• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

The new Leica M8...

Roger Lambert

New member
Thanks, Asher

What do you predict for this new camera system?

I am thinking that with no moire filter, no mirror slap, excellent focusing, and those excellent lenses, this camera is going to produce very very sharp photos, with great contrast, color, etc.

If one is not into birding, long range sports this seems like a very convenient and satisfying product.

I hope Leica has a smash success with this. :)
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I don't think this is for birding!

This seems to be the ideal interpersonal camera. It is not going to compete wiuth any DSLR for fast paced events. However, the fine quality of the lenses and the potential of the 10MP sensor is going to attract a lot of people who don't think manual focus is a barrier. For me, the weight saving, itself, is very attractive.

However, I would be willing to bet that its 10MP will exceed the quality of any scenic image taken with a tripod compared with a 12 MP 5D and Canon lenses or wedding pictures taken by a thoughtful photographer.

The lack of Moire filter should be a plus.

The quality of the wide angle lenses is not challengable. For fashion, someone would have to test the software moire removal for certain fabrics. The rate at which the files are read and the buffer is cleared
will be another important issue for any fashion or runway work.

For anyone with a Leica film camera investment, the jump to the digital Leica is not great.

For those of us with no Leica lenses, there are a lot of sharp older lenses around to snap up at good prices. There are unlikely to be huge bargains, no one gives them away! However, with the availibility of Zeiss lenses with Leica mounts, there are a lot of choices.

I like the M8 for the potential to take pictures without disturbing people as in concerts and theater photography. The claimed ISO of up to 2500 means that pictures might be taken in dim light.

It also means that the camera might be wonderful for street photography, especially where one has enough light to reduce the aperture and get greater depth of field.

The proof will be in the pudding!

Asher
 

Don Lashier

New member
Asher Kelman said:
I don't think this is for birding!

I don't think anyone ever shot birds or sports with an M anyway.

The Tri-Elmar would be all I'd need. Well maybe a 50mm fast also.

I'd keep my Canon for sports.

> For anyone with a Leica film camera investment, the jump to the digital Leica is not great.

Unfortunately the only Leica gear I still have is R.

- DL
 
Read Sean's full review, not the LL summary

It turns out he has some serious usability issues with it, despite the overall love affair. It seem that the desire for maximal elegance and simplicity and the unarguable rightness of M-being for film usage has caused the extra adjustments that are now possible in digital photography (expsure adjustment and ISO in particular) to be left in menus, and not displayed without pushing buttons, and taking your eyes off the scene in front of you.

The Tri-Elmar wide angle and its tri-viewer look awesome (if I trip over an unattached $10K in the street next week, I know what it will go for), but the traditional white line viewer with rangefinder only goes down to 32 mm-e. Curiously, my GR-D has better ergonomics with full digital controls in its semi-automatic modes than this wunderkamera.
 

Don Lashier

New member
scott kirkpatrick said:
... has caused the extra adjustments that are now possible in digital photography (expsure adjustment and ISO in particular) to be left in menus, and not displayed without pushing buttons, and taking your eyes off the scene in front of you.

I understand the ISO but IMO for "Leica" type shooting this is not a big issue. The shutter dial is classic on top and I assume the aperture is still on the lens. What else is there?

One spec I didn't see is the angle of the spot meter. This is important to me.

- DL
 

Roger Lambert

New member
I just read a hands-on minireview of the M8, and sure enough, the reviwer states that the camera resolves at least as well as a Canon 5D, with better results at the wide end.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Where did you see that, Roger?

I couldn't find anything on actual quality except Sean saying it won't disapoint!

Asher
 

Kevin Bjorke

New member
It will be interesting to see if this camera is accepted by journalists, who in the past 20 years or so relegated their M's to an obscure and rarely-visited place in their camera bags. Esp with editors growing used to instant digital pictures.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Kevin, to be sure like the Leica digital Back, it's a dream come true for dedicated Leica users.

I have a feeling that this will be bought by enough people who have kept their lenses ready for this very moment.

