p.7 #1 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
Robsteve, nothing against you at all- but i love seeing people post M8/Noct shots w/ (apparent) missed focus, lack of sharp details, and loads of noise... All of which i would find unacceptable on a 3 year old DSLR, tha i could get these days for $1000 (5D).
A Majority of lowlight M8 shots i've seen, at least 90 percent of them, are garbage compared to what i can do w/ a 5D and my eyes closed.
p.7 #3 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
man go peep my flickr....
www.flickr.com/mx5chris
-lately i've been shooting a lot w/ film in a crappy $19 point and shoot, and i don't think any amount of overpriced Leica gear could make me this happpy.
You'll have to dig a bit to see my awesome 5D "eyes closed" shots hahahaha. Basically anything shot w/ a Canon lens was completely effortless.
p.7 #4 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
brainiac wrote:
The M lenses are great, and if, like me, you aren't too keen on Leica's lens design goals, then you can also use the excellent Zeiss ZM and Cosina lenses.
But all this talk of whether an M 24 f1.4 is a better lens than a Canon 35 L is beside the point. For a fraction of the price you can get better pictures in all light, including low light, from a much cheaper camera system, which has a wide range of advantages over the M8. The M8 lets down its lenses, and the lenses can't compensate for the disadvantages of the M8. There's no knowing when or if an M8 successor will arrive....Show more →
M8 notwithstanding, some people would rather shoot with an RF than a SLR, digital or not. Some people would rather shoot with a Holga, or a home made pinhole camera. Some would rather shoot with a DSLR, and some with a 20x24 ultra large format camera. And if that choice of equipment inspires you, then who's to say its wrong? I shoot way more with an RF than with an SLR, because I feel more comfortable with it and carry it around more. I've also probably spent less than a lot of people on this form have spent on their rigs (especially those who shoot with a 1DS3/D3).
Thank god I don't take photos for a living and I can do what makes me happy with it.
p.7 #5 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
mawz wrote:
Note that floating elements do not eliminate focus shift (the 50L has one as well), what they do is optimize performance to the focus distance. Focus shift is entirely dependent on aperture. The EF 50/1.4 is a decent lens, but outside of the range where focus shift is a distinct issue (f2-f5.6) on the 50L, the L is better in all regards except possibly CA. And focus shift is at least partially ignorable on current LV-equipped bodies since you can focus at working aperture.
I was under the impression that floating elements did help that in addition to optimizing the close range. You're probably right. However, I don't think the 50L has a floating element.
While I do agree that focus shift is probably more of a problem in theory than in practice, shooting with live view is not a practical solution for most kinds of shooting, or shooting with film.
p.7 #6 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
The M8 must be a great camera.
Has there ever been another camera which has incited such vehement passion for and against? I`m thinking that if it would cost in the $500 range, then a big majority of posters here would own one, sing it`s praises and ignore its shortcomings. Is it the money that ...... ?
Jan 13, 2009 at 08:55 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #7 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
mawz wrote:
Note that floating elements do not eliminate focus shift (the 50L has one as well), what they do is optimize performance to the focus distance. Focus shift is entirely dependent on aperture. The EF 50/1.4 is a decent lens, but outside of the range where focus shift is a distinct issue (f2-f5.6) on the 50L, the L is better in all regards except possibly CA. And focus shift is at least partially ignorable on current LV-equipped bodies since you can focus at working aperture.
Hi Richard,
I am pretty sure that the EF 50 f/1.2L does not have a floating element. It is difficult to confirm this anywhere, but the Canon certainly doesn't claim it has one. (Interestingly the nFD 50 f/1.2L and the EF 50 f/1.0L both claimed to have a floating element). Also Canon does claim that the 35 f/1.4L has a floating element.
p.7 #8 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
kleinssz69 wrote:
The M8 must be a great camera.
Has there ever been another camera which has incited such vehement passion for and against? I`m thinking that if it would cost in the $500 range, then a big majority of posters here would own one, sing it`s praises and ignore its shortcomings. Is it the money that ...... ?
