Anyone heard of this camera?

[HoppyUK]

Well, I will have to say it then.

The Leica M8 is a complete hash of a camera. It doesn't work anything like the way it should, or how M-Series Leicas worked so wonderfully well. It is a betrayal of everything that was once great about this fine company. It lists at £4k, and it is really no wonder that you can buy one now for just £1k. Apart from the crazy price, it still has imaging problems fundamental to trying to fit a digital sensor into a body designed for 35mm film. It's a long and sad story, but it doesn't work and it cannot work, even with the frankly ludicrous IR filter that it has to wear. It is not even full frame (the lenses won't work) so cannot take full advantage of the wonderful lenses made for the film cameras. (The whole sorry saga has been played out on www.dpreview.com and many other forums in endless detail.)

Leica was forced to make the M8 to stay alive, but they have only bought a stay of execution. The company is once again in financial ruin and there can't be many more opportunities to down-size again, nor many more philanthropic billionaires ready to squander their fortunes on giving this dead horse a few more lashes.

The last great Leica made was the M6. The R-Series SLRs were always technologically retarded and at silly prices. They are now discontinued. If it wasn't for the instrument division, Leica cameras would never have survived into the 20th century. Their latest product, the medium format S2, fills a market niche that does not exist. It is due for release later this year, but don't hold your breath. The cost of the body, without lens, is Eur20,000 :shake:

Leica's only hope of survival lies in their association with Panasonic. The beautiful Pano LX3 is rebadged and restyled as the Leica D-Lux-4 and this camera is actually more true to the great Leica M-Series rangefinder heritage in digital form than the M8 can ever be. Cartier Bresson would have approved.

There. I've said it. And it gave me no pleasure at all

 

[oldfella]

I got a leica 111 off a drunk GI in 1944 in Brussels. 200 Belgian francs it cost me that was 25 shillings. Have you ever seen those Russian built Leica copies. God they are crap.

 

[EdBray]

I got a leica 111 off a drunk GI in 1944 in Brussels. 200 Belgian francs it cost me that was 25 shillings. Have you ever seen those Russian built Leica copies. God they are crap.

Bleddy hell, and you can work a computer very apt user name then

 

[Flash In The Pan]

You do realise that you're on borderline blasphemy with something like that going through your mind

I think there is a rule here that says such idiologies could get you tied to a stake and burnt alive, much like they did to witches in the old days. I'd be veeeery careful, if I were you

But Wail, the lower-end Leicas are just Panasonics in party frocks. I remember meeting a guy when I was out taking pics and he started going on about his new digital Leica, I was thinking he'd bought an M8, but when he brought it out I almost burst out laughing - it was exactly the same camera as my wee Panasonic, but had cost him three times as much. The only real difference was the Leica branding, but then even my Panasonic p+s has a "Leica" lens on it

Well, I will have to say it then.

The Leica M8 is a complete hash of a camera. It doesn't work anything like the way it should, or how M-Series Leicas worked so wonderfully well. It is a betrayal of everything that was once great about this fine company. It lists at £4k, and it is really no wonder that you can buy one now for just £1k.

Where can you buy Leica M8s for a grand? Point me in the right direction and I'll have one at that price

 

[onikami]

Ask people to name a camera manufacturer and leica will probably be in the top three

bull crap. maybe to camera enthusiasts geek. But the average man in the street would never have heard of Leica.

No nikon, can't spell pentax but does include Panasonic and Sony for the 'usual bands'

I'm refering to the usual £120 from Argos standard digital cameras, not DSLR. FFS :bang:

 

[Flash In The Pan]

So the M8 is the digital version? To be honest, this is the first time in 31 years I have heard of them. It does look beautiful, will admit. And I do want one, but, my God, couldn't justify paying that much in a million years.

Why exactly do you want one? Because of how it looks?

Probably not the soundest rationale for choosing a camera

May I suggest one of these

might be more what you're looking for

 

[Canon Bob]

Ask people to name a camera manufacturer and leica will probably be in the top three (along with canon and nikon)

...the average man in the street would never have heard of Leica.

