A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 20th 06, 02:01 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

jeremy wrote:

I've read about several informal "blind" tests where the participants were
unable to determine which camera took which photograph. Bob Monaghan did
one such test. So how much is Leica's legendary (or should I say,
"mythical") margin of superiority worth? Is there any photo taken with
Leica equipment that couldn't have been taken with a Nikon or even a
Minolta?


I suppose that if you're shooting with your back to the sun, close your
lens down to f/8.0, don't enlarge to more than 12x18 cm, turn a blind
eye (or two) to optical distortion, vignetting, bokeh, colour
saturation, soft corners and a few other aberations, then yes - Jeremy -
you might not be able to tell a difference.

BTW: You should add a footnote when you paraphrase Ken Rockwell...
  #2  
Old September 20th 06, 03:45 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

Kinon O'Cann wrote:
"jeremy" wrote in message news:LRfQg.26$Kh.1@trnddc05...

There comes a point where the cost of the equipment is too high to justify
actually *using it.*

Even Erwin Puts has recently acknowledged that photographers, except for a
small band of dedicated ones, long ago abandoned the precision rangefinder
in favor of Japanese SLRs.

I've read about several informal "blind" tests where the participants were
unable to determine which camera took which photograph. Bob Monaghan did
one such test. So how much is Leica's legendary (or should I say,
"mythical") margin of superiority worth? Is there any photo taken with
Leica equipment that couldn't have been taken with a Nikon or even a
Minolta?


I've seen lots of tests that compare Leica glass to other stuff, and the
Leica stuff is usually much better. Trust me, I'm not seeing things. On top
of initial image quality you also have to consider how long a lens will
provide that level of quality. Company a 30 year old Leica lens to a 30 year
old Nikon or Canon lens and then draw a conclusion.


I "moved" to Leica (and Zeiss in the form of Rolleiflex) after using
Nikon for a couple of decades.

I find nothing at all wrong mechanically with my c. 25+ year-old Nikon
AI/AIS lenses - which are roughly contemporary with my Leica & Zeiss
lenses. But then, IMHO, one of the great advantages of "classic" Nikon
equipment was its indestructability.

It's the quality of the glass which makes the difference to me: L & Z
glass is *usually* better for flare resistance, distortion, bokeh and
often has a 1-2 stop quality advantage over the Nikon equivalents. Not
to mention some less definable characteristics like 3-d & colour rendition.
For example, the 90mm Summicron at f/2.0 is slightly better than the
Nikkor 105mm at f/2.5. The Zeiss 85mm at f/1.4 only slightly worse.
At f/5.6 and beyond they will be practically indistinguishable, but keep
in mind that - IMHO - the 105mm f/2.5 is one of the very best Nikkors.
With (most) wide-angle lenses the differences are greater.

Some of the Leica M (& even Zeiss) lenses are especially compact, being
a fraction of the size & weight of their Nikon equivalents.

Leica also has the nice habit of making very well-designed lens shades
either built-in or as standard equipment (despite Ken Rockwell's
statement that lens shades are unnecessary).

Is Leica too expensive? New stuff probably (and the M8 definitely!), but
on the used market they are competitive with new plastic stuff, and
there - unlike classic Nikon equipment - I'll accept bets on which will
last longer.
  #3  
Old September 20th 06, 04:52 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

nathantw wrote:
Tony Polson wrote:
It was already clear that you didn't have the faintest idea about the
performance of Leica lenses. Thank you for confirming that, beyond
all possible doubt.


You obviously didn't read one of my messages that stated that when I
was choosing a new camera system one of the two choices was Leica.
Certainly I must know something if one of two choices is that brand.


So Mr. Expert, have you actually *used* a Leica and/or tested its lenses?
  #4  
Old September 20th 06, 05:08 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
nathantw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

Apparently there's a new Leica M8 that was just announced.
http://www.electronista.com/articles...leica.cameras/

What the heck? Why in the world would a rangefinder camera cost as much
Nikon's flagship digital SLR and almost as much as Canon's top of the
line camera? The only thing I can think of is that it must be the lens
mount. It's almost like Leica took the price of their regular M7 and
added on top of that instead of starting from scratch. Granted their
cameras are probably hand made (not always equating to better) and
you're basically paying for one worker's monthly salary when you buy a
camera, but damn, $5647US is a LOT of money for a rangefinder. Then
again, to put things in perspective a Patek Phillipe men's watch STARTS
at $12000, but a Leica isn't made of gold.

