Leica M8 Field Test, Iraq

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by crazeazn

isnt the current contractor panasonic?

No, real Leicas are designed and made in Solms and that is the M series.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by PIC

This "design" was outdated decades ago, a lot of old school photographers cheered over the return of things as a shutter speed dial & aperture ring combo vs the dual dials of modern SLRs. Not realizing SLRs have them because things like the aperture ring was obsoleted YEARs ago (from a speed/performance point of view).

Although I'm sorry to say, nice lenses aside, Leica IS decades behind in technology. As this article proves, comparing the M8 to a pro DSLR for any serious performance assignment is a joke. So the only way they could sell this M8 is by doing exactly what they did, a misplaced effort to attract classicists or "old farts" that only buy these cameras out of nostalgia, jewel status, or the need to feel potent.
VIAGRA is cheaper and more effective as are many SLR's.
Its ridiculously overpriced, but truth is nobody would look at it if it cost the same as a D300, it would lose its only true value {snob value}. Like a Bentley.

The first mistake was thinking the M8 was designed as a tool for serious photojournalists. It wasn't. It was designed for wealthy collectors.

The second mistake is bastarding it with 21st Century technology.

The final mistake is made by anyone who buys one and trys to use it for real work - including this author who did it 3 "count them" times !!


EL

Try some Leica R glass on a canon 1DsMkIII and then say that. Leica still makes some of the best glass in the world. Can't put a Noctilux on a D300 eiither.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by PIC

HAD and so did HBLAD, Minolta, Nikon, Pentax, Contax !
Image Icons in Film yesterday, But on the Digital Divide ...
Its a whole new ball game !
Some Lead ... Some Follow ... Others just die or get out of the way ...

Welcome to the 21st Century Friends, Romans, and Countrymen.

EL

Why then do so many serious Canon users put Contax glass on their bodies?

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by AndrewCCM

Not everyone is good at making computers (which is what a digital body is these days).

But Leica is very very good at making lenses and if you don't have it in the lens the computer won't help.

Look at all the people who put older Leica and Zeiss glass on modern body because in the end glass wins out.

[amadjuster]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

But Leica is very very good at making lenses and if you don't have it in the lens the computer won't help.

Look at all the people who put older Leica and Zeiss glass on modern body because in the end glass wins out.

Except the glass didn't help the three M8's this guy went through.

[PIC]

Originally Posted by amadjuster

Except the glass didn't help the three M8's this guy went through.

Careful David -

An Old Man stroking his Leica is like one doing it with his Bentley ...

But you got to wonder why he posted such a pee poor report in the 1st place {???}


EL

[amadjuster]

It sounded like he just tried and tried and tried to like it and didn't. As bad as these things were, I can't believe he kept on going and going - kind of like the Leica Energizer bunny. Its almost like he thought that he was going to wake up one morning and it would work.

I was really surprised by the bad report he gave on the M7.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by PIC

Careful David -

An Old Man stroking his Leica is like one doing it with his Bentley ...

But you got to wonder why he posted such a pee poor report in the 1st place {???}


EL

Having a Bentley to stroke is better than a Kia.

It was posted because Leica users see that putting such things out will over time improve the breed.

[Pascal]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Why then do so many serious Canon users put Contax glass on their bodies?

Mostly because those who know what Leica or Zeiss lenses are capable of don't bother with the hyped up-over priced Canon L or Nikon ED glass.



Leica did try but failed miserably with the R9/DMR and the M8... just my opinion. Their R lenses and the uber-priced M lenses are simply superb when it comes to optics. The colors and resolution are exquisite. But it's a hard sell for photographers who have been spoilt by high speed USM/AF-S/SWD lenses from Canon or Nikon or Olympus (recently).

I wish they had caught up with the times when it comes to the "R". Had they gone 100% digital and provided some new AF lenses..... like they did with 4/3rds/Panasonic, they could have still taken a small chunk of the market share.
But the good part is, some of us can scoop up lenses like the 80-200mm f4.0 for $650 BNIB - a lens that once sold for $1600 :)

It takes a lot for a "red dot" fan to actually come back and say "crap" about the gear. Maybe if they decide to revive themselves with an R10 and provide AF for their lenses, they may still have a chance.