Leica's are a religious issue. On both sides of the coin.
p.7 #9 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
Steve Spencer wrote:
Hi Richard,
I am pretty sure that the EF 50 f/1.2L does not have a floating element. It is difficult to confirm this anywhere, but the Canon certainly doesn't claim it has one. (Interestingly the nFD 50 f/1.2L and the EF 50 f/1.0L both claimed to have a floating element). Also Canon does claim that the 35 f/1.4L has a floating element.
I stand corrected, I was under the impression that it had a floating element.
And it's Adam, not Richard btw.
Jan 13, 2009 at 09:10 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.7 #10 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
p.7 #11 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
mawz wrote:
Note that floating elements do not eliminate focus shift (the 50L has one as well), what they do is optimize performance to the focus distance. Focus shift is entirely dependent on aperture.
Hmmm? I wasn't aware the EF 50L had a floating element design. The FD 50 L does, but not the EF version.
Focus shift may be dependent on aperture, but not entirely. It is completely dependent on design, with aspherical surfaces, floating elements, etc.
p.7 #12 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
one would hope focus shift isn't thrown around as such a deadly flaw here, since a few of the famous Leica lenses suffer from it too. 35/1.4 ASPH and Noctilux being pretty notable ones
p.7 #14 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
fourfa wrote:
one would hope focus shift isn't thrown around as such a deadly flaw here, since a few of the famous Leica lenses suffer from it too. 35/1.4 ASPH and Noctilux being pretty notable ones
Yeah I've heard the 35/1.4A has it too. So does the Zeiss ZM 50/1.5. I don't know if the shift of the 50/1.2L, the 35/1.4A or the Noctilux show up in any appreciable manner on film. From what I've seen, the ZM 50/1.5's shift does. Digital is more sensitive to this.
I would find it as pretty annoying. If I focus on something, and it's then not in focus when I take the picture... No thanks.
p.7 #15 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
The M8 must be a great camera. Has there ever been another camera which has incited such vehement passion for and against? I`m thinking that if it would cost in the $500 range, then a big majority of posters here would own one, sing it`s praises and ignore its shortcomings. Is it the money that ...... ?
If the M8 cost $500, I would most certainly own one, and would almost certainly love it. There is a huge hole in the market in the small, high quality body with interchangeable lenses segment. The 450D is a good body, but its viewfinder is very hard to use, and though liveview is an absolutely brilliant feature, I don't want to use it for every single shot.
But the fact of the matter is that it costs 10x that, and it costs twice what much better performing SLRs like the 5DII and the D700 do. That's what people here are saying. If it was a cheap 10MP crop body like, say the Panasonic (which can also mount M lenses), then I'm sure people would be less critical of the M8 and accept its shortcomings, many of which it shares with the $500 bodies.
The feeling is that it's simple brand chauvinism (and sometimes Euro-centric cultural chauvinism) and nothing else which leads to the inflated price and extremely poor price performance ratio of the M8. Now, those who own and use an M8 can denigrate those who criticise it by implying that it costs too much for them, but even the wealthiest people look for value for money (that's how you get wealthy, after all). The M8 simply does not offer that. Its performance is below products that cost half as much.
They can insinuate that only the M8 allows for total manual control, and that the Canikon bodies do everything for you and that by implication Canikon users are not 'true' photographers or that they lack skill, but they'd be in the wrong forum, seeing as most of the posters in this forum use manual focus lenses. And while it's true that Leica lenses are almost always of a very high standard, there are equally excellent SLR lenses from Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Mamiya, Hasselblad etc. etc., all of which can be used on high resolution Canon bodies. If you are careful, there are lenses there which match up to the Leica M lenses at current pixel densities.
The only REAL (as opposed to chauvinistic) advantages the M8 has are workflow based (some people simply like rangfinders, more power to them) and its small size.
p.7 #16 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
Kidtexas, i fully agree with you that Film M bodies are "where it's at", in that they are totally awesome. I would love to have an M6 .72, and a few cheap CV lenses.
However, i will never even attempt to pretend that i could afford or justify any of the newer M-Asph lenses. Those things are so damn expensive it's sad. Everybody and their mother knows that they kick ass, but the pricing is just horrible.
p.7 #17 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
robsteve wrote:
The title to the thread is about the M8, so I am comparing the lenses you can use on a M8 to those the competition has on their SLRs.