  #5  
Old September 20th 06, 05:17 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

nathantw wrote:

Actually, I think it works well. Patek Phillipe isn't the only watch
maker in the world, but their watches have been sold at auction up to
$13 million. Yes, you read correctly. There are "cheaper watches" out
there but they're considered the best made watches. Others would
disagree with that statement just as we're doing with the Leica and
"cheaper cameras."

A "cheaper camera" could include a Hasselblad, a Rollei, a Linhof, a
Sinar, a Zeiss Ikon, a Contax G and a multitude of cameras from
established companies that professionals have used for years if not
decades. We all know what kind of photographs could be made with those
"cheaper cameras."


First, if you compare cameras, you have to stick to the same format:
Comparing Leica to LF doesn't make sense.

Of the 35mm ones you mention, the designers of the Contax G had the
*wonderful idea* of making it autofocus and then implementing it poorly
at that. Main reason why the Contax G failed.
The Zeiss-Ikon is an interesting alternative, but you can buy a used
Leica for less than a new Z-I. The Leica will outlast the Z-I by several
decades.
The Cosina-Voigtländers aren't that well built and have short
rangefinder bases.
So there really aren't that many alternatives in the world of quality
35mm rangefinder cameras.
You also can't compare a leica to, say, a Nikon F6; they have totally
different uses.

Until then we can basically
say that the Leica 10MP camera will be similiar to the ones taken with
a Nikon 10MP camera since they use the same imaging chip.


There's a thing hanging on to the front of your camera. Its called a
lens. It makes a difference.

  #6  
Old September 20th 06, 05:26 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Kinon O'Cann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 321
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

This question has been asked many, many times, and long before the first
digital camera was produced. Leica builds a premium quality camera for a
small but dedicated group of shooters. The materials used and quality of
construction is absolutely unmatched. Simply put, Leicas aren't for
everyone. In the end, the decision is simple: it's up to you whether or not
it's worth the money. Best lenses on the planet, too.

FWIW, I did own a Leica a long time ago, and they are amazing cameras...

"nathantw" wrote in message
oups.com...
Apparently there's a new Leica M8 that was just announced.
http://www.electronista.com/articles...leica.cameras/

What the heck? Why in the world would a rangefinder camera cost as much
Nikon's flagship digital SLR and almost as much as Canon's top of the
line camera? The only thing I can think of is that it must be the lens
mount. It's almost like Leica took the price of their regular M7 and
added on top of that instead of starting from scratch. Granted their
cameras are probably hand made (not always equating to better) and
you're basically paying for one worker's monthly salary when you buy a
camera, but damn, $5647US is a LOT of money for a rangefinder. Then
again, to put things in perspective a Patek Phillipe men's watch STARTS
at $12000, but a Leica isn't made of gold.



  #7  
Old September 20th 06, 06:02 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Advocate
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 26
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?


"nathantw" wrote in message
oups.com...
Apparently there's a new Leica M8 that was just announced.
http://www.electronista.com/articles...leica.cameras/

What the heck? Why in the world would a rangefinder camera cost as much
Nikon's flagship digital SLR and almost as much as Canon's top of the
line camera? The only thing I can think of is that it must be the lens
mount. It's almost like Leica took the price of their regular M7 and
added on top of that instead of starting from scratch. Granted their
cameras are probably hand made (not always equating to better) and
you're basically paying for one worker's monthly salary when you buy a
camera, but damn, $5647US is a LOT of money for a rangefinder. Then
again, to put things in perspective a Patek Phillipe men's watch STARTS
at $12000, but a Leica isn't made of gold.


Suggested retail prices seldom reflect the real world street price. Perhaps
the Leica will cost what is stated in the release; it depends solely on
supply and demand.

If Leica only manufacturers 1,000 of the M8's and there are 5,000 eager
Leicaphiles waiting to buy one...they may bring even more.


  #8  
Old September 20th 06, 06:41 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Peter Chant
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 238
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

Kinon O'Cann wrote:

This question has been asked many, many times, and long before the first
digital camera was produced. Leica builds a premium quality camera for a
small but dedicated group of shooters. The materials used and quality of
construction is absolutely unmatched. Simply put, Leicas aren't for
everyone. In the end, the decision is simple: it's up to you whether or
not it's worth the money. Best lenses on the planet, too.



