Question for leica M8 (potential buyers)

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck jewelry'

The very high level of excitement about the M8 is precisely because it is (expected to be) a very high performance and distinctive camera (functionality-wise, not vanity-wise).

Honest.

This whole new Leica Talk forum is full of reasons why. Here is my own view of the "bling-bling" criticism that you are suggesting:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1038&thread=20036799

--
JoelH

instead of a $ %^& SLR screen or @#%$ EVF.

And- with 4 lenses - will weigh less than a Canon 1D body alone (that being the prime competition for my bucks if there were no M8).

It's funny... Most existing Leica rangefinder owners know and realize the advantages and will buy it for those reasons, those who can't afford or don't want it and look in from the outside have your point of view. I must admit that for a long time I looked in from the outside and thought just the same but having used it and realized how it changes the way you take photographs I'm a convert.

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

I have been thinking of a wawy of explaining what's the sense of such a camera.

In fact the best answer would probably be a question in return.

"Why do people still use bikes while there are motorcycles, allowing them to get them faster and with less fuzz at their detsination?"

It's the trip that's rewarding, not only the result

sugar

Phil Askey said:

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

Click to expand...

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I can crop at the long end myself if I want to

some humble pictures : http://www.flickr.com/photos/67259727@N00/

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

If you want to buy one, take it to bed and snuggle with it, be my guest. As for me, I have a bag of Leitz lenses that haven't gotten much use since I've discovered the quality and convenience of digital processing. The M8 will let me use them again, and I may end up selling off all the Canon gear.

I don't whisper sweet nothings to the 5D either. ;-)

piperphoto said:

instead of a $ %^& SLR screen or @#%$ EVF.

Click to expand...

You'll be just using the 28mm then? with the 90, the viewfinder is #$%^#@ MINISCULE.

Lourens

Expensive high end equipment provokes such questions.

I will be honest. I want the very best equipment for when I have time to use it. I will admit that very expensive, well built, high performance equipment, no mater if it is a camera or my car, makes me feel good. I have also found that the equipment performs better, lasts longer and holds it value.

People who are less fortunate see this equipment as "bling bling", to me bling bling is stuff that people have that they regularly could not/should not afford, a purchase made to impress other. To the others it is just your car or camera.

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two Xs
Leica M7

LJSmak said:

piperphoto said:

instead of a $ %^& SLR screen or @#%$ EVF.

Click to expand...

You'll be just using the 28mm then? with the 90, the viewfinder is

1. $%^#@ MINISCULE.

Lourens

Click to expand...

Hi Lourens, do you mean (for the 90) the brightlines will be - proportional to the finder frame - miniscule? That makes sense to me. My RF experience has not yet encountered interchangeable lenses or the need for them.

i.e., to be clear, the 90mm frame is the tiny frame in the center of this pic?



In answer to the OP, the reason i'll consider the M8 is because - apart from many other more obvious positives - split image focusing may better suit my poor sight and style. I also want to loose the automation of big DSLRs, but not have it automated for me, as it were.

cheers!

• kirbs

--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================

Phil Askey said:

It's funny... Most existing Leica rangefinder owners know and
realize the advantages and will buy it for those reasons, those who
can't afford or don't want it and look in from the outside have
your point of view. I must admit that for a long time I looked in
from the outside and thought just the same but having used it and
realized how it changes the way you take photographs I'm a convert.

Click to expand...

Hi Phil,

your comment is interesting. I'm on the outside looking in, and yet - never having owned or used a Leica - I can immediately see the advantages, and envisage rather clearly the change in style and attitude it might provoke in me. I suppose then, i've been twitching to buy a Hexar for a long time now, but held myself back from halide, despite having sufficient gear and experience to happily scan chromes. Ironically, if i do ever get the M8, i wonder if i won't be tempted with a halide body too. I would then treat the M8 as "loaded with chrome" and run print neg in the film body.

I would really like to see more of your commentary & experience as a "convert" in your review. What was the moment you "got it"? I presume that whilst you've had a pre-prod unit, they're sending you a full production M8 asap? Could you please, pretty please, test their flash system performance? I realise these aspects may be a departure from your house review style, but i can barely think of a more interesting editorial approach.

kind regards,

• kirbs

--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================

For me it's having to think about things like focus point, being involved in that directly with my hand on the focus ring nearly all the time means that I found myself varying the focus point. With an AF camera the tendancy is to just point and shoot, using the focus point selected by the camera. I also found myself experimenting more with exposure, using full manual exposure and swinging the shutter speed up and down a stop or two to create different looks.. Not something I would normally do with an SLR. Lastly the viewfinder, while it doesn't give you the exact framing experience you do (a) get to see outside the frame area, (b) feel more 'connected' with the scene thanks to the huge view provided by the viewfinder and the fact that there's never any blackout when you take your shot...

The rest is difficult to describe, there's certainly some immediacy to the shutter release which an SLR can seem to lack (although in reality there's probably little actual difference) and there's some tactile significance to the surprisingly compact yet superbly made body and lenses.