I'd love to hold one and see how it would stack up against my 5D for landscapes and street photography. I suspect I would be so happy to own one, but I'd have to sell of some Zeiss lenses to pay for it.

Who has seen any actual images made by this wonder camera?

Asher
 

Daniel Harrison

pro member
It is strange, very expensive, no AF, not weather sealed, doesn't do 8fps, can't see through the lens, but yet for some strange reason, one feels like they would love to have one

I hope it is a great cam for all those patient Leica fans.

You just get a strange respect for these cams, almost like a good swiss watch or something. Would love to shoot with one, just to see what it is like, although that could be quite dangerous!
 
Don Lashier said:
I understand the ISO but IMO for "Leica" type shooting this is not a big issue. The shutter dial is classic on top and I assume the aperture is still on the lens. What else is there?

One spec I didn't see is the angle of the spot meter. This is important to me.

- DL

Putting the DP and Reid reviews together, you can guess about the spot meter. Metering is done by capturing the light reflected off the white strip in the middle of the shutter. This is a strip that appears to pick off 1/4 " vertically across the full width of the image, so the vertical spread of the "spot" is probably 1/4" at the image plane, and whatever width horizontally they chose to collimate with the lens or tube that surrounds the exposure sensor. (edit: actually, there's a plot of the horizontal influence on p. 4 of the dpreview article.)

In my drawer, twitching eagerly now, is my old M2 with collapsible 50/2 Summicron and collapsible 90/2.8 Elmar. I can't bear to tell them that Leica warns that the collapsible lenses must only be used in their extended configuration, for fear of damaging components inside the M8. Especially since their comrades, the Canon 35/2.0 (not super-sharp, but considered by Reid to be a good "sunny-day" lens since it is not super-contrasty either) and the unknown Canon 19/3.5, might just get used again.

scott
 
Last edited:

Roger Lambert

New member
Asher Kelman said:
Where did you see that, Roger?

I couldn't find anything on actual quality except Sean saying it won't disapoint!

Asher

I saw it at rangefinderforum.com.

Here is the first post in the thread :) :

I had a chance to use a pre-production M8 for review and a write-up end of last month, and now that the cat is out of the bag, here are some quick comments.

Firmware version was 0.23 so final image quality and some electronic operational items are certainly going to be different than what I got to use. Reasonably, I was asked not to post pictures from this camera. Various family members have gotten prints from it, but they really couldn't care much about which camera they came from. I took about 1600 pictures over 10 days.

I had a couple of interesting moments w.r.t. other people's reactions. A couple of times while walking around downtown someone came up and said 'nice camera' while sporting their own late model Leica's. I slipped my fingers over the 'M8' logo and held the camera back against my body, went into grumpy mode, grunted and walked past. Then we had a gathering at our house, and among others the neighbours were there. A friend of their son came to our door, asking for Christoph; I let him in and he saw the M8 on the counter and immediately oohed and aahed. Turn's out he's a photographer and while born in Vancouver now lives over the LeicaShop in Vienna. After that I 'disguised' it, but it still was recognized at times.

So - the camera. It handles like an M, except your hands miss the grip that the wind level gave you. The extra thickness is easy to get used to, and the responsiveness is very good. Because of the firmware issue, the testing I did on it is meaningless, but there was nothing negative to my perception. The shutter, while certainly different than the rubber-curtained one on the film camera, is not particularly loud, either in firing or winding. I think the dampening they did on the transplanted R9 shutter had some effect. It doesn't have a high frame rate, but neither do the film M's and that's not important to me. The shutter travel includes a detent for locking the exposure that was a bit hard to find, but a lot better with one of Tom's softies.

The covering is fine grained and a bit too slippery, especially since I missed the wind lever for holding the camera with the right hand. Some kind of molded bump like on the Hexar RF would be nice, but I'm not sure right now how that could be implemented in line with the desire to retain the 'classic' look.