I'll add economies of scale, if they sold as many Leicas as Nikons they
could probally bring down costs a bit.

I am sure I could get you a one off pinhole camera built, but it would cost
as much as the Leica.


--
http://www.petezilla.co.uk
  #9  
Old September 20th 06, 06:44 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Chris Loffredo
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 355
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?

nathantw wrote:
"Chris Loffredo" wrote in message
...
You also can't compare a leica to, say, a Nikon F6; they have totally
different uses.


Uh...you're right. Taking pictures with a Nikon F6 is totally different than
what you can do with a Leica.

Okay, you want 35mm, how about a Hasselblad Xpan? Oh, that doesn't count
because it's made of metal but it only take a few interchangeable lenses,
right? And let's see, ah yes, it doesn't do the same things as a
Leica...take pictures.


Actually, I'd love an Xpan; it just happens to be more expensive than a
Leica (even used). It will probably be my next purchase...

Okay, how about an old Olympus OM-camera? It's quiet, has interchangeable
lenses (some great ones at that)...ah yes, it's an SLR. Not the same thing.
Plus it doesn't do the same thing as a Leica...take pictures.


The lenses *don't* compare, especially the wide-angles. There is a
physical reason for that: Google for "retrofocus"...

Then how about a Hexar RF? You can mount the all important LEICA labeled
lens on it. Ah, but it doesn't have a red dot on it. And it's not intended
towards what a Leica is suppose to do...taking pictures.


I don't happen to like cameras which are 100% battery-dependent. If
that's not an issue, the Hexar sounds nice.
Personally, I don't really need to spare my thumb.

So what are you suppose to do with a Leica? Ah, I know, put it into the
closet for safe keeping and pull it out when you need money and sell it on
Ebay. So it's suppose to be for collecting. I get it now. No wonder Leica
made so many commemorative editions, such as the very useful gold Leica, the
special plated ones, the ones with special leather, and the rest that were
all sold at a very reasonable price mind you.. It all makes sense. So, yes,
those other cameras don't compare with the Leica.


Yawn... The old Leica-is-only-for-jaded-collectors line. Again.
While Leica has made some silly cameras aimed at collectors, it also
makes some great one which *do not* live in my closet.


It's still as good as a Nikon 10MP camera at the moment. You show me a
picture taken with a M8 right now compared with a Nikon 10MP camera or even
a Canon 10MP camera side by side. Let us see how much of a difference that
Leica lens makes. Come on, do it. What? You can't? Why? Because it doesn't
come out until November, 2006. So, what did they say in the movie "The Bad
News Bears 2?" Oh yeah, when you ASSUME it makes an ASS out of U and ME.


Hey, give me an M8 and I'll be glad to oblige!

So, what's your issue with Leica? Envy? Guy with a Leica run off with
your wife?
  #10  
Old September 20th 06, 07:07 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,rec.photo.digital
Rich
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 718
Default Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive?


Kinon O'Cann wrote:
This question has been asked many, many times, and long before the first
digital camera was produced. Leica builds a premium quality camera for a
small but dedicated group of shooters. The materials used and quality of
construction is absolutely unmatched. Simply put, Leicas aren't for
everyone. In the end, the decision is simple: it's up to you whether or not
it's worth the money. Best lenses on the planet, too.


At about 650 grams, it costs $352 per oz. 1 oz of silver costs $12.00.
So, it costs less to mine and process and refine the equivalent amount
of silver
out of 29 tons of rock than the Leica is worth. The Leica, by weight
is about
1/2 the price of gold. Then again, something NASA might send into
orbit that size
might cost a few million $'s. A 16 meg medical grade CCD (if they
exist) would probably cost about $100,000. It's all relative.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Leica M8 - is the lens mount THAT expensive? Chris Loffredo Digital Photography 281 October 16th 06 09:30 PM
Canon digital bodies and Nikon lenses Joseph Chamberlain, DDS Digital SLR Cameras 128 November 20th 05 01:01 AM
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon Skip M Digital Photography 204 October 28th 05 12:15 PM
Nikon D70 issues/questions Vs. Canon Skip M 35mm Photo Equipment 202 October 28th 05 12:15 PM
FA: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1 Digital camera with Leica 12X optical zoom lens Marvin Culpepper Digital Photo Equipment For Sale 0 October 15th 04 01:05 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.