What is the big deal about the Leica M8?

[Murph]

I fail to understand the intense desire that people have for the Leica M8. I have some problems with this, and would like to have it explained if you would be so kind.

1) Its a rangefinder derivative with a VERY limited range of focal lengths. Would it not have been better to have added an electronic framing area where you did not need to use an auxillary finder? Certainly the technology is available.

2) Why in this day and age manual focus lenses? Surely Leica could have made some autofocus lenses like the ones they make for Panasonic (14-50mm)? While nice, do not Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta, or Kodak (schneider) make lenses as good?

3) 10 mp, OK, a D200 has as many, can use any Nikon lens from 10.5mm to 600mm without an add on focusing aid.

Its a digital M7, a camera that only Leicaphiles use these days, and at least to my mind, a potentially limited one ever since the advent of the SLR. I am not trying to be insulting, but why?

[kenw]

self-delusional snob appeal.....

[evil4blue]

Tread lightly Murph, there are some that would take the context of thread akin to an act of war.

[Jim Victory]

All I can say is your lucky your not on a Leica forum. One of their own compared it to a 5D and gave a favorable nod to the 5D and I think they drug him from his home and removed his member-ship in the Leica club.

http://www.texasphotoforum.com/forum...ad.php?t=30791

[Daniel Bates]

Well, I certainly won't be buying one--I have other things to do with about ten grand. But if you have the money and you like well-made, quiet, small cameras, the M8 just may be exactly the thing you need.

Different strokes for different folks. I want a big, fast DSLR and big, fast lenses. Others like street candids, where the smaller the camera, the better. It all depends on what you want to do with a camera.

[Gabby498]

I took my very old M4 to a photo club shoot a vew months ago because I thought it would be fund to shoot film again. It was a model shoot and I like the Leica when working in close, it is quiet and unobtrusive. One of the young ladies, photographer not a model, in her mid twenties asked me why my camera looked so strange. She had never seen a 35mm rangefinder. I love my Leicas and if I could afford the M8 I would be right in line. Just different strokes. I used to do street photography with Leica and it was fun to watch peoples expression. Not hearing the expected SLR clunk they were never actually sure whether of not I took the photograph. You can get some strange looks when you are using a rangefinder or twin lens reflex any more.

[lulalake]

Originally Posted by Murph

I fail to understand the intense desire that people have for the Leica M8. I have some problems with this, and would like to have it explained if you would be so kind.

1) Its a rangefinder derivative with a VERY limited range of focal lengths. Would it not have been better to have added an electronic framing area where you did not need to use an auxillary finder? Certainly the technology is available.

2) Why in this day and age manual focus lenses? Surely Leica could have made some autofocus lenses like the ones they make for Panasonic (14-50mm)? While nice, do not Nikon, Canon, Olympus, Minolta, or Kodak (schneider) make lenses as good?

3) 10 mp, OK, a D200 has as many, can use any Nikon lens from 10.5mm to 600mm without an add on focusing aid.

Its a digital M7, a camera that only Leicaphiles use these days, and at least to my mind, a potentially limited one ever since the advent of the SLR. I am not trying to be insulting, but why?

Gee Murph, why do people spend hundreds of thousands on sailboats when a jet will get you there faster?

Why do people choose blues played on an acoustic guitar or prefer a Stradivarius violin when a synth will play it louder with far more control?

Why do people spend hundreds of bucks on hiking shoes when a car will get you there faster?

Think about it my man.

Cheers

Jules

[Glen_A]

Ever since I saw a photo of Johnny Depp in France wearing a beret, with a leica hanging from his neck, and the article it was with, he was basically saying how wonderful France was and how much the US sucked......more or less.........anyhow I associate that with Leica and can't seem to disassociate it. I am a chevy kind of guy...........I don't need a Mercedes or BMW.

[dlbdata]

They seem to capture more expensive pixels. Almost like a ROLEX

[boxofrocks]

The sharpness of the lenses is supposed to be fantastic, right?

I had the same question. Here is what Phil Askey had to say about it:


Rangefinder advantages / disadvantages (for the uninitiated)

Fewer moving parts (no mirror or diaphragm) means slower shutter speeds possible (-2 EV)
More compact, discrete and quieter than an SLR
Shorter shutter lag
Lenses are considerably smaller than an equivalent SLR lens
No auto-focus makes them less suitable for action shots (or at least doing so requires a lot more skill)
Many users claim rangefinder focusing is faster than using a focusing screen

Rangefinder
You are not looking through the lens itself and do not have a focusing screen hence it is more difficult to get a sense of depth-of-field
Framelines indicate the field of view of different lenses
Because there is no mirror you have no mirror black-out
Brighter than any SLR viewfinder, and not affected by lens maximum aperture
Not as accurate as an SLR viewfinder, especially with longer lenses (or close subjects)

Longer minimum focus distances compared to an SLR
Virtually no telephoto lenses beyond 135mm
Very wide angle or telephoto lenses require an accessory viewfinder, meaning focus and framing are separated

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Daniel Bates

Well, I certainly won't be buying one--I have other things to do with about ten grand. But if you have the money and you like well-made, quiet, small cameras, the M8 just may be exactly the thing you need.