Frame lines were bright and useable, and came up in the pairs that you would expect due to the traditional lens mount activation. The frame for the 24 is reasonably visible with glasses. It works with the Visoflex III, and it worked fine on the Aristophot I got recently, and I shot some pictures with the various Photars. I also put on my 17mm fisheye, and it looks like this:

http://www.archiphoto.com/Various/Incognito.jpg

All lenses that I tried, including 12, 15 and 21 CV; 21, 35/1.4, 50 and 90 ASPH, and older 35/2, new 50/2.8, 50/1, 75/1.4 and 135/4 worked, and worked well. I wouldn't hesitate to use any of them and there was no vignetting that wasn't visible on film as well. Those angled microlenses do their job, and erase one of the main objections I had re the RD-1, which was really not useable with lenses beyond the range of 24 to (slow) 75. Image quality was outstanding in general, the best were easily on a par or, in the case of wideangle shots, readily exceeded that of the best on the Canon 5D. My favourite lenses on the M8 were the 21 and 35/1.4 ASPH and 75/1.4, but I wouldn't hesitate to use any lens.

Menus were fine, and quite direct. There is no 'dedicated' button for ISO (full stops from 160 to 2500), but since you can get at two different menus by pushing two different buttons, changing ISO's was very fast and efficient. There are also good user parameter save options, so after you set them up you can go from low ISO with -1/3 compensation, colour, colour histogram, bright LCD screen, high resolution with DNG and fine jpeg with medium sharpening and low saturation to high ISO, not compensation, B&W, dim LCD screen and regular jpeg with higher sharpening in a very few button pushes. The dial that's concentric with the arrow pad is also very nice and works well.

One thing I didn't like was that after selecting a menu item, such as 'B&W', you had to press the 'Set' button, or the selection didn't take. If you just lightly pressed the shutter release to get out of the menus and into the shooting mode after selecting the B&W mode, you would still be in colour. Fortunately in the digital camera industry there has been a move away from that. Leica should follow suit.

Mainly, it felt like an M, and within a couple of minutes of picking it up you could shoot with it like an M, and except for the sound, lack of winding and having more than 36 shots, it really wasn't different than an M.

And that's good.

Henning
 
Erwin Puts' article -- fascinating

for several reasons. I had heard that he has a very prickly relationship with Leica, now that he is independent, and this proves it. Other reviewers have respected the NDA requirement that no images be published until the M8 firmware is more mature, but this apparently doesn't stop him. The Moire' effects that he shows look like the sort of thing that DPReview might obsess over, but ought to be easily managed by C1's Moire' routines. Puts isn't concerned either, and this certainly proves that there is no AA filter in the path. As an E-1 owner, I was intrigued by his frequent references to the E-1 as the M8's spiritual ancestor. I wonder whether the rather poor showing in the "Leica wall" vs "Canon wall" will be borne out in shots with recognizable small details or is an artifact of Canon's in-camera image processing creating texture which is not really in the original image. I look forward to reading the next article in his series.

scott
 

Don Lashier

New member
I'm withholding judgment for now. To me, the "eye" shot looks considerably better with the Leica. The moire is expected without AA, the question is how often and how much of a problem it will be in real (non-textile) shots.

The bigger concern to me is high-iso noise. Erwin's test is rather flawed because he obviously didn't equalize tonality and also doesn't even mention the RC settings, or if the shots are even raw. If these were done thru C1 the results might improve considerably (also moire) when C1 is used. Considering this the 1250 looks quite good - the 2500 not so good but not terrible.

- DL
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Irwin Puts, at least is in a position to test the M8 from a standpoint of an experienced reviewer and rangefinder aficionado. He is pretty straightforward as is Sean Reid in his perspective. Of course, both have their tilts but so do we all.

Undeniably we have two competent reviewers interested in practical use of the M8 and how it fits into the world. Interesting that Irwin compares it to the 5D as I said above that I wouldn't be surprised if the M8 bettered the 5D with the superior Leica wide angle lenses, (in spite of the 2MP differences).

We haven't, as yet, seen such wide-angle examinations, but now I expect will.

The truth is that Leica designed the M8 to be backwards compatible with its existing film lenses. Was that a compromise?

The camera lacks full comfort grip for the right hand, (from leaving out Leica's rewind lever and no Konica type grip), by both reviewers' comments.

