Post Honeymoon?

[atanabe]

I have an M8 and also shoot with Nikon albeit a D1x and find that the term "horses for courses" is appropriate here. Now the M8 is small and light, begging to go on daily walks but prone to the limitations of long focal length capabilities and fear of failure. Mine just so happens to be on a spa vacation in Allendale,NJ for just such a breakdown.

I love the M8, the files are really nice but the platform is limiting, low light/high ISO performance is spotty, literally, if you have a point light source in the picture. But if the conditions are right the files have no peer in 35 equivalent DSLR. Long lens work is limited by the practicality of rangefinder focusing on a small patch in the viewfinder and the accuracy of framing. So the need for a DSLR for the long lens work is a given. BUT if you do not use lenses greater than 90mm or have a job shooting macro table top, then stick with the M8.

I am waiting for the price of the D90 to settle down before I buy another DSLR. Why D90? It has the high ISO performance that the D3 and D700 has with a smaller platform. The cost at $999 is much more affordable and in keeping with the "Horses for courses" long lens performance is better suited for a 1.5 crop and smaller lenses. The moral here is that if it is too big and heavy then you aren't going to carry it around everyday. If you don't carry your camera around, you won't take any images, which solves the PP issues I guess.

Cheers,
Al

 

[GrahamWelland]

I'm an M8 and also Nikon D3 & D700 user so I guess I fit your demographic. My general observation would be that sometimes you really need the versatility of a DSLR ...

I love the form factor of the M8 and the remarkable images that it delivers with it's wonderful glass. I'm almost post-production free when I use it since images only really need minimal work compared to almost all DSLR images. I'm almost fully vested with an M8, M8.2 and coded Leica glass from WATE, 28 & 35 'crons, 50 'lux, 75 'cron, 90 'cron and 135 APO Telyt so I can't blame the glass. As an outfit I really enjoy using it and can't see any reason to change it but it isn't ideal for many types of shooting such as landscapes where I need grads, macro or telephoto work. No problem, I have other tools for that.

From a convenience and versatility point of view I find either of the Nikons much better. The quality of the glass is excellent, especially the latest Nano coated zooms. The high ISO versatility of both D3 & D700 mean that I can practically forget about sensor limitation when shooting in low light and I can use three variables - aperture, exposure & ISO - to get what I want. The sensor performance is outrageous IMHO.

The D700 and Zeiss MF primes makes for a great DSLR travel kit for me. I really like the quality of images that the Zeiss glass delivers and I find it more convenient sometimes than schlepping around with a big zoom. (i.e. 14-24 or 24-70).

The form factor of the D3 suites my hands perfectly and the heft actually works for me. I confess that I bought the D700 as a lighter weight companion to the D3, expecting to use it only as a spare or for travel, but I find myself using it a lot more often than planned. The only significant downside of the D700 vs D3 is really the cropped viewfinder (95%), with the D3 having a superior set of external controls/dials for my use. The only limitation I've run into has been in the constant quest for more and more pixels for landscape work - something Nikon have just addressed with the D3x.

From a post processing perspective, the files from the Nikon's require a little extra work although this depends a lot on which raw processor I use. Nikon Capture NX does a fabulous job of rendering images using the in-camera sharpness, tone and contrast settings from raw. The CA removal is also a significant factor to making image production as simple as possible. I'm normally only doing local contrast & local dodge & burn to my Nikon images now - I couldn't say that about using any of the previous generation Nikon D cameras I've had from the D1 through to the D2x.

