[Leica] Re: Leica answer

[henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)]

At 11:46 PM -0400 8/30/07, Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:
>On Aug 30, 2007, at 6:50 PM, Adam wrote:
>
>>  I keep thinking that you want a particular answer and are disgruntled
>>  when you don't get it, Lawrence.
>
>
>I never intended to release a flood of emotions when I asked about 
>the relative reliability of the M8. What I really wanted was someone 
>to say that the M8, and indeed any Leica, is a camera, not the Holy 
>Grail. I would have liked to see it compared objectively to other 
>cameras, but I guess expecting Luggers to be unbiased is a real leap 
>of faith. After all, it is the LUG. I don't even want to see it 
>compared to Canon or Nikon. I have no interest in buying either. Nor 
>am I unacquainted with the convenience of digital cameras. I have 
>owned them since they first came out about 15 years ago, starting 
>with a B&W Logitec, the Apple 100, and the Leica Digiflex Zoom. I 
>regularly use an Olympus 4/3 DSLR, apparently the second choice of 
>many Leica fans. The digitals let me take more pictures without a 
>cost penalty but I seriously doubt that they are better pictures.
>
>What I would like to see is a comparison of the M8 with a film 
>Leica, say the M6, using the same lenses on each, the film to be 
>scanned at 4000 lpi on a top quality scanner.
>Surely one of the excellent photographers on the LUG has both 
>cameras and the interest in making such a test. My problem is that I 
>have film Leicas and lenses that I use for personal photography. I 
>am satisfied with the results but I like the convenience of digital. 
>The entry price of the M8 can buy a lot of film and processing. 
>Still, I'm tempted. The largest pictures I regularly make these days 
>are 8x10s with an occasional 11x14 or 16x20 for a photo show. No 
>40x60s ever.
>
>The value of Leica RF cameras as instinctive image making machines 
>extends to the M8 as several Luggers have stated. I don't expect MF 
>results from a 35 mm frame despite the assertions of M8 fans that 
>Hassleblad quality can be squeezed out of the sensor. Too bad there 
>isn't a Consumers Research for high end cameras.
>
>My problem would be resolved if someone would just give me an M8. I 
>wonder what Leica does with all those returned cameras. Can't sell 
>them as new. It's against the law.
>
>Larry Z

Tina and others have answered your question pretty definitively. I 
will add my note to that:

An M8 shot lets me produce prints that show more detail with better 
tonalities than prints from negatives shot with M whatever. I use the 
same lenses, but if I want the same angle of view, I'll use different 
focal lengths. It wouldn't be fair to the M film cameras to crop the 
film down to the M8 sensor size.

This comparison holds unless the film camera is fed something like 
Agfapan 25 (of which I still have a brick and a half) or Tech Pan. 
For normal to high speed material (100ISO and up) it's no contest, 
and especially in low light. The M8 might not have the low noise 
characteristics of the Canon 5D at 3200, but it's a lot better than 
film.

You're obviously knowledgeable enough regarding digital cameras and 
their output quality; almost any digital SLR can produce images that 
are beyond their recently produced film counterparts. Why would you 
think that the Leica M8 to film M relationship would be different?

As far as scanning goes: yes, you can then manipulate the image to a 
greater degree than printing it directly, but in my opinion unless 
you are using a very good drum scan you are generally not going to 
get as good output as high quality direct optical printing from a 
technically good negative, so the ultimate quality will fall even 
further behind that of the M8.

I really don't understand what else you want. This has now been 
answered in many different ways. Labelling all M8 users as deluded 
wannabees or fools who need to justify their ridiculous purchase is 
silly. There probably are some such out there, but many are not and 
have purchased the camera after careful consideration and trial.

  The M8 is a reasonable offering for those that want M style 
shooting, in particular to make good use of their M lenses and are 
comfortable with the M system. The camera is my preferred shooting 
tool now, in spite of it's foibles, and if a better (M9?) comes out 
I'll probably get that. I will keep some film M cameras but they will 
play a smaller and smaller role in my photography.


-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com