--
Phil Askey
Editor / Owner, dpreview.com

JKirbs said:

i.e., to be clear, the 90mm frame is the tiny frame in the center
of this pic?

Click to expand...

Yes. the rectangle in the center is the focusing area. the 4 small lines around it make up the 90mm frame. The entire image will (I think) be 28mm view. (including the part outside the second frame.) I found the viewfinder already problematic (sometimes) with a 50mm, when I used an M5; that is a long time ago though and it sure had it's strong points too...

;-)
Lourens

I came from digital to film and got into rangefinders. Love the simplicity and freedom you get from them and now use a Leica MP, CL and Ziess Ikon. Use them for all kinds of shooting but mostly for orcherstra rehearsals where the quiet 'snik' sound of the MP's cloth shutter won't bother the performers. Use a 50 lux, 35 cron, 90 cron, Minolta 40 f2 Rokkor and a Canon 50 1.4 (nice lower contrast lens). All were bought used.

What I like:

• Being able to hand hold at slow shutter speeds (no mirror slap vibration), great for low light. This is where rangefinders excel!
• Quiet shutter release
• Viewfinder doesn't black out when taking picture (no mirror to move)
• Being able to see outside the framelines
• Focus accuracy and freedom; zone focusing
• The cameras make you take your time and think about the picture, compostition, lighting, etc.
• Wonderful lenses from many sources, tho Leica is not cheap (Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, and many older companies). Beautiful out of focus areas (Bokeh)

The Zeiss Ikon is a great new rangefinder that has aperture priority and a fantastic, large and bright viewfinder (nicer than my MP!). Price of the M8 is still high, for me but very tempting. After using the Ikon, I'm a little concerned that the M8 has only a .68 viewfinder. Anyone know what the baselength is of the M8?
--
Way

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

I used my first Leica about 15 years ago, a meterless m4-2 with 35 and 90 lenses. I bought it after comparing the results with my Nikon FE-2 (I used primarily 35 and 85 with that camera). The Leica chromes were noticably better, both to me and my wife.

It took about two years to really become accustomed to the camera. In the late 90s I got a Contax G2 for my wife (she has trouble focusing Leicas, probably needs a diopter), and I tried it out myself for a while. Nice, but I kept using the Leica, and around that time traded the m4-2 in on an M6, and added a 50mm.

Around 2000 I tried to use the Nikon again for a week, thinking that I was being stupid about the Leica---too expensive, too much brainpower required, an elitist dilatannte toy. After the week was done, I ebayed a lovely FE-2 and lenses. It now felt constricting, slow, noisy and clunky.

Still, I thought I must be missing something in SLR land (all those people couldn't be wrong, and I'd never tried one of the new AF cameras), and digital was getting good. Sometime in late 2001 I got a Canon D30---the most money I'd ever paid for a camera. It was amazing, and I quickly sold it for an acceptable loss to finance a D60, again setting a new cost record. I sold a couple of the Leica lenses to finance the Canon.

The D60's quality for typical snaps was better than I needed, and I did get some outstanding shots with the camera (as good as I would've with the Leica). It also was quite fast in use---turn on and shoot, and you get something at least servicable. With a Leica, you always have to think at least a little bit or you get junk. But when I wanted to dial up the technique, it might be %90 of the Leica, but after two years of very hard work, I still couldn't figure out how to get that last %10.

After two years of nearly all digital, despite workflow advantages, it was clear to me that something was lacking. So I decided to give the Leica one last try before selling it---I borrowed a 35 summicron ASPH, and took it with a bunch of Delta 100 on a family trip. I shot a variety of landscape photos handheld and off tripod, developed in xtol and printed on a well-aligned Durst enlarger to 14x20. Amazing. Fine detail, subtle tonality, with both beautiful printable highlights and open shadows, even in extreme light. And easy---not "point-and-click-and-chimp" easy, but "understand-light-and-materials-and-be-there" easy.

So after the trip I gave in and bought the summicron and an M7 (not as expensive as any of the three DSLRs I've owned), and a year or two later a 21 elmarit, and last year a 35 summilux asph. I don't care if they are worth nothing tomorrow, I'm never going to sell my film Leicas. Never.

Today I shoot digital with a 5D (I had to get it for a job) and film with the Leica, and use them roughly equally. The 5D has a great sensor, but the Leica still does significantly better black and white, with either tri-x or delta 100.

I really like the 5D, it is the best digital camera I've ever used. When I can get an M8, the 5D will be sold to help financing, and I'll finally have a Leica that cost more than a Canon. I'll carry two camera bodies (M7 and M8) and three lenses. And I'll have the D60 for those few times I need a DSLR.

You can decide about the bling bling thing.

Great story Clyde! I love it!

I actually started with digital. About 4 years ago when I got into photography, I debated on going film or digital. I was worried that with film, I probably wouldn't shoot near as much and realized that you don't get the same feedback. It's hard to learn from your mistakes when you can't even see them for a week or so. So, I went with digital.

