Leica M8 will be launched on Oct. 14 in Singapore
- Thread starter nsng
- Start date
- Status
Of course not, but it's about the only digital sensor I've used which comes somewhat close. Digital files still take a bit of post processing to transform them into something usable, imo, and the R-D1 is the same.
Student,
You forget that apart from the recently introduced M8, the Epson RD-1/s is also a rangefinder (introduced 2 yrs ago) and it also accepts those wonderful M lenses. Using the Epson is in fact closer in experience to a film based M camera as the Epson has a advance lever.
So you can get Rangefinder capability/experience with a digital camera w/o having to purchase the Leica M8 and at a lower premium too.
I've tried the M8 side by side with the Epson recently in Japan and found the M8 not to be worth the moolah (comparing apples with apples) when compared to the Epson.
Thank you for the reminder.
But no, I did not "forget" that the Epson exists.
You are absolutely right that one can make photographs the rangefinder way with the Epson +Leica lenses, and that the Epson may be "better" value for money for some. But the Epson is of course not Leica.
The value of "worth" is very subjective, and there are many considerations which I think we should not dwell on. Some people are willing to fork out $100,000.00 for a Hi-Fi system for that "extra bit" oomph from super high end equipment. I have friends who own such equipments, but I personally did not find extra satisfication when I played my music on these equipment. We are all different.
But I need to point out one thing for your consideration. This is my opinion. To me the essence of rangefinder photography is the abilty to see, without interruption at any point of the photographing process, the subject and the surrounding dynamics. No other equipment allow this unobstructed view with supreme clarity.
The absence or presence of partial or full automation is, to me, not the most essential of rangefinder photography.
Very interesting review indeed. . Sean Reid conclude his part 2 of his review by saying and I quote Essentially one potentially has two kinds of camera in the M8. At lower ISO levels, the camera really does draw very much like a medium format film camera. .. At higher ISO levels, the cameras grainy luminance noise is very reminiscent of film grain and so one can also have the kind of look if he or she prefers .
He also mention.. The new leica is very useable at all ISO levels for Black and white work The overall rendering of the camera is very impressive in both color and B&W...
Cheers
Alvin
.. now they're cooking... esp at temp of 2500
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IaPX&tag=
http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IaPX&tag=
Hi,
Leica M8 review by Michael Reichmann:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/leica-m8.shtml
In this "preliminary" report, he has given an excellent review to M8. I especially agree with him on the following paragraph in his report:
=================
But, having said that, the M8 isn't for everyone, money notwithstanding. I know a number of very experienced photographers who simply don't enjoy the rangefinder experience, or whose work and style requires the use of long lenses, TTL viewing, the use of a groundglass, image stabilization, tilt / shift, etc, etc. No, the Leica M8 isn't for everyone, even if they cost no more than a Canon Digital Rebel XTi or Nikon D80. Indeed they may well be the wrong tool for a great many photographers. But, for those that want, need and understand its strengths, the M8 offers the M gestalt in a digital form.
==================
For a very selected group of individuals with budget, go ahead and enjoy the M8 - it is an excellent camera. For the rest of us, we shall enjoy whatever camera tools that fitting our budget. Happy shooting.........
Cheers!
PC
Leica M8 review by Michael Reichmann:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/leica-m8.shtml
In this "preliminary" report, he has given an excellent review to M8. I especially agree with him on the following paragraph in his report:
=================
But, having said that, the M8 isn't for everyone, money notwithstanding. I know a number of very experienced photographers who simply don't enjoy the rangefinder experience, or whose work and style requires the use of long lenses, TTL viewing, the use of a groundglass, image stabilization, tilt / shift, etc, etc. No, the Leica M8 isn't for everyone, even if they cost no more than a Canon Digital Rebel XTi or Nikon D80. Indeed they may well be the wrong tool for a great many photographers. But, for those that want, need and understand its strengths, the M8 offers the M gestalt in a digital form.
==================
For a very selected group of individuals with budget, go ahead and enjoy the M8 - it is an excellent camera. For the rest of us, we shall enjoy whatever camera tools that fitting our budget. Happy shooting.........
Cheers!
