The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

M8 in Iraq

S

sirvine

Guest
When you are shooting in a war zone you do not deal with leather cases they slow you down changing batteries and cards. Also when shooting like this jpegs are the rule of the day . Me I wonder why in terms of electronics why they did not use the resources of panasonic who they have a huge relationship with.
Well, then you can add the locking baseplate to the list of "flaws" for war zone photojournalists. As for shooting jpegs, I don't get that at all, war zone or not. As a matter of fact, if I were shooting "under fire", I'd be sure to shoot RAW so that I can salvage the near misses.
 
M

Mango

Guest
Well, then you can add the locking baseplate to the list of "flaws" for war zone photojournalists.
What I don't get is that when shooting film, one has to change the film every 36 shots, which involves removing the baseplate in heat and dust conditions. With a 2GB SD card, shooting Raw and Jpg, you get 137 or so shots, which results in removing the baseplate a lot less than before. Why has this suddenly become an issue for our man in Iraq, when it wasn't with film?
 
P

pascal_meheut

Guest
What I don't get is that when shooting film, one has to change the film every 36 shots, which involves removing the baseplate in heat and dust conditions. With a 2GB SD card, shooting Raw and Jpg, you get 137 or so shots, which results in removing the baseplate a lot less than before. Why has this suddenly become an issue for our man in Iraq, when it wasn't with film?
I guess the issue is that now, he is used to shoot with digital, shoots more, changes card quickly and so on.
He is not comparing the M8 to its previous M, more to its Canon.

He indeed says that the M8 keeps all the advantages of a rangefinder but when it comes to sensor & some ergonomy aspects, it is less than perfect and behind the competition.

Love my M8 but cannot say I fully disagree as I had the same problems as this guy. I live with them but I do not depend on my M8 to make a living under fire.
 

jlm

Workshop Member
kamber's issue with the baseplate had to do with the attempted censorship, particular to this war and the way it is PR managed by the government. if he had had a film camera, they would have pulled the film. with digital, they are hip enough to pull the card, so michael wanted to be quicker so he could swap out a dummy card. again his comparison was to other digital cameras, not to earlier leicas in this respect
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
Well, then you can add the locking baseplate to the list of "flaws" for war zone photojournalists. As for shooting jpegs, I don't get that at all, war zone or not. As a matter of fact, if I were shooting "under fire", I'd be sure to shoot RAW so that I can salvage the near misses.
They shoot jpeg because they are on deadline and don't have time to convert RAW files to jpeg before sending them to their agency. Also, raw files often take up too much space to be uploaded quickly via slow internet connections and satellite phones. If they had the time to post-process, they would.
 

Terry

New member
They shoot jpeg because they are on deadline and don't have time to convert RAW files to jpeg before sending them to their agency. Also, raw files often take up too much space to be uploaded quickly via slow internet connections and satellite phones. If they had the time to post-process, they would.
I really don't completely buy that argument anymore with programs like Lightroom. Corrections if even needed are fast, can be copied and then conversion to the correct size/compression on jpeg can be done and uploaded in a batch.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Nor do I , you should see how fast I can fly in either LR or C1 especially if you process for a jpeg.
 

Stuart Richardson

Active member
I am just repeating what I have heard in the past. I am not sure what the actual realities are now. I am pretty sure in many cases they just turn in the card too, rather than have any involvement in the process.

In terms of his actual criticism, parts of it I agree with, parts I disagree, but I do not think that the M8 would make a good combat camera. That said, I don't think that disqualifies it from being a professional tool. While it makes superb images, it does it on its own terms. Like Marc, Charles and others, my camera has not been reliable and it has spent a lot of time in the shop. This is a bad thing, and if they come out with a camera that is less buggy, full frame, and IR free, with easier to set ISO, faster startup (something that turns on without you having to press the shutter down halfway too), consistent AWB, and an SD card door like most other cameras, and framelines sized for 2m rather than .7, then I will be very happy. I like the idea of a digital rangefinder enough to work around these problems, but there is no getting around the fact that the M8 does not have the responsiveness and refinement of the latest generation of pro digital SLR's like the D3.

I really wish that Nikon and Leica would team up and produce a digital rangefinder with Nikon's technology and Leica's lenses and RF experience. I know that that is 99.99999% unlikely to happen, but it would be nice, nonetheless.

In its absence, I would love it if they just made a full frame M8 (9?) without IR problems, along with some of the refinements I mentioned above. And while I liked the retro styling, I would rather that it have some sort of grip -- even molded rubber like on the Hexar RF gives a much better grip with heavy lenses. I use a half case now, but I would rather not have to.
 

Seascape

New member
I use the optional camera grip, and because of the thickness of the M8 verses a M6 type body, the grip is almost a necessity.

Certainly having it as part of the design would probably not offend too many Leica purists......it is a very workable solution.
 

Guy Mancuso

Administrator, Instructor
Well no question many of us had some issues. If i was going into combat with M8's I would actually have three of them and for the simple reason besides backup. You just may have to drop one and run your butt off for cover. LOL Seriously anything you go into a war zone with do NOT expect it to survive period. Any camera that is. Some will hold up better and some will not but you absolutely can't plan anything being trouble free. Dust alone can eat a camera in a week in those type of conditions. These are not camera's that go into a bag ever there out all the time around some ones neck banging into anything in sight. The guy is lucky he is alive and that is the real bottom line. This stuff is disposable in these conditions.
 

Chris C

Member
....I really wish that Nikon and Leica would team up and produce a digital rangefinder with Nikon's technology and Leica's lenses and RF experience............unlikely to happen....
Stuart - Unlikely indeed, but it is an interesting fantasy. And maybe Nikon would teach Leica some lens tricks too. My battered and much used Plaubel Makina 6x7 rollfilm rangefinder camera has a custom made 'fixed' Nikon lens on it; and it is a fabulous lens. So Nikon have done collaborations in the past.

Still unlikely to happen though.

........... Chris


Meanwhile ----- back in Iraq; the raging war on the M8 continues............
 

charlesphoto

New member
Budgets are down all over, esp the NY Times. I think they are probably struggling as it is to keep a shooter over there, and I'm sure he's not making enough to approach something like a $5k camera as "disposable."

A colleague of mine covered some flooding for the NY Times awhile back. He is a regular, yet even so he had to wrangle over reimbursement for a $19 pair of rubber boots. As glamorous (and dangerous) as these guys jobs might seem, you're going to make a whole lot more money covering company meetings or doing weddings. These guys truly do it for the glory.

And jpegs are a must, LR or no. By the end of the day you just want to satellite these pics off, not muck around on an uncalibrated laptop that never has enough room or power all the while trying to write captions and just get some chow and sleep. The RAWs can go on a separate hard disk for your gallery show down the road.

I recently had a large job shooting for UNICEF in the Dominican Republic. I toyed with the idea of doing it with my M8 but then decided to go with a D3 instead. In almost all aspects it was the better camera for the job. I had my M8 along for some downtime wandering which was perfect but D3 was, most importantly, super reliable. I also loved the big clear screen I could show the producer, even in the middle of the day. I wish I could have done it all with the M8 but it just isn't there yet. If there had been a film budget I wouldn't have hesitated doing it with my M7. Funny how that is.
 
S

sirvine

Guest
I can certainly understand the need for JPEGs if that is the "industry standard" in this application. It just bugs me that this "M8 in Iraq" review is buzzing around the Internet as the basis for a lot of condemnation of the M8. Shooting the M8 for color JPEGs at ISO 2500 in the dark is hardly using the camera's strengths. It took us all a while to discover that one of the great powers of this camera is in boosting underexposed areas in RAW.
 
Top