I started with a PS camera and while in Hawaii, quickly realized their limitations so I bought the 10D. I loved it. And have since bought the 5D. Most of the photography I do is street and travel photography (hence my upcoming trip). But I also recently bought a Voigtlander R3A and a 40 1.4 lens. I have always been fascinated with RF's, partly becase of HCB, and partly becuase I get a little annoyed with all the technical sides of a DSLR (despite being a major gadget freak). I thought about buying a Leica for my trip but went with the Voigtlander because I knew the M8 was coming out at some point.

I was lucky enough to play with the M8 the day it came out as the leica rep was in my local shop that day and had one on display. All I can say is that I can't wait for it to come out. It was just amazing to hold and it was so close to the M7 in every way. It simply felt great. Unfortunately, I have a feeling it will be a while before I get it as I will be traveling and photographing for the next 15 months and my budget doesn't allow for it because of that. I'll be working on a photography bok during that time and think the M8 will be perfect for what I want to do. Knowing me, I will buy it and simply go hungry for a month, or two!
--
Christian Wagner
http://www.lifevicarious.com
448 Days Around the World

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

I am a professional photographer. I also like well-built machinery. My philosophy has always been, to always buy the best "tools" you can afford. I have always done this, with Sinar view camera system, Hasselblad medium-format systems, Leica and Nikon 35mm.

When you are a working professional, you consider more things than just the feature set of a piece of equipment. You consider suitability for the task, reliability, ease of use, accessories available, ease of repair service, reputation of maker, etc.

I am budgeting for the purchase of an M8 in 2007.

McCluney Commercial Photography

Way Wong wrote:
Anyone know what the baselength is of the M8?

The baselength is the same as for all "M" Leicas from the M3 to present.
You can use lenses with attached goggles.

McCluney Commercial Photography

Most people don't know what a Leica is, it has absolutely no 'bling' value. Most people just think it's an old, vintage camera that belongs in children's toy bins. That's part of why it's so effective. For the greatest bling value you should get the latest electro gizmo, with auto-everything, a huge lens with many X zoom, confirmation beeps, lots of lights inside and outside, several displays with lots of numbers, and equip it with heaps of everything that's easily quantified in numbers including the most LCD segments. Part of the reason Leicas pass unnoticed even as they're pointed right in the face of people is exactly the absence of all these things that draw the attention of non-photographers.

Talc said:

Please be honest

are you buying it for the performance or as some bling bling 'neck
jewelry'

Click to expand...

As you say, most do not know the value of a Leica and it does not look as Bling Bling as today modern DSLR with a big lens attached.

So Bling Bling is not the reason people buy. Must be quality!

--
Greg Gebhardt in
Jacksonville, Florida
D Two Xs
Leica M7

Phil Askey said:

For me it's having to think about things like focus point, being
involved in that directly with my hand on the focus ring nearly all
the time means that I found myself varying the focus point. With
an AF camera the tendancy is to just point and shoot, using the
focus point selected by the camera. I also found myself
experimenting more with exposure, using full manual exposure and
swinging the shutter speed up and down a stop or two to create
different looks.. Not something I would normally do with an SLR.
Lastly the viewfinder, while it doesn't give you the exact framing
experience you do (a) get to see outside the frame area, (b) feel
more 'connected' with the scene thanks to the huge view provided by
the viewfinder and the fact that there's never any blackout when
you take your shot...

Click to expand...

May you never be said (derogatively) to be a "photo-geek"!

Maybe we can precis the feeling you derive as the joy of an "real" camera (i don't now where you started out) sans the guilty feeling of having one's film returned publicly? This, at least, was one of my earliest memories, retrieving a roll from a lab (my prep school had no darkroom) .. the embarrassment, the slight sense of transmuted disdain, but the delightful knowledge i had done what i intended to achieve, even as an experiment.

Member said:

The rest is difficult to describe, there's certainly some immediacy
to the shutter release which an SLR can seem to lack (although in
reality there's probably little actual difference) and there's some
tactile significance to the surprisingly compact yet superbly made
body and lenses.

Click to expand...

Sometimes the experiences are too personal for prose in a review. Many reviewers do not realise this, and i know you eschew that approach. Off i was, just moments ago, in a post (before i saw your reply) expounding the intangible virtues of tactile, sensory response; how they affect the consciousness. I hardly touched the reality of the expression either, but i'm pleased this word "tactile" is one of your immediate responses. It's evocative. Since all humans i know communicate emotion (if they can) indirectly, (direct evaluation is not only too powerful, but disruptive, trained as we are to distrust empirical language) one seeks to channel these unknown, maybe undiscovered, expressions through photography.

Is the attraction not one of "talking oneself into" a Leica, but the form and function closing these private differences of imagination? Because of your professional perspective alone (if we might take that in isolation) , i think your review will be eagerly awaited by a far wider audience. Please, if you will, don't be afraid of spurning the constraints of house style!

thanks for your reply,

• kirbs

--
=====================
Bring Back The Mind Of Minolta !
=====================