PC
Thank you Thank you. May be those who like to quote other people articles as their own experience. Can learn from this gentleman.
Cathay quoted me $7800 with gst. Are they quoting different prices to different people again? If buy from HK, would be around S$6800 when i checked a few days ago.
Knowing Leica, they will probably release something like a M8J, limited edition with lever and budda ears
Of course even with a Apples to apples comparison, this can get very subjective. In Singapore, the Epson is about SGD $3888 currently (the newer RD-1s model), the M8 around SGD7k (or, if weekh is correct, less than that). The price differential gets you
1) 1.3x crop instead of a 1.5x crop, making ur wider lenses wider
2) 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 framelines as opposed to only 28, 35, 50 on the RD-1s.
And remember, the M8 allows u to use a 24mm lens with the inbuilt viewfinder, for an effective focal length of 31.2mm, whereas the RD-1s goes up to only 42mm widest without using an external viewfinder. That's a lot of difference in field of view.
3) Longer rangefinder baselength giving more accurate focusing with longer and faster lenses.
4) Much better build quality. There are many reports on the net of pple having misaligned rangefinders in their Epson. Sean Reid in his exhaustive report on the RD-1 did a survey on the no of pple who had to send in their cameras - not pretty. As a matter of fact, Sean's own RD-1 was in repair at the time of that article. (He had 2 of those if i am not mistaken). He writes that most users are willing to put up with this issue or live with slightly off rangefinders, but that was cos it was the ONLY digital rangfinder in the game.
Not anymore. The rangefinder is the most important part of any rangefinder camera (duh
) and I believe we all want a camera where any focusing errors is due to our own inability, not because the camera's focusing mechanism is off.I've handled the M8 and its construction is right up there with my m6. Ok so it can't run without batteries
5) Better image quality.
Besides the obvious 6 mp vs 10mp issue, there's also the issue of better microlenses on the sensor which does seem to do a good job of correcting for vignetting. Also, the 6mp of the RD-1 is (some say) essentially the same Sony sensor on the D70. So in effect, u're buying presumably newer technology with the M8.
6) Larger buffer. Ok i don't have the actual numbers, but i do believe the buffer is larger and the M8 writes faster than the RD-1. Someone correct me if i am wrong on this
7) It feels and handles exactly like an M, with all the tactile feel and quietness.
(ps: of course now we can argue whether an advance lever or a removable baseplate comes closer to the Leica rangefinder experience
)Whether it's worth the money is up to the individual
Of course even with a Apples to apples comparison, this can get very subjective. In Singapore, the Epson is about SGD $3888 currently (the newer RD-1s model), the M8 around SGD7k (or, if weekh is correct, less than that). The price differential gets you
1) 1.3x crop instead of a 1.5x crop, making ur wider lenses wider
2) 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 framelines as opposed to only 28, 35, 50 on the RD-1s.
And remember, the M8 allows u to use a 24mm lens with the inbuilt viewfinder, for an effective focal length of 31.2mm, whereas the RD-1s goes up to only 42mm widest without using an external viewfinder. That's a lot of difference in field of view.
3) Longer rangefinder baselength giving more accurate focusing with longer and faster lenses.
4) Much better build quality. There are many reports on the net of pple having misaligned rangefinders in their Epson. Sean Reid in his exhaustive report on the RD-1 did a survey on the no of pple who had to send in their cameras - not pretty. As a matter of fact, Sean's own RD-1 was in repair at the time of that article. (He had 2 of those if i am not mistaken). He writes that most users are willing to put up with this issue or live with slightly off rangefinders, but that was cos it was the ONLY digital rangfinder in the game.
Not anymore. The rangefinder is the most important part of any rangefinder camera (duh
I've handled the M8 and its construction is right up there with my m6. Ok so it can't run without
5) Better image quality.
Besides the obvious 6 mp vs 10mp issue, there's also the issue of better microlenses on the sensor which does seem to do a good job of correcting for vignetting. Also, the 6mp of the RD-1 is (some say) essentially the same Sony sensor on the D70. So in effect, u're buying presumably newer technology with the M8.