Different strokes for different folks. I want a big, fast DSLR and big, fast lenses. Others like street candids, where the smaller the camera, the better. It all depends on what you want to do with a camera.

Well if you want "big, fast Lenses", Leica is the way to go. The only camera company to manufacture a 50/1.0 currently and it is big and very fast and costs less than a used Canon 50/1.0L.

I like Leicas for small, fast, quiet, unobtrusive available light work with the finest lenses going.

[kenw]

Purchases like this rarely follow sound logic. they are emotional, yet the purchasers often attempt to rationalize them on some esoteric technical basis, which since they are not really very technical astute anyway, usually falls apart upon subjective scrutiny (such as Phil's above).

If you buy one and tell me it's a superior camera because of such-and-such, I'll laugh in your face.

If you buy one and tell me you did so simply because you LIKE it and WANT it, I'll support you 100%.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by kenw

Purchases like this rarely follow sound logic. they are emotional, yet the purchasers often attempt to rationalize them on some esoteric technical basis, which since they are not really very technical astute anyway, usually falls apart upon subjective scrutiny (such as Phil's above).

If you buy one and tell me it's a superior camera because of such-and-such, I'll laugh in your face.

If you buy one and tell me you did so simply because you LIKE it and WANT it, I'll support you 100%.

The Lenses' Laddie, the Lenses. Ever look at nice large prints made with Leica glass they have a Leica look.

Also Leica designs for maximum preformance wide open.

[lulalake]

Originally Posted by Glen_A

Ever since I saw a photo of Johnny Depp in France wearing a beret, with a leica hanging from his neck, and the article it was with, he was basically saying how wonderful France was and how much the US sucked......more or less.........anyhow I associate that with Leica and can't seem to disassociate it. I am a chevy kind of guy...........I don't need a Mercedes or BMW.

It's interesting how perception works. You know how here, Mercedes are considered hoity-toity (mostly because of the price and the "prestige"). I have a daughter that lives in London and travels to Europe quite a bit. There, Mercedes are considered nothing much more than French Taxis, which is what they are. Also, Mercedes makes a line of garbage trucks that service the rest of the world. Why? They work great and last forever.

Volvos: We all know the baggage that Volvo ownership carries with it in the USA. In Europe it's just the opposite. Volvo drivers are considered black-hat cowboys that couldn't care less about traffic laws, or tagging other cars. Why? Because you can beat the s*** out of them, they keep on keeping on and last forever so Volvo drivers there are considered disrespectful and careless.(Much like teenage hot-rodders here).

It's all perception. I wonder what if Depp were wearing a Canon?

Jules

[venchka]

For macro work & lenses longer than 135mm, SLRs rule. No dispute!

I am not a Leicaphile nor rabid on the subject. I have owned rangefinder equipment and SLR equipment for about the same amount of time. That would be like slightly after Edison invented the light bulb!

The Leica M3 & M2 (that's in chronological order, believe it or not) were introduced just about the time that the SLR was introduced. Leica is still making M body rangefinders. How many SLR makers are gone?

Leica came into being in the 1930s. They have only used two lens mounts & the older original mount lenses work with the newer mount bodies. There is a bewildering array of lenses in a wide price range available for the Leica M body. Lenses from the 1930's can be used on the latest M body. Canon, Nikon, Minolta, Konica, and a host of others have produced lenses in one or both of the Leica mounts. Did you know: I can mount my old Canon FD lenses on my even older Canon (Leica screw mount) rangefinder bodies? Something I can't do on my newer Canon EOS SLR.

Autofocus lenses? Why? I can focus a rangefinder under conditions that my autofocus lenses don't even understand. This borders on the film vs. digital debate. Armed with a rangefinder (doesn't have to be a Leica at all) camera and a moderately fast lens (f:3.5 even) and some Tri-X rated at (Corrected major OOPS!) 12,800, a person can make photographs under any condition where there is enough light to see the subject. Yes, that is ISO 12,800. Two stops faster than ISO 3200. The instructions and an example here: Tri-X at 128k in Rodinal

I suppose it boils down to this: Until you have used an all metal, all mechanical, film based rangefinder camera and seen the photos produced, you just won't understand.

Back to the M8. Yes, there has been much (too much perhaps) TALK about the M8. So far it is just that: TALK! Until real photographs appear from the finished product, the jury is still out. Time will tell.