I was an early adopter of medium format digital back in 2004 when I shot with a Mamiya 645AFD and Kodak 645M - 16mp of exquisite detail that if I'm honest still beats some of the aspects of my Nikon files today. The lack of AA filter really proved it's worth in the sharpness and detail in landscape shots that the Nikons slightly blur over, even with extra sharpening. I know that the latest crop of medium format backs can simply blow my old Kodak away in terms of resolution, color fidelity, noise and overall dynamic range. However, there is a very large difference in the utility of any medium format system compared to that of the Nikon, particularly where you've got lenses of all types from super wide through to extreme telephoto, intelligent flash solutions, specialist lenses such as T/S, zoom versatility, not to mention an overall cost point that is far more manageable. I had a pretty complete Mamiya AF outfit from 35, 45, 55, 80, 120 macro, 300, 55-120 & 105-210 zooms - however compared the D3 or D700 the system was relatively crude, poor AF performance and often fragile (although this was mostly an attribute of the back/camera interface). I shot a lot less with it than when I returned to DRFs and Nikon DSLRs.

The quest for the S2 is laudable and I understand why people here are recommending waiting for it as an alternative. However, think long and hard about the cost and availability of the system ... it isn't going to be 'affordable', it's going to be a premium priced Leica system where each lens is going to cost you more than a D700 & 24-70 lens combo would. I'm as guilty as anyone here of being a Leica fan-boy but realistically the S2 is a system that I could only consider as an alternative to a full Phase One/Hassy medium format digital outfit, not as an alternative to something like the Nikons.

 

[ptomsu]

I have my own math for the S2:

1) I know the perfect IQ from the M8 with it's 10MP and the exceptional glass
2) the sensor of the S2 is approximately 4x the size and MPs as the M8
3) I expect same or higher quality from the S2 as with the current M8, but this at 4x the resolution

This is why I am waiting for it and meanwhile trying to sort out my FF DSLR stuff to suit my needs, as I might add an S2 as soon as it is available and working properly

 

[fotografz]

I have my own math for the S2:

1) I know the perfect IQ from the M8 with it's 10MP and the exceptional glass
2) the sensor of the S2 is approximately 4x the size and MPs as the M8
3) I expect same or higher quality from the S2 as with the current M8, but this at 4x the resolution

This is why I am waiting for it and meanwhile trying to sort out my FF DSLR stuff to suit my needs, as I might add an S2 as soon as it is available and working properly

#1? "Perfect" IQ?

I doubt #3 is going to fullfil your 4X expectations. But it should be excellent.

 

[fotografz]

Honestly, these comparisons are sort of pointless. You have to sort out your shooting needs and priorities and apply the "horses for courses" rule of thumb.

My criteria is dictated by the demands of the work I do for money. I wish I could shoot a wedding with just a couple of M8s. Some people can. I can't. I can't shoot a ring shot without a true macro lens, or a ceremony while relegated to a balcony 250 feet away without long lenses. I can't imagine a bird shooter or a sports photographer using a M8 either.

Personally, I also like to do street photography ... however this is often done handheld, available light in the wee hours or at night .... I'd love to use a M8 here also, but the D700 with Zeiss optics provides higher ISOs, full frame capture, and stellar optical performance in a package not really much larger than the M8.

I love my M system and have had one for most my adult life. But it's relevance and use is waining as other solutions to very real-world needs present themselves.

 

[TimF]

Indeed. It'll be twice the resolution.

 

[TRSmith]

Honestly, these comparisons are sort of pointless. You have to sort out your shooting needs and priorities and apply the "horses for courses" rule of thumb.

I feel I should respond since I started this thread. Clearly, many who have added their take on this (thank you for your thoughtful responses) are working professionals. I recognize the distinction that makes when it comes time to make purchasing decisions. Photo gear for them are the tools of the trade and there needs to be a clear benefit to each investment.

However, I don't fall into that category. To be honest, I have no idea what category I fall under. I was a working pro in the 70s and 80s and have worked with some of the best equipment available during that time. So after returning 20 + years later to photography, It's not as if I'm graduating from the P+S category into "pro-sumer" level tech for the first time.

My own goals are both simple and fuzzy. I know I want to advance my skills and the quality of my images as far as I can, but I don't have some specific target in mind (like turning pro again, or selling prints, or even teaching).