You may well be right, nowadays "Joe Average" doesn't have any class.

Bob

 

[onikami]

Well, I will have to say it then.

The Leica M8 is a complete hash of a camera. It doesn't work anything like the way it should, or how M-Series Leicas worked so wonderfully well. It is a betrayal of everything that was once great about this fine company. It lists at £4k, and it is really no wonder that you can buy one now for just £1k. Apart from the crazy price, it still has imaging problems fundamental to trying to fit a digital sensor into a body designed for 35mm film. It's a long and sad story, but it doesn't work and it cannot work, even with the frankly ludicrous IR filter that it has to wear. It is not even full frame (the lenses won't work) so cannot take full advantage of the wonderful lenses made for the film cameras. (The whole sorry saga has been played out on www.dpreview.com and many other forums in endless detail.)

Leica was forced to make the M8 to stay alive, but they have only bought a stay of execution. The company is once again in financial ruin and there can't be many more opportunities to down-size again, nor many more philanthropic billionaires ready to squander their fortunes on giving this dead horse a few more lashes.

The last great Leica made was the M6. The R-Series SLRs were always technologically retarded and at silly prices. They are now discontinued. If it wasn't for the instrument division, Leica cameras would never have survived into the 20th century. Their latest product, the medium format S2, fills a market niche that does not exist. It is due for release later this year, but don't hold your breath. The cost of the body, without lens, is Eur20,000 :shake:

Leica's only hope of survival lies in their association with Panasonic. The beautiful Pano LX3 is rebadged and restyled as the Leica D-Lux-4 and this camera is actually more true to the great Leica M-Series rangefinder heritage in digital form than the M8 can ever be. Cartier Bresson would have approved.

There. I've said it. And it gave me no pleasure at all

Interesting read.

 

[onikami]

You may well be right, nowadays "Joe Average" doesn't have any class.

Bob

or perhaps doesn't want to spend over a grand on a camera when a Sony Cybershot will do the job at a gig, birthday party, night out in the town.

 

[Flash In The Pan]

or perhaps doesn't want to spend over a grand on a camera when a Sony Cybershot will do the job at a gig, birthday party, night out in the town.

I don't think Leicas are targeted towards people that will use them for "a gig, birthday party, night out in the town"

There are plenty of people out there who would see even a couple of hundred quid spent on a camera as a lot of money, when you can buy one for a tenner...

 

[onikami]

I don't think Leicas are targeted towards people that will use them for "a gig, birthday party, night out in the town".

Who said it was?

I'm just stating the fact if you stop someone on the street and ask them to name a camera brand, most would give the usual name: Sony, Panasonic etc. Leica would hardly get a mention. When did you ever see a Leica advert on TV? This is just going back to the guy who claimed most people will recognise the Leica brand name.

 

[AliB]

I did a household test (asked round my family who have no interest in photography at all) and they DID include Hasselblad and Leica.

Perhaps it's a generation thing. The ones you mention (Sony and Panasonic) I'd rate for making TV's not cameras.

Advertising is not a mark of quality. When did you ever see Hasselblad, Ferrarri, Lambourghini, Tiffany, Asprey, Bentley, Harrods........... advertise on TV? Some things don't need advertising to sell, they sell themselves.

 

[Uneducated_Rick]

Who said it was?

I'm just stating the fact if you stop someone on the street and ask them to name a camera brand, most would give the usual name: Sony, Panasonic etc. Leica would hardly get a mention. When did you ever see a Leica advert on TV? This is just going back to the guy who claimed most people will recognise the Leica brand name.

I recon people would say Leica as Sony, Panasonic et al. are all electronic manufacturers rather than specifically a camera manufacturer - then again society is dumbing down a hell of a lot

 

[onikami]

Advertising is not a mark of quality. When did you ever see Hasselblad, Ferrarri, Lambourghini, Tiffany, Asprey, Bentley, Harrods........... advertise on TV? Some things don't need advertising to sell, they sell themselves.

And who said it was? The people who want just a digital camera to capture birthdays, nights out, office party I am pretty sure far out number those who would spend over £2k and over on a Leica.

