[Leica] Re: Leica answer

[luisripoll at telefonica.net (Luis Ripoll)]

Henning,

I find very interesting your comments, just one of my questions is if I had
an M8, should I continue using my film cameras?, (I think yes). The other
point, about quality, for me we should differenciate colour and B&W, and
when we talk about B&W, it should be compared with a darkromm print and not
with other digital cameras, on this case I continue asking me, even the
digital quality (B&W) has been improved, if is better or not than a Baryta
print.

Saludos cordiales
Luis
 

-----Mensaje original-----
De: lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+luisripoll=telefonica.net@leica-users.org] En nombre de
Henning Wulff
Enviado el: viernes, 31 de agosto de 2007 22:50
Para: Leica Users Group
Asunto: [Leica] Re: Leica answer

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

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information