There's no doubt that Sean sees this as the best camera built and Irwin expresses a more conservative opinion.

We need both points of view. I respect Sean so much that I'll follow every word he writes. I like Irwin too and won’t miss his columns either.

If Sean's position is sweetened a little from an itzy bitsy flake of romanticism and his penchant for reportage with rangefinders, then we have a great protagonist.

Equally, if Irwin has traveled the bumpy road of issues with Leica's ivory tower view of design eschewing for example, ideas from Konica and other companies innovations, seems less giddy with praise, that is un-surprising too.

For sure, Sean has strength as a working photographer and that has to be given real weight.

Anyway, every fresh independent perspective helps.

I have no idea how Phil Askey will test this. Hopefully he'll hand the camera to his wife!

Asher
 
Asher Kelman said:
Anyway, every fresh independent perspective helps.

I have no idea how Phil Askey will test this. Hopefully he'll hand the camera to his wife!

Asher

The DPReview was written jointly with Simon Johnson, which may account for some of the fairly perceptive comments in it. Pictures appear to be by Phil, and they don't prove anything. The best technical studies are currently done by Imaging_Resources, which knows about careful lighting of targets and uses Imatest and other solid software to analyse things. They haven't said anything yet, but I would wait for them to weigh in on things like noise characteristics at high ISO.

scott
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Scott,

I didn't see any actual indications of images except those to demonstrate navigating a magnified image on the LCD.

Still, for this particular unique and long-awaited camera, we do really need lots of opinions.

However, I personally will value, the most, opinions from working photographers, for whom rangefinders have become tactile extensions of their own presence in the world.

Apples must be taste-tested by apple lovers and wine by the wine tasters of note. Same with cameras and lenses. Yes, I want to know a little about the physical characteristic of the M8, but this camera needs special photographers.

These are the rare guys for whom a rangefinder is an integration of sight, hearing, position-sense, light touch and balance and even smell, touch and vibration.

Asher
 

Don Lashier

New member
scott kirkpatrick said:
Putting the DP and Reid reviews together, you can guess about the spot meter. Metering is done by capturing the light reflected off the white strip in the middle of the shutter. This is a strip that appears to pick off 1/4 " vertically across the full width of the image

That's a bit of a bummer - I was hoping for a true spot, although anything can be adapted for with practice.

On the "buried settings" issue I did a bit of research and apparantly what folks are complaining about is EC and ISO. EC?!? I'm surprised that anyone would use AE with a Leica. Isn't that a bit like ordering a Beamer with auto? I don't even use AE on my Canon.

In my drawer, twitching eagerly now, is my old M2 with collapsible 50/2 Summicron and collapsible 90/2.8 Elmar.

I always hated the collapsible lenses. Had one once and periodically would forget to uncollapse it when taking a quick shot. Results were too blurry even for the blurry photo thread. My first lens was an uncoated Summar. When I started shooting color that didn't work so traded in for an Elmar. After a few blurry shots I took that back and got a Canon Serenar which was a superb lens and served well for the life of the camera. Sort of ironic to shoot Leica with a Canon lens, but it worked for me.

Speaking of lenses, I'm going to wait for the M8 to drop to $4k (6 months?) and meanwhile want to bottom feed for lenses. Anyone care to list preferred lenses, particular WA?

btw Erwin Puts's test shots have been pulled, but someone pointed out that the model's dress was out of the plane of focus. In general, aside from being beta firmware, Erwin's test shots appear to have been done rather carelessly. In any case detail looks adequate, what I'm more interested in is DR and bit depth of raw images

- DL
 
Don Lashier said:
T
Speaking of lenses, I'm going to wait for the M8 to drop to $4k (6 months?) and meanwhile want to bottom feed for lenses. Anyone care to list preferred lenses, particular WA?