And, you've never seen Harrods advert on TV? The Harrods sale advert? Never seen the Harrods owner Mo Al fayed on TV, newspaper, on the Ali G show?

I see Farrarri all the time on ITV/BBC in Formula 1

 

[Voyager]

I only recently developed an interest in photography and was only aware of the usual brands: Canon, Pentak, Panasonic, Sony etc.

Strangely I don't really think of Panasonic and Sony as a 'usual camera brands'. They make electronic equipment.

Never heard of Lecia until Thursday this week.

I honestly find that level of ignorance astonishing. I know I knew what a Leica was when I was still a small child growing up in a family with little interest in photography....

Now that I've come across them, it is somewhat annoying that it seems the price indicates is more or less a rich mans play thing. Reading comments here and looking at the pic of the M8, I want one now.

Are you a rich man who needs a plaything?

 

[Wail]

But Wail, the lower-end Leicas are just Panasonics in party frocks. I remember meeting a guy when I was out taking pics and he started going on about his new digital Leica, I was thinking he'd bought an M8, but when he brought it out I almost burst out laughing - it was exactly the same camera as my wee Panasonic, but had cost him three times as much. The only real difference was the Leica branding, but then even my Panasonic p+s has a "Leica" lens on it

...

But by that same analogy, isn't there a Korean car manufacturer that makes 4x4 based on Mercedes components? Does that make it any better, or even close to the quality of a Mercedes?

Taking it from there, Lexus (which is really just a fancy branded Toyota) now make better quality cars than Mercedes .. that doesn't stop the masses from wanting to own a Mercedes as opposed to a Lexus!

Point is, it's a global market with a lot of shared resources. If Leica are re-branded Panasonic, then we'd have to give in to Porsche being a re-branded VW!

Personally, if I had the ££££ to buy an M8 (even if it is just a re-branded Panasonic) then I'd happily fork-out the money for it. If only to look at it.

 

[onikami]

I honestly find that level of ignorance astonishing.

I am happy you find it "astonishing" someone has never heard of a camera brand name. It is of such importance. Everyone must know it!

Strangely I don't really think of Panasonic and Sony as a 'usual camera brands'. They make electronic equipment.

True. But I mention Panasonic because of the adverts on tv recently. You may not have seen it, but many milions certainly have seen this on ITV, Sky etc:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVaafVtDlik

And here is a great Sony Cybershot one. Again you might have missed it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jsHfWrPZdU

Are you a rich man who needs a plaything?

Have no idea what this means?

 

[Wail]

I guess it has something to do with pedigree .. something which advancement in technology can not cater for :shrug:

 

[AliB]

And, you've never seen Harrods advert on TV? The Harrods sale advert? Never seen the Harrods owner Mo Al fayed on TV, newspaper, on the Ali G show?

I see Farrarri all the time on ITV/BBC in Formula 1

No, I don't watch that kind of TV.

 

[onikami]

No, I don't watch that kind of TV.

As you say yourself: you "live in your own world". Thats cool. No probs with that.

 

[AliB]

It's a much better place, trust me.

There are Hasselblads and Leicas and Mamiya's and Canon's and I'd even let the odd Nikon in on a Friday.

 

[AliB]

It's a much better place, trust me.

And the TV's play programmes about the history of photography and natural history with stunning scenery and tell me about places I'll never visit.

 

[Voyager]

I am happy you find it "astonishing" someone has never heard of a camera brand name. It is of such importance. Everyone must know it!

It is. I'm sorry you know so little, but you are seemingly clearly happy that you are utterly oblivious to any photographic history.

I mention Panasonic because of the adverts on tv recently. You may not have seen it, but many milions certainly have seen this on ITV, Sky etc:

I rarely watch ITV. I don't pay Murdoch for the rubbish on Sky. I avoid adverts generally by pre-recording what I would like to watch and fast forwarding through them (or editiing them out of films and the like) on my Panasonic DVD recorder. Yet I know about the existence all sorts of photographic (as well as film and TV) equipment I never have seen or handled.

Have no idea what this means?

That does not surprise me unduly.

 

[KayJay]

That new limited edition Safari M8 they have on the site is absolutely stunning.

 

[KavKav]

When they say that Leica do digital they mean that they take a panasonic camera and stick a red dot on it

Spot on! Like my DMC-LX3 for example!

Identical except no dot and because of that, well over £100 cheaper

Mine lives in the leather Leica LBC-01 case. Not posing, it is simply one of the best cases out there.



Kav

 

[KayJay]

KavKav. How are you finding the LX3? It looks exactly what I need for close up street photography. Are you having fun with it? I'm actually quite intrigued by the short focal length and apparently outstanding low light capabilities.

 

[onikami]

It is. I'm sorry you know so little, but you are seemingly clearly happy that you are utterly oblivious to any photographic history.

a true crime against humanity. Up there with the Rwanda genocide. Holocaust. Rape of Nanking. We must put Lecia on the national cirriculum

 

[ujjwaldey8165]

To be honest, not knowing about Leica and carrying on posting in a photography site is a 'crime against humanity'.

We are not here to talk about rwanda or holocaust, but to share and learn about photography and camera.

And if someone, who is on a photography forum and hasn't heard of Leica and its history, he may be a true average man on the street ( which street?), but he surely should spend some time educating himself on it rather than pretending that ignorance on the history of cameras such as Leica and contax is the best thing since sliced bread.

Yes, I would consider it truely bizzare if someone who has a modicum of interest in photography and its history has not heard of Leica; and shows not even a cursory interest in learning about Leitz Camera Company.

Ujjwal

P.S : This post is not about belittling any particular memeber; merely my personal opinion on Leica

 

[KavKav]

KavKav. How are you finding the LX3? It looks exactly what I need for close up street photography. Are you having fun with it? I'm actually quite intrigued by the short focal length and apparently outstanding low light capabilities.

KayJay,

I did a real mountain of research before buying the LX3! I ended up with a 'head-to-head choice between the LX3 and the Canon G10. What finally swung it in favour of the LX3 was:-

1. Superb Leica F2.0 Vario-Summicron lens
2. Canon used the old G9 sensor in the G10, just crammed more pixels in which as 'any fule now' equals more noise!
3. Build quality of the LX3 and the fact that I have had the LX1 since it came out.
4. New sensor and processing engine in the LX3

OK, that is why I bought it,now having owned it for a few months let me tell you what I think of it:-

Having been extremely pleased with the LX1, this LX3 really is a step beyond. It does everything I could ask for and the picture quality is quite superb. One thing I cannot understand is that in the marketing blurb, they made little mention of the macro facility. The macro on this is the finest I have seen. A few months ago I sold a Lange & Sohne 1815 wristwatch over on TZ-UK and the guys said the macro pictures of the movement were the best they had ever seen and in all modesty, the pics were pretty damn good!

At the beginning of this year I treated myself bigtime, I bought a Nikon D700, a Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and SB 900 flash. Super super kit and I cannot fault it, that lens does what it is designed for, i.e. it replaces a bag of primes! However, I have hardly used the Nikon kit as the LX3 does everything I want, it is supremely portable on the hip! Mad to buy the Nikon kit you might think, maybe so but as a long-standing Nikon fan, I 'wanted it'.
The LX3 is that good that I am now seriously thinking of selling the Nikon kit on. Crazy you might say, but the LX3 just does it for me in terms of quality pics and delightful portability.

Sorry to ramble on, I hope you find my comments of some interest!

Tom

 

[onikami]

To be honest, not knowing about Leica and carrying on posting in a photography site is a 'crime against humanity'.

We are not here to talk about rwanda or holocaust, but to share and learn about photography and camera.

And if someone, who is on a photography forum and hasn't heard of Leica and its history, he may be a true average man on the street ( which street?), but he surely should spend some time educating himself on it rather than pretending that ignorance on the history of cameras such as Leica and contax is the best thing since sliced bread.

Yes, I would consider it truely bizzare if someone who has a modicum of interest in photography and its history has not heard of Leica; and shows not even a cursory interest in learning about Leitz Camera Company.

Ujjwal

P.S : This post is not about belittling any particular memeber; merely my personal opinion on Leica

So, I cant join your "club" as I dont know about Leica? I must learn the history of Photography in order to post on this forum? If anyone moves on from digital and decideds they want to try a dslr, they *must* learn a little bit about the history of photography and Leica to join your club?

I've only just developed an interest in DSLR. Spent £332 on a camera, another £130 on a lens, £55 on a tamron lens, £30 on a colour printer and more on ink and photo paper. Joined this forum to get some opinion/learn how to take shots on some of the pics I've taken, but will not be fully accepted by some snobs who cannot stand anyone who does not the "history of photography".

P.S : This post is not about belittling any particular memeber; merely my personal opinion.

 

[KayJay]

Thanks for sharing Tom, very interesting. I'm about to finish off a website so will have some money coming my way. Problem with the SLR is it makes it quite tricky to do any real street photography candids without getting spotted, the LX3 seems to be ideal for that.

I'm also looking at the Ricoh G2. Some of my contacts on flickr are using that and the results are equally spectacular, as far as point and shoots go.

 

[KavKav]

So, I cant join your "club" as I dont know about Leica? I must learn the history of Photography in order to post on this forum? If anyone moves on from digital and decideds they want to try a dslr, they *must* learn a little bit about the history of photography and Leica to join your club?

I've only just developed an interest in DSLR. Spent £332 on a camera, another £130 on a lens, £55 on a tamron lens, £30 on a colour printer and more on ink and photo paper. Joined this forum to get some opinion/learn how to take shots on some of the pics I've taken, but will not be fully accepted by some snobs who cannot stand anyone who does not the "history of photography".

P.S : This post is not about belittling any particular memeber; merely my personal opinion.

Friend, haul your hackles in! You are missing the point here, this is nothing to do with digital. Members are just surprised that you have not heard of Leica which is like a car owner saying they had never heard of Rolls-Royce. People on here are a friendly crew and will offer you help 'in spades' but be a little careful, just because you have not heard of Leica, when people expressed surprise, you thought they were taking the *iss and you got defensive. Slagging Leica just because you have not heard of it, and calling people snobs when this is as 'snob-free' a forum as I have encountered,will not win you any friends on here. Chill a bit and have a nice weekend!

 

[Wail]

So, I cant join your "club" as I dont know about Leica? I must learn the history of Photography in order to post on this forum? If anyone moves on from digital and decideds they want to try a dslr, they *must* learn a little bit about the history of photography and Leica to join your club?

I've only just developed an interest in DSLR. Spent £332 on a camera, another £130 on a lens, £55 on a tamron lens, £30 on a colour printer and more on ink and photo paper. Joined this forum to get some opinion/learn how to take shots on some of the pics I've taken, but will not be fully accepted by some snobs who cannot stand anyone who does not the "history of photography".

P.S : This post is not about belittling any particular memeber; merely my personal opinion.

I would say you're on the right track; also, I believe others are just pulling your leg when they mark you down for not knowing much about Leica.

It's just that certain brands are highly sought after, and it's "funny", in an odd way, when someone doesn't know about them.

I hope no harm is done from all this picking on you

 

[onikami]

Friend, haul your hackles in! You are missing the point here, this is nothing to do with digital. Members are just surprised that you have not heard of Leica which is like a car owner saying they had never heard of Rolls-Royce. People on here are a friendly crew and will offer you help 'in spades' but be a little careful, just because you have not heard of Leica, when people expressed surprise, you thought they were taking the *iss and you got defensive. Slagging Leica just because you have not heard of it, and calling people snobs when this is as 'snob-free' a forum as I have encountered,will not win you any friends on here. Chill a bit and have a nice weekend!

Who said anything about slagging Leica off? Yet another poster who fails to read the thread in full.

Near the start after a few posts from members, I said I wanted to buy the camera myself because people here were saying it is practically a rolls royce camera. World class lens, quality etc. I cant afford it because its too expensive. We then get a guy come with his "rich mans play thing" comment which made no sense at all.

I cant complain about the help/advice I've had here since joining. Whats bizare is people expecting someone who has only started taking an interest in photography as a hobby (just over a month now) to start learning about the history of photography. Thanks, but I would rather learn how to use my A300, learn about the type of lens, how to compose shots, what shutter/apperature to use etc. After that, everything else will follow.

 

[onikami]

I would say you're on the right track; also, I believe others are just pulling your leg when they mark you down for not knowing much about Leica.

It's just that certain brands are highly sought after, and it's "funny", in an odd way, when someone doesn't know about them.

I hope no harm is done from all this picking on you

Nah. Its all cool. At least I now know about Leica and will never forget it

 

[KavKav]

Thanks for sharing Tom, very interesting. I'm about to finish off a website so will have some money coming my way. Problem with the SLR is it makes it quite tricky to do any real street photography candids without getting spotted, the LX3 seems to be ideal for that.

I'm also looking at the Ricoh G2. Some of my contacts on flickr are using that and the results are equally spectacular, as far as point and shoots go.

A fair point about the 'street candids' The LX3 is quite unobtrusive whereas a D700 with a 24-70f/2.8 is quite a bit more obvious!

Did you mean the Ricoh GR2? If so, that was one of the cameras that made my shortlist. A fine camera but I rejected it for noise starting to creep in at ISO 200 :shake: getting quite noticeable at ISO 400, (or so the review I read said!)

 

[HoppyUK]

But by that same analogy, isn't there a Korean car manufacturer that makes 4x4 based on Mercedes components? Does that make it any better, or even close to the quality of a Mercedes?

Taking it from there, Lexus (which is really just a fancy branded Toyota) now make better quality cars than Mercedes .. that doesn't stop the masses from wanting to own a Mercedes as opposed to a Lexus!

Point is, it's a global market with a lot of shared resources. If Leica are re-branded Panasonic, then we'd have to give in to Porsche being a re-branded VW!

Personally, if I had the ££££ to buy an M8 (even if it is just a re-branded Panasonic) then I'd happily fork-out the money for it. If only to look at it.

It's a bit unfair to say Lexus is a rebadged Toyota. Made by Toyota maybe. But then Rolls Royce is now made by BMW. And Porsche actually controls the entire VAG empire, including VW, Audi and even Bentley. The deeper you look, the more complicated international branding and ownership becomes - in Japan it's so confusing I've given up trying to keep track. They tend to keep it quiet, too.

But one thing's for sure - the Leica M8 is not a re-branded Panasonic, and I have to say it is probably the worse for it. It is 100% a West German product (except for the Japanese bits!).

Edit: I find it quite revealing that the OP has not heard of Leica before, and puts Panasonic and Sony so high up the camera awareness list. And that's not any criticism BTW, just an interesting observation on how the present market is viewed. I wonder who is most in touch with current trends?

 

[KavKav]

Nah. Its all cool. At least I now know about Leica and will never forget it

Leica are expensive mainly because of the superbly engineered manufacture allied to the fact that it is a premium brand name that asks (and gets) high prices. If you get the opportunity to hold an M8 in your hands you will see what I mean, the controls operate with silk-like precision and the camera feels sooooo good to hold.

Given the choice of sitting in a Rolls-Royce for an hour or fiddling with the M8 for an hour, I would take the M8!

 

[Wail]

I may be off, by today's measure, about the Porsche & VW; but Lexus is nothing more than a rebranded Toyota.

As a matter of fact, when Lexus were first launched, it was offered in Japan under the Toyota brand; and up to a few years ago, all the parts were Toyota.

Please don't get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with Toyota / Lexus, I've owned no less than 6 Lexus since their launch, and God knows how many Toyota. It's just that however you look at these two brands, there is one thing missing from them, as opposed to Mercedes, and that's pedegree. Just because a product is a better product doesn't make the less-good product less desirable (another example, Aston Martin which is always hampered with quality issues).

But, I only mentioned cars here as an analogy ... may be I ought to keep it on Leica so as not to take things off track.

 

[Philx1979]

would this picture make you wanna spend £27,000 on a camera???? haha i wouldn`t.