Leica M8

Graham

There is a very good article on the M8 in this weeks edition of Amateur Photographer.

The camera is well reviewed because of its inbuilt quality and its use of current lenses.

Never lose track of the fact that the lense is the most important part of any camera.

I would not normally say this, but get yourself over to the PFM and ask for Vuk. He is the best photographer on any hifi forum and examples of his work is there to see. He uses a M6 and no one else can hold a candle to him.

Go there and get really good advice.

Regards

Mick ... M6 owner.

Mick

The AP article caused me to post here. Thanks for the advice.

Graham.... F3 owner

Graham
I was writing a long and probably pompous response to your original post when the phone rang.
If you already have some M lenses then the M8 should be fantastic. If you have some Nikon lenses to fit your F3 there are some damned good Nikon DSLRs out too. With Leica, acquiring the body is just the start of the expense! That said, I think Leica glass is second to none. An M series isgreat for wide to short telephoto work but not suitable for macro or longer telephoto.
Horses for courses.
If you really have no experience with digital maybe it would be an idea to get much less expensive digicam which has RAW capability and see if you are happy to do the necessary post-production computer work to get a good image out the other end. JPEG gives you that right away but at the expense of some detail.
Sorry if this still comes across as pompous!

I'm certainly not bagging leica - great glass, great kit. Even trialing their binoculars makes you sad to even consider other brands.

This article should make interesting reading.

And then of course there's Your camera has NOTHING to do with making great photos

Vuk's an excellent photographer, *actively leveraging* the strengths and weaknesses of the kit he selects for use. He'll make a brilliant photo regardless of whether he's using a disposable camera, or a Leica.

cheers!

Rico is right. "Seeing" is everything - and only familiarity with your equipment will allow you to to get what you "see" onto a photographic image.

While Leica lenses are nice, I have only ever seen the Leica "look" in black and white prints from film. Not sure if the digital Leicas get that feel across.

I don't have a Leica camera (moved from Olympus SLRs to Nikon many moons ago when Zuiko lenses vanished from the market place) but I've always wanted to have one. Not because their lenses are sharper than Nikkors, nor because of the virtually silent shutter action, nor the relatively diminutive size (esp compared with an F5!!) but, from the various articles read over the years, Leica's legendary ability to create an image on film which has a unique personality - almost an exemplar of vinyl qualities versus cd.

So the idea of a digital Leica sits rather at odds with the legend I have built up in my perception over a long time. I wonder if they have managed to retain that magic - an inner voice whispers not a chance!

Then again I still haven't persuaded myself to move away from 35mm film. I'm sure one day in the not to distant future market forces will insist upon it. But for now, I'll wait a while longer before rushing to embrace it.

Peter

[How ill advised my comments may be never having owned a Leica, I dread to think!!]

Dear Peter,

About the advisedness of your observations on the esteemed Leica camera company, I have no idea, but like you I cannot quite bring myself to give up film. There wwas a thread about my very old Canonet [28?] range-finder with which I took all the recent photos in Poland. For the good photograghers here, some of these may be seen on my Polish Vodka Thread. The camera is almost as old as I am, but stil works well, I think!

I was offered a [post 1945] Leica, which was my grandmother's previous camera before the Canonet, but I declined it. It looked a proper monster to work. But surely finer in ultimate terms...

ATB from Fredrik

PS: Four weeks today with my veteran Canonet in Warsaw:

The real decision here is not about digital v. film, but rangefinder v. SLR.
The investment in an M8 outfit with a couple of bright Leica lenses would be substantial, and I doubt if many people would carry a rangefinder and SLR at the same time.
So the choice is between; compactness of the camera and viewfinder brightness v. ability to use telephoto/zoom lenses and a WYSIWYG viewfinder.

An unbiased review of the leica M8 here...
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/leica-m8.shtml

I was asked to write a review on the M8 for a magazine. If you Google "leica m8 review" you can read it.

quote:

Originally posted by count.d:
I was asked to write a review on the M8 for a magazine. If you Google "leica m8 review" you can read it.

Which one is out of the 630,000 is it, come on don't be shy give us a link.

Beano

Trouble in paradise:

http://luminous-landscape.com/whatsnew/

I love my M6, and my lenses (16 voigtlander, 24, 36, 50, 90, hike!) and had one of these on my list but will wait for v2 if there is one. At these prices, who needs the hassle of a recall? My wife already thinks I am a lunatic for even thinking about buying one with Canons under $1000.

I hate it for Leica. These guys are overdue for a breakthrough. Remarkably though, the color defect is a feature for black and white.

Hard to see how Leica stays independent for much longer.