- DL

The Voightlander-Cosina line look like the best bargains out there, unless you find real Zeiss and Leica WA's on the block in a rush as a result of a divorce settlement. Sean Reid's subscription site covers all of these in exhausting detail. He also tried a few of the Canon rangefinder lenses, and liked them, but didn't use my intriguing 19/3.5.

scott
 

Ben Rubinstein

pro member
Don Lashier said:
Speaking of lenses, I'm going to wait for the M8 to drop to $4k (6 months?) and meanwhile want to bottom feed for lenses. Anyone care to list preferred lenses, particular WA?
- DL

As Leica are saying that their entire first years batch has already been preordered and anyone putting an order down now will be waiting until half way through 2007 at the earliest, I would rather doubt that the M8 will drop in price probably until the next model comes out.
 
Don Lashier said:
On the "buried settings" issue I did a bit of research and apparantly what folks are complaining about is EC and ISO. EC?!? I'm surprised that anyone would use AE with a Leica. Isn't that a bit like ordering a Beamer with auto? I don't even use AE on my Canon.
- DL

"Leica-style" shooting seems to have developed around Tri-X and later ISO 200 b/w films. My M2 certainly had mental autoexposure sufficient to work with those materials and the exposure meter could stay in my pocket all the time (if I didn't leave it at home). But digital is more like slide film, highlights can easily be lost while b/w negative film had enormous highlight latitude. So the options in digital are constantly chimping with the rgb histogram displayed, versus using AE and tweaking the EC to preserve highlights when necessary and as experience suggests. I think the second method is more "Leica-like." I can do it without taking my eye from the finder of my GR-D (as long as I leave the stupid LCD lit up). I can almost do ISO changes sight unseen, but not quite. Do you spotmeter with the Canons?

I think the M8 will inevitably generate a new style of shooting, that everyone who doesn't have $4800 and an early delivery position will have to wish they could do.

scott
 

Don Lashier

New member
scott kirkpatrick said:
But digital is more like slide film, highlights can easily be lost while b/w negative film had enormous highlight latitude. So the options in digital are constantly chimping with the rgb histogram displayed, versus using AE and tweaking the EC to preserve highlights when necessary and as experience suggests. I think the second method is more "Leica-like." ... Do you spotmeter with the Canons?
Scott
Well I shot mostly chrome with my Leicas and in any case until I got an R4 never even had an in-camera meter.

With digital I never liked chimping although I do occasionaly glance at the histo to confirm I'm doing ok. I don't understand using AE and constantly EC'ing as the EC required changes frequently. If you have to constantly bias why not just meter and expose manually and get it right the first time.

Yes, with Canon I use the spot meter exclusively. This allows me to quickly meter the darkest and lightest part of the scene and get the exposure right the first time without trial/error and pulling the camera down (and putting on my glasses!) to look at the histo. Hence my concern about lack of a true spot-meter in the M8. But then I shot chrome with my Leica RF for over 10 years mostly with no meter at all and that worked fine (and no chimping allowed with film), so like I said earlier, with a little practice you can learn to make anything work.

- DL
 

Colin Jago

New member
Canon 19mm

scott kirkpatrick said:
The Voightlander-Cosina line look like the best bargains out there, unless you find real Zeiss and Leica WA's on the block in a rush as a result of a divorce settlement. Sean Reid's subscription site covers all of these in exhausting detail. He also tried a few of the Canon rangefinder lenses, and liked them, but didn't use my intriguing 19/3.5.

scott

Why intriguing?

I ask because I have one in the post on the way to me. It was a bit of leap in the dark and I'm not entirely sure what I'm expecting of it.

Useful 25mm equivalent on the M8

Colin
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
If it's true that we can't get an M8 until mid 2007, then the RD1s is going to look very good again!

I wonder whether we might see an update in Photokina. If so, it might serve to fill the void left by the awoken appetite for the rangefinder. I see the two cameras as being related. Athough Leica must have been way advanced in design when the RD-1 came out, perhaps they used it somewhat.

I guess it it may have also helped Leica in having a more prepared the market for their own digital rangefinder.

Asher
 

Don Lashier

New member
Asher Kelman said:
If it's true that we can't get an M8 until mid 2007, then the RD1s is going to look very good again!
My rangefinder lust isn't that reawakened (to spend over $2k). I'll just wait, by then the M9 should be out anyway ;)

- DL
 
Top