p.1 #1 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
Traveling with a 40 D and L glass adds up to WEIGHT. Has anyone tried the Leica M8 and leica lenses to lessen the load? Do you have any advice on the idea? thanks joanlvh
p.1 #2 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
This depends on your type of travel. If you are going on an excursion with a cultural focus, then the M8 is ideal. It is suitable for people, street, architectural, and landscape photography... it is not well suited to nature travel.
Where and how long will you be gone?
regards
bruce
p.1 #3 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
I don't know about the M8 (except for drooling over it), though here's an interesting article from LL, where a guy brought an M8 with a few lenses and a Canon G9, and ended up using the G9 almost the whole trip:
p.1 #4 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
Jman13 wrote:
I don't know about the M8 (except for drooling over it), though here's an interesting article from LL, where a guy brought an M8 with a few lenses and a Canon G9, and ended up using the G9 almost the whole trip:
Yes but that guy first looks for a camera that "should fit into the pocket of my fleece or shell" and finds the M8 too big. For someone used to a 40D and L glass the M8 is the equivalent of what the G9 was for that guy.
p.1 #5 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
OwlsEyes, the subjects you mentioned are what I would be photographing, also indoor shots, Should the M8 and something like the Leica 50 f2 work well inside a museum or cathederal? thanks again.
p.1 #6 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
Maybe get a new 450D?
As I understand it, the M8 was old technology when released, and hasn't got any better. Lenses great (manual focus?) but noise, lack of high ISO, etc. (don't forget crop sensor as well) is a killer for a travel lens IMHO. Sad really, I wanted to buy one too ...
450 is a lot lighter than 40D, and not far off G9, which although is quite good, noise at medium ISO is a killer for me as a travel lense - I want clean at ISO800, fixable at 1600 for inside cathedrals, etc.
p.1 #7 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
You can always get a new 1000D and a few Olympus primes...a 24 f/2.8, 28 f/2.8 or f/3.5, 50 f/1.4, and 85 f/2 will be very compact, and pretty inexpensive too. Of course, manually focusing wouldn't be fun without a good screen, but Katz eye will make one for the 1000D I'm sure.
p.1 #8 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
The leica M-lenses are small, and normally I carry only a few primes when I use my (analogue) M4 (most of the time 3, just 15 / 35 /90 for landscape or 25 / 35 / 50 for city/culture).
But if you combine a eos 40D with some compact olympus primes (e.g. 24/2.8, 50/1.4 100/2.8) you'll also have a similar small package.......
p.1 #10 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
The problem with these lenses 24 f/2.8, 28 f/2.8 or f/3.5, 50 f/1.4 and the 40D is the crop. The 24 becomes 38 and so on.
With the M8, if you can afford it, a 21 becomes a 28. If you want wider, then the inexpensive CV 15/4.5 beomes a 20. Obviously, you need an 18 to get a 24 FOV.
The other problem with the crop DSLR's are their awful viewfinders - exactly the opposite with the M8.
p.1 #11 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
So get the OM 21 f/3.5 for ~$450. Sure, you're not at a super-wide lens, but come on, if you're goal is lightweight travel, you are compromising already. You'll still be WAY under the price you'll pay for the Leica kit. Also, you can travel with a 5D and those lenses and get true ultra-wide. Yeah, it's not as compact, and now we're getting heavier, but the 5D is only 50% heavier than the M8, and the Oly lenses are so light that it probably balances out with a full kit.
The problem with the M8 is the $5,500 pricetag. Perhaps some people (and maybe the OP) can afford to drop $15,000 for a 'lightweight travel setup.' Most people can't.
p.1 #12 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
joan leslie wrote:
Traveling with a 40 D and L glass adds up to WEIGHT. Has anyone tried the Leica M8 and leica lenses to lessen the load? Do you have any advice on the idea? thanks joanlvh
I think it is a great idea, the only problem is the price of that M8 body, for me. Although the M8 looses out to the high ISO performance of a 5D or equivalent, it still will deliver quality files for large prints.
I tried the Epson R-D1 for a while, but it produced rather average 6MP quality.
I do hope to use my M lenses again some day with a lesser expensive M8 option.
p.1 #13 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
If you looking for a fairly compact package with high quality I would seriously look a Rebel 450/XSi with either a 28 1.8, 35 f/2, or 85 1.8 lenses.
Even though I've owned numerous Leica M film cameras and virtually all the new Asph/Apo lenses in the past, I wouldn't touch the M8 for anything but hobby work.
p.1 #14 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
joan leslie wrote:
Traveling with a 40 D and L glass adds up to WEIGHT. Has anyone tried the Leica M8 and leica lenses to lessen the load? Do you have any advice on the idea? thanks joanlvh
Leica Equipment does lessen the load, Makes your wallet very light in no time at all!
