Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Leica M8  (Read 9476 times)
seany
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« on: November 20, 2006, 03:34:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Michael we know you are hurting and it is normal to want to hit back at someone over your misadventure with the now infamous M8 review but it would be much better to let it go after all time is a great healer and continual sniping about critics and those who were unkind will only serve to keep the wound open,as the saying goes "when in a hole its best to stop digging".
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #1 on: November 20, 2006, 04:24:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Do you mean the What's New comment for Nov 19?

Actually, I'm not hurting all that much, thanks.

I'm somewhat miffed at the situation, but I'm a big boy and I'll survive.

My ire at the moment though is aimed at those that have no horse in the particular race but who enjoy taking swipes at Leica, reviewers, the problem itself and whatever helps them grind thier particular axe.

In any event, I'll continue to report on the situation, the good, the bad and the ugly, since it's what currently interest me and others. I know I should lie low for now, but that's not in my nature.

Whip me. Beat me.

Michael
Logged
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #2 on: November 20, 2006, 04:58:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Whip me. Beat me.
"Sticks and stones may break my bones
but whips and chains excite me"


Logged

Jan
soslund
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #3 on: November 20, 2006, 06:28:36 PM »
ReplyReply

As an M7 owner with 3 lenses, I eagerly awaited the arrival of the M8.  The IR issues were certainly disappointing, and initially I was a bit put off with the notion of having to use a filter to address the problem.

However, I also own a Hasselblad XPan 2 with both the 45 and 90 lens.  The 45 (virtually) mandates the use of a center filter which I have never been bothered using.  The resultant images are spectacular, and despite transitioning to digital, I will continue to use the XPan WITH the filter--in fact, I'm hauling the rig to Antarctica once again with Michael et al.

And, once Leica works out the latest M8 bugs, I suspect I'll soon be shooting "leicachromes" with the M8--filter and all!!

Scott Oslund
Logged
seany
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #4 on: November 21, 2006, 03:59:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Do you mean the What's New comment for Nov 19?

Actually, I'm not hurting all that much, thanks.

I'm somewhat miffed at the situation, but I'm a big boy and I'll survive.

My ire at the moment though is aimed at those that have no horse in the particular race but who enjoy taking swipes at Leica, reviewers, the problem itself and whatever helps them grind thier particular axe.

In any event, I'll continue to report on the situation, the good, the bad and the ugly, since it's what currently interest me and others. I know I should lie low for now, but that's not in my nature.

Whip me. Beat me.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86240\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
seany
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 30


« Reply #5 on: November 21, 2006, 04:13:05 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86321\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
While your attitude is laudable Michael I think your analogy to horse racing is both unfair and incorrect.Horse racing as a sport would not be the industry it is today if it was confined to owners and trainers/jockeys likewise camera equipment reviewing would have a very small audience if confined to those who owned Leica M8 cameras,though it would eliminate a lot of your tormentors it smacks of snobbery and elitism which I'm sure is not your intent.
Logged
michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #6 on: November 21, 2006, 05:49:22 AM »
ReplyReply

No, it is not my intent.

Sigh!

Michael
Logged
JJP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #7 on: November 21, 2006, 06:30:56 AM »
ReplyReply

Good Day Michael,
All's I want to know about the M8 is:
Would you consider the M8 a pocket camera, if you've got the body in one pocket and lens in another?
If the answer is yes to above, would you buy an M8 as is with your own money?
JJ
Logged

JJ
madmanchan
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2110


« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2006, 07:09:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Good Day Michael,
All's I want to know about the M8 is:
Would you consider the M8 a pocket camera, if you've got the body in one pocket and lens in another?
If the answer is yes to above, would you buy an M8 as is with your own money?
JJ
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86339\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

JJ, with regards to the 2nd part of your question -- keep in mind that Michael already has bought an M8 with his own money.

Eric
Logged

michael
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4915



« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2006, 07:10:14 AM »
ReplyReply

You need to define "pocket".

The M8 will fit in a large overcoat pocket even with a lens attached. But, that's not how I would carry one around.

I did by an M8 with my own money, even aware as I am of its flaws.

Michael
« Last Edit: November 21, 2006, 07:10:31 AM by michael » Logged
JJP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 208


« Reply #10 on: November 21, 2006, 11:34:07 AM »
ReplyReply

thanks Michael, Madmanchan,
jj
Logged

JJ
jani
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1604



WWW
« Reply #11 on: November 21, 2006, 03:11:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
No, it is not my intent.

Sigh!
Here, share this virtual glass of Glenrothes Select Reserve with me.

Heavens know, I need one, and I'm not the target of this endless mudslinging.
Logged

Jan
mikeseb
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 482



WWW
« Reply #12 on: November 22, 2006, 10:27:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
No, it is not my intent.

Sigh!

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86331\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

With every touch of the tarbaby, you are more firmly mired, eh?

Amazing how much time some folks here have on their hands. I'm voting for more shutter, and less keyboard, time.

Jani, I think I'll make mine a couple fingers of Pappy Van Winkle or Woodford Reserve.