One of the things I love about the M8 is that I see things in the files that just plain make me smile. Call me crazy, but it brings me back to my early days of shooting sheet film. Even in less-than-prize-winning shots, I would get all gooey looking at the beauty of the tonality and detail. The Nikon I own (D2Xs) doesn't give me that. The M8 does.

So I do want to add to my capabilities and continue to pursue that elusive "quality". If I could access a darkroom, I'd be shooting 4x5 and case closed. But I don't and won't any time soon. So it's digital all the way.

Do I need low light capability? Not really. Do I want tele and macro? Yup. But will the files show me the "magic"? Capture the subtlety of the light I saw? Many of the characteristics of the equipment and techniques are near-invisible nuances that lots of people don't see. But they are true joy to me. And since it's not about a "job", it's all about the joy for me.

 

[helenhill]

My own goals are both simple and fuzzy. I know I want to advance my skills and the quality of my images as far as I can, but I don't have some specific target in mind ...
And since it's not about a "job", it's all about the joy for me.

Couldn't AGREE more....
For Me its about Pure Pleasure
capturing the Light & Moment
Creating atmosphere
and being totally Consumed in the Moment

Rght now its mostly Film for me
but the ease & instant gratification of digital is still there (mind you, I am Lusting for a possible DP2 whenever it comes out & YES maybe an M8)

To Finding Joy....
Best-H

 

[ptomsu]

My requirements / needs for the S System are the following:

1) I am not a Pro but sometimes I want highest IQ and then I can really think of the S2 delivering this - will have to be proven though, as well as the final price of this system must come to a range which I can (am willing) to pay

2) I will use this camera for high level studio work, landscape and others, but definitely NOT as travel camera - where I prefer currently Canon - either 450D and in the future also 5DM2

3) the M8 (and probably M9 in the future) I use for locations where I need to work silent and where I need to stay "undercover"

 

[fotografz]

I feel I should respond since I started this thread. Clearly, many who have added their take on this (thank you for your thoughtful responses) are working professionals. I recognize the distinction that makes when it comes time to make purchasing decisions. Photo gear for them are the tools of the trade and there needs to be a clear benefit to each investment.

However, I don't fall into that category. To be honest, I have no idea what category I fall under. I was a working pro in the 70s and 80s and have worked with some of the best equipment available during that time. So after returning 20 + years later to photography, It's not as if I'm graduating from the P+S category into "pro-sumer" level tech for the first time.

My own goals are both simple and fuzzy. I know I want to advance my skills and the quality of my images as far as I can, but I don't have some specific target in mind (like turning pro again, or selling prints, or even teaching).

One of the things I love about the M8 is that I see things in the files that just plain make me smile. Call me crazy, but it brings me back to my early days of shooting sheet film. Even in less-than-prize-winning shots, I would get all gooey looking at the beauty of the tonality and detail. The Nikon I own (D2Xs) doesn't give me that. The M8 does.

So I do want to add to my capabilities and continue to pursue that elusive "quality". If I could access a darkroom, I'd be shooting 4x5 and case closed. But I don't and won't any time soon. So it's digital all the way.

Do I need low light capability? Not really. Do I want tele and macro? Yup. But will the files show me the "magic"? Capture the subtlety of the light I saw? Many of the characteristics of the equipment and techniques are near-invisible nuances that lots of people don't see. But they are true joy to me. And since it's not about a "job", it's all about the joy for me.

The assumption that "doing the job" is a bloodless endeavor, and working stiffs don't derive "gooey joy" from beautifully rendered images seems counter to the attitude of any working stiff I know. In fact, quite the opposite.

Depending on the lenses used, I could easily see a D2x not living up to your expectations compared to a M8. However, a D2X isn't a D3. And even then, depending on the lenses used, I can understand a preference for the M8 files (I have both cameras.)

The rest of your description, tele/macro etc, all with that subtile magic and near invisable nuance, is a perfect description of MF digital capture.

