Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/04/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]My reactions are just the opposite of Neal's. The GF-1 has it's place but it's not as nifty to use as the M8 with the Leica glass. On a trip, if I wanted to make good images I'd take the M8 without a second thought. Why? Although the electronic viewfinder is nice, it's quite pixelated to my eyes. I don't like holding the dratted camera out in front of me, what a ridiculous way to take pictures (in my opinion). The M8 doesn't do video but I can live without video. I like my M8 a lot, wish I could afford an M9 but the gods aren't raining cash down upon me right now so I'm staying with the M8 and liking it very much. Adam On 2011 Apr 11, at 2:26 AM, Simon Ogilvie wrote: > The recent discussions about micro 4/3 (and Sony NEX) got me thinking. > I've been using my Leica M lenses on the Panasonic micro 4/3 cameras > for a little while, and more recently with a Sony NEX-5. I like the > results, but quite often find that critical focussing is out, > particularly at wide apertures. This would clearly be easier to get > right on an M8, and so I've been considering "upgrading" from my M6 as > I rarely use film any more. The only experience I've had of using an > M8 was without UV/IR filters and the results were not surprisingly a > little disappointing. With the right filters, how would the results > compare with micro 4/3 and the Sony? Is the larger sensor of the M8 > really that much better than the Sony's APS-C? The M8 resolution is > lower than any of the others, so presumably the photo-sites are > considerably larger? Sadly there's no way I can afford to go the > whole hog and get an M9, so it's a used M8 I'm looking at... > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information