Happy Thanksgiving to my fellow US forum-goers, and a peaceful Thursday to the rest.
Logged

michael sebastian
Website  |  Blog
MrIconoclast
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 88


« Reply #13 on: November 24, 2006, 01:22:52 PM »
ReplyReply

In my mind the real lesson to be learned from the M8 debate is not to rush in and buy the first of anything. Back in my days as a programmer (AKA software engineer) our rule was be 6 months or one release behind.   Let somebody else be on the bleeding edge of technology.
Logged
Michael O'Sullivan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #14 on: November 27, 2006, 10:52:09 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As an M7 owner with 3 lenses, I eagerly awaited the arrival of the M8.  The IR issues were certainly disappointing, and initially I was a bit put off with the notion of having to use a filter to address the problem.

However, I also own a Hasselblad XPan 2 with both the 45 and 90 lens.  The 45 (virtually) mandates the use of a center filter which I have never been bothered using.  The resultant images are spectacular, and despite transitioning to digital, I will continue to use the XPan WITH the filter--in fact, I'm hauling the rig to Antarctica once again with Michael et al.

And, once Leica works out the latest M8 bugs, I suspect I'll soon be shooting "leicachromes" with the M8--filter and all!!

Scott Oslund
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=86258\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Logged
Michael O'Sullivan
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3


« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2006, 11:37:53 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87370\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

         I am a very long time Leica fan and I think Leitz need to examine their concience on  this matter instead of offering two free filters to someone who has spent 4 to 4.5k on an M8.
                                      One could buy a digital camera for a fraction of this price that wouldn't have these issues!
        Also if you happen to have more than two lenses your "friendly Leica dealer" will facilitate you!
                         There is obviously a serious design fault here and they should fix it instead of trying to camouflage it with filters!

It's not very Leicalike!
Logged
dlashier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 518



WWW
« Reply #16 on: November 27, 2006, 12:03:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
One could buy a digital camera for a fraction of this price that wouldn't have these issues!
Also if you happen to have more than two lenses your "friendly Leica dealer" will facilitate you!
There is obviously a serious design fault here and they should fix it instead of trying to camouflage it with filters!

It's not very Leicalike!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

But it is very Leicalike! You could almost be talking about Leica's insistence that PITA bottom loading yields better pictures.  Leica likes to sqeeze every ounce out even if it causes a bit of pain now and then.

- DL
« Last Edit: November 27, 2006, 12:07:03 PM by dlashier » Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5168


« Reply #17 on: November 27, 2006, 01:08:33 PM »
ReplyReply

I expect some people to find the external IR/UV filter solution clumsy, but in other ways, it has its attractions:

- one can probably do IR photography better than with any other standard digital camera, by swapping from the IR/UV filter, to a deep red "visible light blocker". (Maybe UV photography, too: there is a hint that both UV and IR are under filtered on the M8.)

- the IR/UV filter also provides the "protective filter" than many people have permanently in place anyway. And when the lens being protected is an expensive Leica one, this protection has more than the usual degree of attraction.

- the cost and weight of such filters is very small compared to the cost of the Leica M8 and Leica lenses, so I do not see much to complain about, even if you buy more than the two offered for free, so as to have one permanently on each lens.


The worst of it is what happens when one wants to use another filter, probably a polarizer: do you stack filters? Does that risk vignetting?
Logged
John Camp
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1260


« Reply #18 on: November 27, 2006, 02:08:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
There is obviously a serious design fault here and they should fix it instead of trying to camouflage it with filters!

It's not very Leicalike!
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87380\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

There are actually two serious design faults. One was by God when he set up the laws of physics, and which Leica can't do too much about; the other was by Leica when they designed a rangefinder camera in the first place, and then got some people hooked on them.

If we want to use Leica M lenses, we'll have to put up with filters. The long, and often tedious discussions on the Leica forum suggest that Leica is being squeezed between competing design parameters. Leica has said they want to design the best digital camera for taking B&W photos (long a Leica speciality) along with color; that means extra IR sensitivity. You can't have both without having something that's removable; they tried to skate it and then deal with the IR sensitivity in C1 profiles, but people aren't buying that. So we need filters; so do some much more expensive MF cameras.

I personally like the compromise; I'm more than willing to screw and unscrew a filter occasionally; when I was shooting B&W with Nikon film cameras, I did it all the time, and have no particular fear of filters. In fact, as soon as I got a Noctilux, which for me is a pretty expensive lens, I screwed in a B+W UV filter simply for protection. It would take a far better eye than mine to see any difference in the resulting photos, between filtered and unfiltered.  

I guess the bottom line is, if you really want a 5D, you should get one. If you really want an M8, this is what you're gonna get. Nobody's putting a gun to your head.

JC
Logged
Scott_H
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 331


« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2006, 06:00:02 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
The worst of it is what happens when one wants to use another filter, probably a polarizer: do you stack filters? Does that risk vignetting?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=87400\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Using a polarizer with a rangefinder is clumsy anyway.  If the polarizer is screwed in to the filter threads, there really isn't a good way to determine the amount of polarisation.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad