# leica M8



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

I am not sure exactly which forum this question should be in but since Leicas are indubitably style icons I will chance it here.

has anyone experience of the M8? Or should I stick to my M6?


----------



## pdstahl (Aug 18, 2008)

no direct experience but a good friend, a professional photographer, has 2 leica film camera's and a nikon D3x but has been waiting for the M9 (finaly here) to get a Leica digital. because the M8 does not have a full frame image sensor the quality of the optics suffer.


----------



## alphadelta (Oct 2, 2007)

Great (affordable) cameras that will always be with you: Canon G11/S90
Best (unaffordable) image quality: Nikon D3X

I was a fan of Leica film cameras back in the film days, but the company has not kept up with the digital age.

AD


----------



## LeicaLad (Nov 5, 2006)

There are several sites that will answer this question far, far better than this one. Among your choices are:

photo.net (the Leica/Rangefinder forum)
rangefinderforum.com (multiple excellent forums)
luminous-landscape.com (see his review of the M9)

The general consensus is to skip the M8 and M8.2. There are too many shortcomings. On the other hand, the M9 is wonderful. This is not about comparing with DSLR bricks. You own an M6, so you understand rangefinder photography. The Leica is never about cheap, so that is also not part of the discussion. I still love and use my M6ttl and M7 cameras. The M9 is the digital version.

Try these other forums. 

Cheers!

L.L.


----------



## saluki (Nov 13, 2009)

archduke said:


> I am not sure exactly which forum this question should be in but since Leicas are indubitably style icons I will chance it here.
> 
> has anyone experience of the M8? Or should I stick to my M6?


Hi,

I got the M8 about a year ago. I purchased a discounted demo model at a good price. It has been very reliable and the files are nice. I did need to have my lenses adjusted to get optimal focus as the film thickness compensates for some focus play and a sensor is perfectly flat. So it does have a few quirks. I also use a Canon 5D when I need to use a reflex or speedlites, but nothing beats the m8 for a small package that still offers selective focus possibilities. Since getting the M8, I've not used my M6 or other M's.
My local pro lab stopped dev film this past summer!

I would love to get an M9, but it is not essential & the price point is a little steep right now.

Hope this helps.


----------



## MF177 (Jun 10, 2009)

pdstahl said:


> no direct experience but a good friend, a professional photographer, has 2 leica film camera's and a nikon D3x but has been waiting for the M9 (finaly here) to get a Leica digital. because the M8 does not have a full frame image sensor the quality of the optics suffer.


very few cameras have a full frame sensor---there is a canon with one and the m9 will have one. and it isnt the optics that suffer from a reduced frame sensor--the information is less and less is the amount it can be blown up without distortion

the leica still has superior lenses and optics to most if not all of the canons out there.

the m9, which i have seen in person but not used, is full frame, but note has a huge file size


----------



## msphotog (Jul 5, 2006)

I have just sold my Leicas two weeks ago. An M4-P and a very nice M6, along with a 28 Elmarit, a 35 Summicron and a 50 Summicron Wetzler. I was sorry to see them go, but I just can't justify the cost of an M9, or an M8.2 either, for that matter.
In my case the cameras have to pay for themselves, and for me, film is dead, hence my Nikon D700. The camera's sensor is full frame, and the files at 3200 ISO are better than my D2X at 800. The D700, D3 and the new D3s are the absolute kings of high ISO shooting, beating out even Canon(which are great cameras, too)

As far as the M9, if you can afford it, and want one, you should own one. Leica optics are legendary. My old 50 Summicron was made in 1971, and it was easily as sharp as any other current standard lens made today. Heck, I paid $550. for it about 10 years ago, when they retailed for about $500. new. I recently sold it for $625! You can't go wrong buying Leica M lenses!

I can't say as much for the "R" lenses, they quit making cameras quite a while ago, and shut down the lens manufacturing recently. Too bad...


----------



## dport86 (Jan 24, 2009)

I have not handled the new M9, but I purchased an M8 within the first year of it's introduction. Prior to that I shot an M3, M6ttl and an m7. For a time, I shot a lot of Leica film cameras, and have 10-12 lenses, from the 30's through the 90's. 

For me, Leica glass is incomparable in color rendition, contrast (soft and sharp), bokeh and handling--and the Leica experience of seamless interface (what some designers call the integration of man and horse) made it possible for me to get shots I never was with other cameras.

As my film labs closed up, I knew I had to make the digital transition. Several things about the Leica digital cameras: they are larger (slightly) than the Leica film cameras. They are nowhere near as large as Nikon and Canon DSLR's but still, unless you have large hands, that effortless interface has been slightly compromised. 

Second, there have been (and I've experienced) issues with IR changing coloration, as well as some odd streaking that firmware upgrades seemed to fix. 

Third, and most challenging for me, there have been instances where the shutter was slow, hung up or stuttered. A war photographer who had shot Leica for 10+ years blogged about this and it was my experience as well. Perhaps they will fix this on the m9.

Lastly, the crop. I shoot wide street stuff like many Leica photos, and the crop of the M8 forced me to go to wider (and slower glass) or spend a fortune for some of the new Leica lenses. (by the way, backwards compatibility, which is one of the great things about Leica, enabling us to use vintage glass to recreate or reinvent, is somewhat compromised by the thickness of the sensor vs. film--you can't use all your old lenses, including favorites like the dual range summi). The new M9 fixes this problem.

For all these issues, I have not gone back to my film Leicas or to a Nikon or Canon. I still strongly prefer Leica glass and Leica handling. And I still get astonishing images.

That said, will I upgrade to an m9? Not now, not in this economy at these prices/exchange rates. To me, having paid $5k for my m8, the value on used ones at less than $2k (Photovillage has a heavily used one with a 1 year warranty on for $1695, which is less than what I bough some of my film cameras for 10 years ago when the dollar was strong). There are Leica factory refurbs in the $3500 range. Is the m9 worth twice as much--definitely not. 

If you love Leica glass or the Leica shooting experience, buy a used M8. Slap some used glass on there and enjoy.


----------



## saluki (Nov 13, 2009)

dport86 said:


> Second, there have been (and I've experienced) issues with IR changing coloration.....
> 
> .


You can purchase IR filters take care of that issue. It's a non issue for b&W.


----------



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

I feel certain that film will keep going, after all there is a market for it. There is a firm trying now to restart the polaroid instant film making factory because they have the demand. Film will be harder to get but still out there.

I also have the M7 but do not seem to use it as much as the m6. can anyone talk me out of this? Otherwise the M7 is not getting its moneys worth. It seems to get throught the batteries faster because I always leave the damned thing on!

My lenses are old so if I get the M8 will I need some kind of software to make them compatible?

The M9 is way too expensive. M8's can now be had for approx £1600 in the UK but black ones are harder to come by.

By the way the gorgeous girl in the latest Chanel ad uses either an M9 or M8. What product placement!


----------



## challer (Sep 4, 2008)

Check out www.kenrockwell.com. His take is that the M9 is better than any DSLR out there. The M9 is not a natural progression of the D8 and it's accolades do not suggest the M8.2 is almost as good as a M9 - they are very different. I've not had a chance to use a M9 but Rockwell's review resonates with me and the problems I've had with DSLRs (several over the past years).


----------



## dport86 (Jan 24, 2009)

challer said:


> Check out www.kenrockwell.com. His take is that the M9 is better than any DSLR out there. The M9 is not a natural progression of the D8 and it's accolades do not suggest the M8.2 is almost as good as a M9 - they are very different. I've not had a chance to use a M9 but Rockwell's review resonates with me and the problems I've had with DSLRs (several over the past years).


I'm curious--in what way would you say the M9 is not a natural progression of the M8 (presuming that's what you meant)? And how are they very different, other than the different sensor?


----------



## dport86 (Jan 24, 2009)

btw, thanks for posting the Ken Rockwell link. I should have read it before I posted as he comes to much the same conclusion as my earlier post: the M9 is great, a big step forward but the M8 is a great deal used:

"Here's another idea: get a used M8. (The M8.2 is the same thing with a tougher LCD cover and quieter shutter.) You'll only be shooting half-frame and might need to screw with IR filters over every lens, but the M8 is otherwise mostly the same camera as the M9, for a third the price. Get some good used lenses, and you'll have a complete digital Leica M system for around $4,000. "


----------



## burnedandfrozen (Mar 11, 2004)

I do my own b&w processing and printing, so I'll keep shooting film as long as it's being made. Digital just cannot quite match the tonality to my eyes.

As far as cameras go, this is a great time to get into medium format. Used prices are very reasonable right now. I shoot 6x7 and its quality never fails to amaze me. Some newer models also accept digital backs but those probably still cost big $$$.


----------



## challer (Sep 4, 2008)

"other than the sensor" is the issue. The sensor changes everything. It's giant leap forward. The M9 is most often compared to the M7, not the M8 and is probably one of the few cameras to exceed pro DSLRs in performance.



dport86 said:


> I'm curious--in what way would you say the M9 is not a natural progression of the M8 (presuming that's what you meant)? And how are they very different, other than the different sensor?