Edited by ACElkins on Jul 17, 2008 at 04:21 PM GMT
Kit#2: Canon with Olympus OM lenses. Prices are EX or EX+ at KEH (which is really like new)
Canon 5D: $1,999 - 810g
21 f/3.5: $484 - 180g
28 f/2.8: $120 - 170g
50 f/1.4: $165 - 230g
85 f/2: $379 - 260g
Add 4 OM to EOS adapters: $100 (my cheapo works great!) Total: $3,284 - 1650g (3.6lbs)
So, going with the 5D + Oly, vs M8 + Leica, you save over $15,000, AND you get a full half pound lighter kit, with better high-ISO performance, a true ultra-wide with the 21mm, and a big viewfinder.
Now, sure, the Leica optics are probably better than the OM lenses here (though the 21 f/3.5 and 28 f/2.8 may be hard to beat), but are they $15,000 better? I doubt it. The only real weak spot here is for the 50 f/1.4....so you may want to pick up a Zeiss 50 f/1.4 or a SMC Takumar 50 f/1.4 in its place. The Takumar weighs the same 230g as the Oly, so you wouldn't lose anything there.
Kit#2: Canon with Olympus OM lenses. Prices are EX or EX+ at KEH (which is really like new)
Canon 5D: $1,999 - 810g
21 f/3.5: $484 - 180g
28 f/2.8: $120 - 170g
50 f/1.4: $165 - 230g
85 f/2: $379 - 260g
Add 4 OM to EOS adapters: $100 (my cheapo works great!) Total: $3,284 - 1650g (3.6lbs)
So, going with the 5D + Oly, vs M8 + Leica, you save over $15,000, AND you get a full half pound lighter kit, with better high-ISO performance, a true ultra-wide with the 21mm, and a big viewfinder.
Now, sure, the Leica optics are probably better than the OM lenses here (though the 21 f/3.5 and 28 f/2.8 may be hard to beat), but are they $15,000 better? I doubt it. The only real weak spot here is for the 50 f/1.4....so you may want to pick up a Zeiss 50 f/1.4 or a SMC Takumar 50 f/1.4 in its place. The Takumar weighs the same 230g as the Oly, so you wouldn't lose anything there.
Or you can get a LOT closer by going with a demo M8 w/warranty and the new Summarit, Zeiss, or CV lenses. Other than the body, the choice of how much to spend is pretty much up to you.
And to make a more meaningful comparison - you could also go used on the whole kit and and be only a "few" thousand difference.
But it may still not be worth it to most people, but if you like rangefinders you'll pay a premium for the M8....
p.1 #18 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
I really appreciate all this info. When suggesting ways to lighten the load, many are mentioning Olympus primes, not too many mention canon lenses. I am wondering if the choice of Olympus instead of Canon lenses is mostly for the price and the weight or for the quality of the lenses. thanks again joanlvh
p.1 #19 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
A bit of both. In the alt world, there are few lenses as light and compact as Olympus lenses. Some of their better primes (21 f/3.5, 24 f/2.8, 28 f/3.5, macros, etc) are exceptional optically as well, and most are good. But all are very lightweight, and very small.
The three wides mentioned above are all under 200g, and are exceptionally short as well...they're almost pancake lenses, and all three are killer. In the 16-9 tests, the 24 f/2.8 was the best of all the non-super large aperture 24mm primes tested. The only lens tested against it that fared better was the Canon 24L, which is 5 times the cost and 3 times the weight and size. (though, of course, is autofocus and two stops faster). The 28 f/2.8 and f/3.5 get raves on this board (I own the f/3.5 and it's just outstanding...sharp corner to corner), and the 21 f/3.5 I've heard mentioned in the same company as the Zeiss Distagon 21 (with an edge to the Zeiss, but with the Oly not too far behind).
p.1 #20 · canon DSLR vs Leica M8 for extended traveling
Of course the alternative lenses..the olympuse's etc..on the canon bodies means stop down metering and some may not like that for travel photography where often the subject needs to be shot quicker.
I'm not advocating af over mf simply not having to think about stopping down to meter and then changing to shooting aperture.
Joan, the op, has not said wether they are happy with this.
If I wanted manual focus nd primes I'd choose the leica all the time..if ignoring the cost issue.
The other option to the leica is a small nikon body with zeiss zf primes...manual focus with out stop down metering and with the option of an af zoom if you want also...the best of both worlds perhaps?...in fact the more I think about this option the better it gets although of course the zeiss zf lenses cost more than the olympus primes.