...
For this premise of mine to be true, I have to show that the fast Leica lenses are performing better than the competion's lenses. The only current competion is from the Canon/Nikon SLRs. That is how we get to M versus SLR lenses.
When Zeiss or Nikon makes a digital rangefinder, we can then compare apples to apples.
Robert
In an effort to show the approximate 2 stop advantage of Leica lenses that I have experienced also, I submit we can compare some apples to some apples, now.
If you accept the premise that some of the latest Leica designs are very, very close between M and R versions, such as the 90AA, the R50/1.4 & M50/1.4 Asph, R28 & M28 Elmarits, then comparisions can be made between M8 and Canon sensors. One could even use the same R lens on both SLR cameras and M8 with careful attention to adapters. Furthermore, the Heliar 15 comes in a version for Nikon, and with adapter, can be fitted on a M8. I have a EF converted Leica M 135/4.0 Tele-Elmar that could be compared to same on a M8. This exercise could illuminate differences in sensor and sharpness of a mirrorless camera.
Or, if you want to compare a Leica lens against a Canon lens as originally proposed, choose the 28 Elmarit w/adapter to a Canon 28, on an EOS body. Or, a R 50 Summilux against an EF 50L. Same for 80-90mm.
p.7 #18 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
ISO1600 wrote:
Kidtexas, i fully agree with you that Film M bodies are "where it's at", in that they are totally awesome. I would love to have an M6 .72, and a few cheap CV lenses.
However, i will never even attempt to pretend that i could afford or justify any of the newer M-Asph lenses. Those things are so damn expensive it's sad. Everybody and their mother knows that they kick ass, but the pricing is just horrible.
Yeah they are expensive. On the other hand, my shooting setup consists of a 50 and 28. I don't have a 5D/5DII/1D (in the neighborhood of 2-3k), a 50/1.2 (1k), a 35L (1k), an 85L (1.5k?), a 70-200/something (.5-1.5k), a 16-35 (1k), 24-105L (1k?) etc. You get my point. It adds up. A lot of people in this forum have setups like that, or even more extensive. A lot of people on this forum buy a new camera every year or so. You makes your choices...
The Leica guys with a 15, 21, 25, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90, and a couple duplicates... I don't get that. Haha. WAY too much money, WAY too much gear to carry around, and WAY too much lens switching.
It is a shame how the prices have essentially doubled in the last 3 years. Though currently, with the crummy exchange rate, you can shave off about 25% if you buy from the UK.
p.7 #19 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
Justin D wrote:
. And while it's true that Leica lenses are almost always of a very high standard, there are equally excellent SLR lenses from Zeiss, Leica, Nikon, Canon, Pentax, Mamiya, Hasselblad etc. etc., all of which can be used on high resolution Canon bodies. If you are careful, there are lenses there which match up to the Leica M lenses at current pixel densities.
There are quite a few speculative claims in your post but the above I can address to some degree from personal experience. Every time I've been suckered in to purchasing a Nikon or Canon lens because of internet claims that it's "as good as a Leica" I've been disappointed. There may be certain aspects of the (N, C) lens that rival a comparable Leica lens but the total package isn't there. It might be image detail, color quality, distortion, flare, bokeh, handling... something or several somethings are missing.
p.7 #20 · M8/Leica People I'm Thinking About Switching
kidtexas wrote:
Yeah they are expensive. On the other hand, my shooting setup consists of a 50 and 28. I don't have a 5D/5DII/1D (in the neighborhood of 2-3k), a 50/1.2 (1k), a 35L (1k), an 85L (1.5k?), a 70-200/something (.5-1.5k), a 16-35 (1k), 24-105L (1k?) etc. You get my point. It adds up. A lot of people in this forum have setups like that, or even more extensive. A lot of people on this forum buy a new camera every year or so. You makes your choices...
I understand where you are coming from on this, and this mindset has me thinking a lot lately about my setup. I think i would be just peachy w/ a D700 and 28/1.4- if that lens really lives up to everything people say about it....
But a more realistic kit for me would be D700, 18/2.8, 35/2, and 85/1.4... That is fairly simple, and covers my bases well.