6) Larger buffer. Ok i don't have the actual numbers, but i do believe the buffer is larger and the M8 writes faster than the RD-1. Someone correct me if i am wrong on this
7) It feels and handles exactly like an M, with all the tactile feel and quietness.
(ps: of course now we can argue whether an advance lever or a removable baseplate comes closer to the Leica rangefinder experience
Whether it's worth the money is up to the individual
So when you robbing a bank;p HA HA Can call me to join
Hi!
For those who have had Canon DSLR experience and M series experience, could you let me know how good is the M series for low light work?
I have read some users feedback that the rangefinders make good low light cameras since they do not have a mirror and they have reduced handshake. I'm asking cos CP was selling 50mm f2.0 for M mount and they told me apertures below f2 hard to find.(Please correct me if I am wrong). I've got a 35mm f1.4 for Canon and I was wondering if that makes my lens faster than a M series f2.0...
For those who have had Canon DSLR experience and M series experience, could you let me know how good is the M series for low light work?
I have read some users feedback that the rangefinders make good low light cameras since they do not have a mirror and they have reduced handshake. I'm asking cos CP was selling 50mm f2.0 for M mount and they told me apertures below f2 hard to find.(Please correct me if I am wrong). I've got a 35mm f1.4 for Canon and I was wondering if that makes my lens faster than a M series f2.0...
Coming from a R-D1s user, I don't think the M8 should be consider a replacement (not withstanding the price)...
1) The crop factor has been discussed many times, surffice to say, it depends on what you like. Some prefer the longer reach, some not. Between 1.5 and 1.33, it really translate to 1-step back in framing. Conversely, I would really want a full-frame RF simply to retain the image characteristics/fingerprints offered by some lenses.
2) Many users opt/send to have additional framelines cluster removed via ala carte or otherwise. If I predominently uses 35/50, it is actually a plus to have less framelines. Many users also use a 21mm (with the 35mm frameline) without any reservation. Not to mention the VF on the R-D1 is 1:1 (good for open-eyes framing).
3) Agree on this point.
4) I can't say I don't really put much weight on Sean's review. For example, he's the same guy who say the VF on the R-D1 is as good as any M (when he's using the R-D1), which is clearly not the case... In anycase, the user base for M8 is still very small at this stage to consider any inherent fault. Any camera with electronics can be iffy at times, and remember that the M8 has more! On the point of accuracy, it is mostly the verticle alignment that is bothering people, which BTW, does not affect accuracy. I think it has to do more with point 3. That said, I've been using the R-D1 with Noct without much complaints.
5) They use different sensor. Before I got my R-D1, I did consider getting the M8, but interestingly, the R-D1 do more than the M8 for my use. It is like thinking of getting the D70 or D2X, which bigger and supposedly more advance, the D70 has wider spectral response to the D2X. This is also the case between the R-D1 and M8. If you're into all-spectrum photography, R-D1 is a gem (as is the D70). IMHO, RF is the best for such application in a dynamic situation.
6) M8 has MD while R-D1 uses a lever. The buffer size is appropriate for both cases.
7) I would argue the reverse. Having use the M7 and MP on a regular basis (and handling the M8 in Ginza recently), I would say the R-D1 is closer to M-experience. Don't under estimate that little advance lever and the ability to hide the LCD. Then again, this point really depends on what you're used to in terms of using a M camera.
All in all, I really don't think the M8 and R-D1 is meant to replace each other. Each of them has a different design philosophy. I don't think either will replace general photography for me (have a read at the Japanese mag "Cameraman" Nov 2006, where they compared 5D, D200, Alpha, Kiss digital, etc vs Provia, Velvia, etc. Digital is still not really on par with slide yet, and I don't have to talk about B&W). But for alternate light, the R-D1 has my vote over the M8.
Just my 2 inflated cents
1) The crop factor has been discussed many times, surffice to say, it depends on what you like. Some prefer the longer reach, some not. Between 1.5 and 1.33, it really translate to 1-step back in framing. Conversely, I would really want a full-frame RF simply to retain the image characteristics/fingerprints offered by some lenses.
2) Many users opt/send to have additional framelines cluster removed via ala carte or otherwise. If I predominently uses 35/50, it is actually a plus to have less framelines. Many users also use a 21mm (with the 35mm frameline) without any reservation. Not to mention the VF on the R-D1 is 1:1 (good for open-eyes framing).