----------



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

MF177 said:


> very few cameras have a full frame sensor---there is a canon with one and the m9 will have one. and it isnt the optics that suffer from a reduced frame sensor--the information is less and less is the amount it can be blown up without distortion
> 
> the leica still has superior lenses and optics to most if not all of the canons out there.
> 
> the m9, which i have seen in person but not used, is full frame, but note has a huge file size


What's the disadvantage of the big file size? Will the printing be difficult?

BTW what quality of printer will I need?


----------



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

I was recently asking a slesman in a London shop thatsells used Leicas. i was told that the M8 has problems with focusing for lenses of 50mm and above! Also the the framing is difficult because the frame is shifted more to one side rather than a symmetric decrease in the frame size. I was amzed. Can this be true?

M8 can be had for £1550-£1900 used in UK right now. Cannot decide what I should do.

Will probably hold off.


----------



## budrichard (Apr 3, 2008)

The M8, M8.2 is a seriously flawed camera requiring IR filters for every lens you have to reduce the IR sensitivity of the sensor. The reduced sensor size commonly now known as DX also requires a reassessment of your normal Leica focul length as well as additional external finders for superwides. It is a product that never should have been brought to market. The jury is still out on the M9 but it does appear to be a better product.
I use two M7's with Motor M's and a Leicavit M occasionally with the newest ASPH lenses from Leica. I still use Kodachrome, scanning to digital with a Coolscan 5000 Super ED for the time being. I have an M6 that I use with a handle flash rig for my 21mm 2.8 ASPH. My M3 and kit sit unused.
For the time being the M film camera and Kodachrome provide the best images obtainable. After next year I will need to switch to Fuji film of some sort and eventually purchase a Digital M but it won't be an M8 at any price and may not be a M9.-Dick


----------



## Luis-F-S (Apr 6, 2009)

msphotog said:


> The D700, D3 and the new D3s are the absolute kings of high ISO shooting...


From someone who's made a living as a professional photographer for the past 30 years I totally agree. I have several M Leicas, 9 Hasselblads, 1 Sinar, 2 Deardorffs and a bunch of Nikon film and AIS lenses in the safe. Why? I just can't part with them. For 99 % of my work, I use a Nikon D200. Cheap and hard to kill! Oh yeah, also have a Durst 8x10 enlarger packed up in boxes!

It's refreshing to see that there are still people with more money than sense.


----------



## medhat (Jan 15, 2006)

Luis-F-S said:


> From someone who's made a living as a professional photographer for the past 30 years I totally agree. I have several M Leicas, 9 Hasselblads, 1 Sinar, 2 Deardorffs and a bunch of Nikon film and AIS lenses in the safe. Why? I just can't part with them. For 99 % of my work, I use a Nikon D200. Cheap and hard to kill! Oh yeah, also have a Durst 8x10 enlarger packed up in boxes!
> 
> It's refreshing to see that there are still people with more money than sense.


While not a professional, my Chromega colorhead is packed in a box as well, although I can't even dream of a scenario where it'll ever see the light of day (maybe Craigslist!). I can't bear to part with my old and new "antique" collection (Leica IIIg, an old Canon 35mm rangefinder [that uses the Leica's screw lenses], and a first edition (non HP) Nikon F3). My "daily driver" is a Nikon D70, which is more than good enough for my needs, although I can't help lust after a D700s. I think the whole crop of dSLRs is so overengineered for 99.9% of buyer's that, for my next purchase, I'll probably go for a D5000, so I can consolidate a dSLR and a HD camcorder. It's all about the convergence and convenience.


----------



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

I find the dslr's just too bulky and I cannot be bothered to read the hundreds of pages of instruction.


----------



## Gurdon (Feb 7, 2005)

*not yet digital*

I am still using my MP for family snapshots, etc. M3 is backup. Occasionally use R6 .

I continue to use Deardorffs (and one Canham) in various formats (4x5, 11x14, 8x20, etc.) for personal work.

I develop and print my large format images. I enlarge the 4x5's and contact print the other formats.

I recognize the practicality of digital cameras and may eventually buy one for snapshots and for use with my computer. If I had to make a living as a commercial photographer I would have gone to digital several years ago.

I prefer, however, working with film, paper, and chemicals. My darkroom does have digital timers for the developer and for the printer. They compensate for variations in temperature and light.

I may investigate platinum printing. I picked up a redundant plate-burner for scrap value a while ago.

I have a freezer full of large format film.

Regards,
Gurdon


----------



## archduke (Nov 21, 2003)

Actually I am now drawn towards the Leica MP but there is a silver one on the market. I prefer black but how easily does the black paint come off? I know it is meant to but if the answer is very easily then I would opt for a silver.

Speedt answers please as the MP on sale may go any time.


----------