 

[TRSmith]

...
The rest of your description, tele/macro etc, all with that subtile magic and near invisable nuance, is a perfect description of MF digital capture.

Too true. And a bit scary.

 

[jonoslack]

Do I need low light capability? Not really. Do I want tele and macro? Yup. But will the files show me the "magic"? Capture the subtlety of the light I saw? Many of the characteristics of the equipment and techniques are near-invisible nuances that lots of people don't see. But they are true joy to me. And since it's not about a "job", it's all about the joy for me.

HI Tim
Well, I haven't chipped in before, but nobody seems to me to have stated the obvious answer.

I've owned a D3, and a D700 (and a D1x, D2x, D100 and D200). They are excellent cameras (as Marc has said above). The D700 was competent, fast, efficient, and produced excellent files - even the colour is okay as long as you don't allow it to use AWB. The high ISO is splended.

It is exactly what my wife used to say about Ealing (an uninspired suburb of London): It has everything you NEED and nothing you WANT.

There seems to be a word missing somewhere - joy.

It shouldn't matter, but I shoot better when I like the camera I'm shooting with, and that's an elusive thing, which the leica M series definitely has.

So - either wait for an S2, or else buy a Sony A900.

It's about the same price as a D700, it's 25mp and it uses Zeiss lenses. And the files will make you smile - Oh Yes! (if you want to look at some I can send you a link to some of my raw files).

The body doesn't have many of the features of the D700 . . . but it's a joy to use - clearly designed by Minolta crew, it has so little in common with it's name.

The only problem is that you'll have to live with:

1. Jurgen taking the piss out of you about walkmen
2. Everybody doing arcane comparisons with their medium format kit and deciding that MF is better

 

[TRSmith]

HI Tim

So - either wait for an S2, or else buy a Sony A900.

That screeching noise you hear is my brain trying to change gears. Sony? Really? I absolutely love my Sony plasma but I am having some difficulty wedging that brand name into the category of photography. Maybe I need to expand my thinking a bit. Be more open minded.

I do like the idea of using the Zeiss glass. And it would certainly be less expensive than the S2. And you have owned all of the others being discussed so your opinion is certainly valid (and welcome). Hmmmmm.

But really? I mean you do see stuff in the files that make you smile? It's so hard to tell anything from the the various lens and camera tests that show pictures of vegetables cropped at 100%. Show me the goo!

 

[etrigan63]

Coming to Jono's defense (not that he needs it), he has shared with me a rather large selection of RAW images from his A900 and I have to say that he is right about the combo "having the magic". Were it not for the lack of tilt/shift lenses, I would be all over this.

 

[jonoslack]

That screeching noise you hear is my brain trying to change gears. Sony? Really? I absolutely love my Sony plasma but I am having some difficulty wedging that brand name into the category of photography. Maybe I need to expand my thinking a bit. Be more open minded.

I do like the idea of using the Zeiss glass. And it would certainly be less expensive than the S2. And you have owned all of the others being discussed so your opinion is certainly valid (and welcome). Hmmmmm.

But really? I mean you do see stuff in the files that make you smile? It's so hard to tell anything from the the various lens and camera tests that show pictures of vegetables cropped at 100%. Show me the goo!

I do like to make somebody's gears screech!
Carlos - thanks for the kind words. I agree that it's a pity about the T/S lenses. If they stay serious I'm sure they'll come . . . well, fairly sure!

I hadn't got around to moving the files, so they are still in my mobileme account.

Tim - I've sent you the link - help yourself and enjoy (they are converted to DNG for size reasons, but in Aperture at least the dng seem to be as good as the original RAW files).

Anyone else want the link, then send me a PM or an email and you can have it!

 

[robmac]

Sitting here on a cold night sipping a martini while the chili finishes fermenting, so I thought i'd bob this thread to the surface.

Finally managed to try a local D700 with some nice glass (14-24, 70-200 VR and 60 Macro (old version)) today (local camera shops here move vverrryy slowly) and:

1. VERY impressed with build, ergos, VF and just 'feel'. Feels like a D300 with sometime in the gym as it were. Feels like my R8+motorgrip did - fits like a glove.