3) Agree on this point.
4) I can't say I don't really put much weight on Sean's review. For example, he's the same guy who say the VF on the R-D1 is as good as any M (when he's using the R-D1), which is clearly not the case... In anycase, the user base for M8 is still very small at this stage to consider any inherent fault. Any camera with electronics can be iffy at times, and remember that the M8 has more! On the point of accuracy, it is mostly the verticle alignment that is bothering people, which BTW, does not affect accuracy. I think it has to do more with point 3. That said, I've been using the R-D1 with Noct without much complaints.
5) They use different sensor. Before I got my R-D1, I did consider getting the M8, but interestingly, the R-D1 do more than the M8 for my use. It is like thinking of getting the D70 or D2X, which bigger and supposedly more advance, the D70 has wider spectral response to the D2X. This is also the case between the R-D1 and M8. If you're into all-spectrum photography, R-D1 is a gem (as is the D70). IMHO, RF is the best for such application in a dynamic situation.
6) M8 has MD while R-D1 uses a lever. The buffer size is appropriate for both cases.
7) I would argue the reverse. Having use the M7 and MP on a regular basis (and handling the M8 in Ginza recently), I would say the R-D1 is closer to M-experience. Don't under estimate that little advance lever and the ability to hide the LCD. Then again, this point really depends on what you're used to in terms of using a M camera.
All in all, I really don't think the M8 and R-D1 is meant to replace each other. Each of them has a different design philosophy. I don't think either will replace general photography for me (have a read at the Japanese mag "Cameraman" Nov 2006, where they compared 5D, D200, Alpha, Kiss digital, etc vs Provia, Velvia, etc. Digital is still not really on par with slide yet, and I don't have to talk about B&W). But for alternate light, the R-D1 has my vote over the M8.
Just my 2 inflated cents
Of course even with a Apples to apples comparison, this can get very subjective. In Singapore, the Epson is about SGD $3888 currently (the newer RD-1s model), the M8 around SGD7k (or, if weekh is correct, less than that). The price differential gets you
1) 1.3x crop instead of a 1.5x crop, making ur wider lenses wider
2) 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 framelines as opposed to only 28, 35, 50 on the RD-1s.
And remember, the M8 allows u to use a 24mm lens with the inbuilt viewfinder, for an effective focal length of 31.2mm, whereas the RD-1s goes up to only 42mm widest without using an external viewfinder. That's a lot of difference in field of view.
3) Longer rangefinder baselength giving more accurate focusing with longer and faster lenses.
4) Much better build quality. There are many reports on the net of pple having misaligned rangefinders in their Epson. Sean Reid in his exhaustive report on the RD-1 did a survey on the no of pple who had to send in their cameras - not pretty. As a matter of fact, Sean's own RD-1 was in repair at the time of that article. (He had 2 of those if i am not mistaken). He writes that most users are willing to put up with this issue or live with slightly off rangefinders, but that was cos it was the ONLY digital rangfinder in the game.
Not anymore. The rangefinder is the most important part of any rangefinder camera (duh
I've handled the M8 and its construction is right up there with my m6. Ok so it can't run without batteries
5) Better image quality.
Besides the obvious 6 mp vs 10mp issue, there's also the issue of better microlenses on the sensor which does seem to do a good job of correcting for vignetting. Also, the 6mp of the RD-1 is (some say) essentially the same Sony sensor on the D70. So in effect, u're buying presumably newer technology with the M8.
6) Larger buffer. Ok i don't have the actual numbers, but i do believe the buffer is larger and the M8 writes faster than the RD-1. Someone correct me if i am wrong on this
7) It feels and handles exactly like an M, with all the tactile feel and quietness.
(ps: of course now we can argue whether an advance lever or a removable baseplate comes closer to the Leica rangefinder experience
Whether it's worth the money is up to the individual
Hmmmm..... do you have a VVIP card from CP? They also quoted a S$7.8k to me over the last weekend. Haha...can help me buy one? I meet you at the door if it is below S$7k.
:angel:
- Status
Similar threads
