

If you claim that people don't pay for the Leica NAME, explain to
me why one can go out and buy a Panasonic Lumix DMC-FX01 Digital
Camera at $292, OR a Leica C-LUX-1 Digital Camera (Black) at a
$540? They are the same camera.....minus the oval red Leica stamp
on the front of course, you can look this up if you want.

I thinik we can probably agree to disagree here. Guess that is
what is great about this country.

 

[Slough]

Clearly the Leica is expensive, and for most of us is not a good choice. For me, a normal 35mm DSLR is better. But if you look around, you will find many pros invest hard earned money in a Leica system. These are people who do not buy something because of snob value, but because it does a job.

Leif

 

[jhcampbell]

What are rangefinders good at? I've never seen a wedding, portrait, wildlife or sports photographer toting a range finder. I think landscape and street photography would be it because the design of the camera is too slow for anything else.

The new generation of photographers know nothing of rangefinders and they are soon to be forgotten. The only memory will be what they see at the camera museum and what they read in the how-to photography books.

The M8 looks to be a neat little novelty camera. It's the new Questar for photography but I doubt that it is a serious tool. I have a hard time believing that the M8 can hold a candle to the current crop of DSLRs. I would love to see the M8 compared to the 1Ds.

Clearly the Leica is expensive, and for most of us is not a good
choice. For me, a normal 35mm DSLR is better. But if you look
around, you will find many pros invest hard earned money in a Leica
system. These are people who do not buy something because of snob
value, but because it does a job.

Leif

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

[fotos]

LOL, now see, I drive a Ford, wear a Fossil watch, and Shoot with the Canon Sytem (Formerly Nikon). Maybe one day I will drive a BMW, wear a Rolex, and shoot with the Leica. (However, I don't feel I'll ever give up my Canon gear).

 

[Slough]

The new generation of photographers know nothing of rangefinders
and they are soon to be forgotten. The only memory will be what
they see at the camera museum and what they read in the how-to
photography books.

The M8 looks to be a neat little novelty camera. It's the new
Questar for photography but I doubt that it is a serious tool. I
have a hard time believing that the M8 can hold a candle to the
current crop of DSLRs. I would love to see the M8 compared to the
1Ds.

Clearly the Leica is expensive, and for most of us is not a good
choice. For me, a normal 35mm DSLR is better. But if you look
around, you will find many pros invest hard earned money in a Leica
system. These are people who do not buy something because of snob
value, but because it does a job.

Leif

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Why don't you visit a Leica forum and ask them?

Leif

 

[jhcampbell]

Not looking to start a fight... just voicing my opinion that anything a RF can do a SLR can do better. Sorry if it doesn't make you happy.

Why don't you visit a Leica forum and ask them?

Leif

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

 

[Cihangir Gzey]

You don't believe me? Read this review of Phil about the below mentioned camera and check out the initial price (7500-USD!!!).

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/specs/Kodak/kodak_dcs520.asp

How I know about this camera? Someone in Turkey who uses 1DsMKII were selling that camera for 400-USD just because it just collects dust and he wanted someone to get a value from that camera (which was said to be a legend of its time). Who remembers that legend now? Go and ask in 1D forum whether anyone pays 400-USD for that camera or not. It is 2MP man. OK a very good camera but a 300D/350D has much better functions than that right now.

In my opinion, film days are gone and never come back again and camera prices will drop like crazy as technology advances. Just buy something that fits your needs and give it to your little son after 4-5 years or use as a paper hold. I just laugh at a man who invests on digital cameras. For analog different? Well EOS1 is sold for 350-USD over here (in almost excellent condition). Decide for yourself. This is camera not a house (or gold, or diamond; or L lens which I find expensive though).

Remember the rule of thumb: Purchased camera (computer, or other technological products) technology gets old at the time of your purchase!

 

[boozed]

The Kodak sensor optimized
for sharper corners is interesting too because you wouldn't think
Leica lenses would need any help. Leica lenses are supposed to IT
right?

As far as loaded questions go, you won first prize...

The problem with a digital rangefinder is not the lenses, it's the sensor. The offset microlenses are an attempt to avoid the problems that the Ricoh R-D1 experienced, namely poorly lit corners due to the more acute incident angle of the light on the sensor.

Even digital SLRs experience this problem, of course to a lesser degree due to the greater registration distance.

 

[boozed]

Uhh... Epson, not Ricoh.

 

[Slough]

Why don't you visit a Leica forum and ask them?

Leif

--
James

It's nothing to do with making me happy or not. I'm not really that bothered. But I thought your post was a bit too one sided. I use an SLR. But you are wrong that a SLR is always better. As I think you mentioned, there are areas where an RF is better e.g. candid street photography, and maybe some forms of photojournalism.

Quite a few pros do use Leicas for good reasons such as the small size, and near silent operation. And of course quite a few Canon users buy Leica wide angle lenses to use on Canon FF bodies.

Obviously quite a lot of collectors buy them and store them in a cabinet, which is weird IMO but there you go.

If I was stinking rich, then I might well buy one due to small size, high quality and beautiful engineering.

Leif

 

[jhcampbell]

I'm not knocking Leica. I'm saying the rangefinder design is antiquated. Their R series of SLRs and lenses look to be top notch and if I had money to blow this is were it would be spent. First I would have to get my fill of L lenses and a few 1Ds MKII bodies. Oh, their Panasonic and Olympus made digi/SLRs are nice too.

--
James

Website-
http://home.comcast.net/~jhcampbell7905/

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.