Frankly RF's always had superior WA performance. With the whole edge pixel microlens issue, not sure how the WA M-lenses are going to perform on this M8 given the very short distance between lens and film plane and the resulting obliquness of the light path.
Now if you want the small/quiet/vibration free thing going with a digital body, there might be a customer.
Not sure how I feel abt Leica. I mean I own a small R-system and it is a wonderfully engineered machine and the optics are top-notch, but I am not sure they are worth the price. All of my stuff is used, and still as costly as the equivilent nikon gear would be new.
I've had the same thought about how my 21mm 3.4 Super Angulon would work on one of those. It''s all still speculation of course until they ship. "Announcements" of anything, official or unofficial, don't impress me much.
"If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough." -Robert Capa
If the M8 will be sold for around $5000, it proves my point that having 2 cameras one for film and another for digital is more economical and convienient than having 1 camera with film and digital back like the R9 and Modul R.
No doubt about it. Most pros today have moved to digital and even the DMR is bought mainly by amateurs.
I doubt that the M8 demographic will be any different.
New Leicas are certainly for those with deep pockets. On the other hand, you can put together a decent used R kit for little more than a Nikon MF kit. It just takes careful shopping.
Even a used M kit can be cost effective if assembled properly. I've never bought a new piece of Leica equipment. One of their biggest problems is that their stuff just keeps going. My 46 year old M2 is as smooth as any camera I've ever used.
Well, most of the true pros who didn't think much about equipment are dead by now, but something like M3 is still timeless, imho. Depends on your definition of a "pro" though...
$5k is a bit insane. There used to be a time when Leica was affordable to most. Now looks like they chose to jack up the price based on brand history. I don't beleive this strategy will succeed. They'll just drive themselves further and further into the niche they built in recent decade.
I actually saw an M8 last week here in New York City. Must have been a reviewer. He noticed me starring (as well as the M2 around my neck) and just smiled. Maybe it was the drool on my chin as well.
As far as I know, the M7 and MP are not being discontinued. At least I haven't heard any rumours to the contrary.
As for the M8 price drop, I wouldn't count on that happening any time soon. Leica will have trouble meeting demand for the next year or two.
There has been some talk about Leica offering an eventual sensor upgrade. Normally I'd blow that off as a rumour. However, Leica has always prided itself on non-obsolescence.
If the body is as well built as a film M, the M8 becomes very interesting. It's the sensor becoming "out of date" that causes the majority of the depreciation on DSLR's. Swap out the sensor for $2000 (just a guess) every few years and the cost of the body itself isn't out of line with a film M.
I'm curious as to what the M8 will do to the used M market. I doubt that it will have much effect on the non-metered models, but anything from the M6 on up might take a small hit as people trade them in toward an M8.
I have an M6, and I look forward to using the M8. I think that a 10mp sensor is more than enough to defy obselesence for a few years. If the body can hold up, which I'm sure it will, then the M8 will be around for a long time.
If I primarily shot candids and street photography I would be interested, I had a couple of Leica's long ago -- a IIIc then an early M. Loaded with TriX and with the Nikkor 85mm f2 it was a great setup for candids. SLRs always seemed terribly noisy to me after the Leicas.
The more I think of it the less inclined I am to buying one. I could replace both my Leica M3 and M4-2 and their four lenses for about the same price.
Leicas are a proven investment when it comes to film bodies. How does such an investment fare in the face of digital obsolescence? What happens when the M8's megapixel count is outdistanced by a factor of 2x or 3x? Leitz glass can't salvage that kind of difference.
"If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough." -Robert Capa
>Leicas are a proven investment when it comes to film bodies. > How does such an investment fare in the face of digital >obsolescence? What happens when the M8's megapixel count is >outdistanced by a factor of 2x or 3x? Leitz glass can't >salvage that kind of difference.
Couldn't agree more. Unless Leica does offer some sort of upgrade program there's no way I buy an M8.
I'm not even concerned with pixel count per se, but there are going to be advancements in dynamic range that will make today's sensors totally obsolete.
I should not keep looking at the internet. It is v tempting, not now but as a used item in the future.
I would take the M8 over the D2x anyday I take a M6 over a F6 anyday
Its like a Harley Davidson sure its got less stuff and such and slower to work, ie .. no AF and non zoom lens for travel but hey ..
Its tempting that the M6 can help me pulling too far away from 35mm film, I have had urges to head to LF or MF film sizes. For digital I don't need MF well its even more expensive than a M8
Something that I can spend the next couple yrs saving for it and then get it used, to treat myself, sure its not workable with split filters and lack of AF and stuff and stuff but hey .. the Harley was not born to race either, nor to go to work each morning.
I just like the Leica's because a bright VF I read. However I have not held any of the Leica's. I like its discreet size and without a bulky prism and its a full functional camera. I saw the M8 pictures of its viewfinder, and I like it, less time hassling with the zoom of the lens, and I quite like the rangefinder VF of the grindlines. The lenses are smaller and stuff, its lighter than a D70 but the M7/6 is not lighter than a F75 or such but when I travel I like the size so its more discreet and so you don't need a Lowepro bag of any sort.
I also like the simple design of the Leica's. I don't do sports when AF is required or burst mode or focus tracking or 3D matrix or iTTL ... ..... You have less things to worry about and those things are not even there to begin with. The Fm2n is nice too but the prism gets in the way and the lens is larger.
When I was overseas one time and my D70 batt went flat and another when the mem card was full, I used a disposable camera, the thing I like about that was the camera was smaller no prism and the viewfinder was just so so bright.
I have played the mp3 file and noticed I like the M7 shutter noise better.
Just may keep me travelling with film seriously and then scan it. At most 3 lenses to go with it.
With some ebay patience you can still get a russian clone of II or IIf for about $60-90 in mint condition, like Zorki 4k boxed (speaking of bright viewfinders). Add few M39 lenses - there's some great glass, and voila - complete leica-like system, fits in a pocket, doubles up as a bludgeoning weapon or a hammer in your travels. Attracts less attention and nobody wants to steal it. Can $5000 M8 beat that?
And people took photos of moving subjects with these kind of screwmount setups for a long while. Only thing that I found a bit tough is macro, it being rangefinder and all...
The banding issue didn't seem like a big deal to me, but that IR sensitivity that turns certain blacks and blues into shades of red is going to be a major problem. Also, having to code all lenses and buy IR blocking filters isn't going to make Leicaphiles very happy.
I think I will stick with my film Bessa's for my RF styled shooting, and leave the digital to Nikon.
>The banding issue didn't seem like a big deal to me, but >that IR sensitivity that turns certain blacks and blues into >shades of red is going to be a major problem. Also, having >to code all lenses and buy IR blocking filters isn't going >to make Leicaphiles very happy. > >I think I will stick with my film Bessa's for my RF styled >shooting, and leave the digital to Nikon.
I doubt that I'll be letting my M2 and M6 go any time soon. Maroon labradors just don't look right.
Apparently the "fix" is going to cost M8 owners $150 per lens unless Leica gives the filters away. I'd be a raving lunatic if I paid $4600 for a camera and then had to pay for filters to cure a manufacturer's problem.
Then there's the matter of putting a piece of glass in front of my megabuck lens. I'm sure that the filters will be of good quality, but wasn't the idea behind omitting the filter from the sensor to maintain maximum resolution?
Even Pop Photo is giving Leica some digs. I don't think that I've ever seen them do that to a potential advertiser before.