2. High ISO shots (2500 in this case) - bloody stellar. Though "nice shot" (thinking was ISO 200-400), looked at EXIF and uttered a bad word (or 3).

3. Files are soft out of camera but default sharpening in RD make them snap. Took some nice snaps of the better half (my very reluctant test model) that came out very nicely.

4. Menu system - more convoluted then need be, but workable. Bear in mind and used to Canon 1 series, so some setting took some head scratching initially.

5. LCD - sweet. Just sweet

6. AF very nice. Not 1 series, but close enough that it was nothing to complain about.

7. 14-24 - Great. Feel re: manual focus, etc was a little wanting vs. the Leica primes I use, but such is life in the plastic fantastic AF age

8. 70-200 VF. Didn't test edge performance on FF (where tend s to be wanting) as don't care per se. Nice lens, smaller than Canon version (diameter), nice handling. Great VF and IQ. Resulted in some nice in-store shots at just under 1/2 FL that came out very nicely.

9. Auto WB - seemed fine. Not quite as bang-on as 1Ds2, but close enough to tweak.

10. Flash - the onboard flash is handy and easy to tweak. One of these things you poo-poo over but suddenly realize the value of (with a modifier of course) when you get one you can work with for fill purposes.

11. VF and focus indication system - nice. Wish #$% Canon would backward engineer it for the 5D line (one of my biggest complaints with that body design)

All and all - a nice camera and given that can now use Leica lenses on same, worthy of consideration.

 

[woodyspedden]

Ed: Yes, I think the most practical purchase is likely to be the M8.2 body, or even a used M8 (they seem to be dropping in price). And that's probably where I'll end up.

nei1: I have my trusty Nikon F3 that's been serviced and ready to rock. There's a half-exposed roll of Tri-X in it now and that's as far as I'm willing to go with film at this point. I hate not having a darkroom and won't invest in a technology (film) that essentially puts big barriers in front of my ability/desire to shoot. Laziness is enough of a factor to overcome.

Mike: Your story about the D700 is not the only one with the same ending that I've heard. So I have decided to NOT buy the D700. What's that old song... "how you gonna keep them down on the farm, after they've seen Pareee?"


Thanks,
Tim

Tim

Terry Banet has two M8's for sale here at $2800 each and they are in beautiful condition. My word you could buy one of these and use as is or go for the new shutter and framelines and it would still be a bargain. JMHO

Woody

 

[Terry]

Tim

Terry Banet has two M8's for sale here at $2800 each and they are in beautiful condition. My word you could buy one of these and use as is or go for the new shutter and framelines and it would still be a bargain. JMHO

Woody

I already have upgrade service scheduled for March....so the buyer should be able to take my place in line.

 

[TRSmith]

Thanks to everyone for keeping this alive. Since originally starting this thread, I've lapsed into something of a trance-like state where I can easily imagine myself buying and using all of the mentioned systems. However, as a business owner, I'm currently in the wait-and-see mode re: the economy and how that will impact my clients (and ultimately my business). They are all Fortune 500 companies and the downturn will either require them to cancel plans for my services or increase them. It's too early to tell. Unfortunately, until that becomes more clear, new camera purchases will have to stay towards the bottom of the requirements list.

It doesn't make resisting the urge to buy any easier now that there's a camera body that will accept my Leica glass. Damn those pesky innovative camera companies! Still, I intend to remain frugal for the time being. The worst thing that could happen (and it's not all that bad) is that I end up with my single M8 and my Nikon D2Xs on my holiday in April.

 

[GrahamWelland]

The worst thing that could happen (and it's not all that bad) is that I end up with my single M8 and my Nikon D2Xs on my holiday in April.

Too true. You could do a LOT worse than that combo. The D2Xs didn't become a door stop just because of the D3/D700 ...