Leica M8 vs. Epson vs. Sigma

[henrikfoto]

I am looking to buy a small camera that is light and makes the best possible image-quality for the days I don´t feel like carrying my Hasselblad.

Is anybody using the Leica M8, Epson or the compact Sigma? How good are the files compared to those from the larger cameras?

Any experiences are very welcome.

Henrik

[georgl]

The M8 is basically a small MFDB, the sensor, missing AA-filter, electronics, processing speed - it all comes from the MFDB-world. It's not very versatile (speed, long lenses, macro...) but it also has unique strengths - particulary the "MFDB-look" of the files (DR...), the size, build quality and the lenses. The lenses are unlike any other. They are the best lenses available, period! But they're also a bit over-engineered for the little sensor but an Investment for a future M9 (not within this year).

So if you want something small that isn't too far from your Hassi regarding "look", you have no choice, all other small cameras are more or less typical p&s.

But try it out first, when you are not used to the M-system, you will hate or love it! It's a different kind of shooting than with SLRs.

[Khun_K]

I am looking to buy a small camera that is light and makes the best possible image-quality for the days I don´t feel like carrying my Hasselblad.

Is anybody using the Leica M8, Epson or the compact Sigma? How good are the files compared to those from the larger cameras?

Any experiences are very welcome.

Henrik

I use cameras from medium format digital, 1Ds MK3, D3X, Canon G10, DP-1 and M8, DP-1 is perhaps offering the best image of all compact cameras I have used, but still not close to M8. M8 is easily comparable to much bigger cameras, not quite as good as those full frame DSLR but quite good enough.

[JamesA]

I use cameras from medium format digital, 1Ds MK3, D3X, Canon G10, DP-1 and M8, DP-1 is perhaps offering the best image of all compact cameras I have used, but still not close to M8. M8 is easily comparable to much bigger cameras, not quite as good as those full frame DSLR but quite good enough.

Sigma's cost is now $449 at Amazon.  The Leica, any way you look at it is a $10,000 camera once you put a lens on it.  Olympus's upcoming micro-4/3rds compact model will probably be a good choice as well.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013DCOZ...;pf_rd_i=507846

[mas55101]

Sigma's cost is now $449 at Amazon.  The Leica, any way you look at it is a $10,000 camera once you put a lens on it.  Olympus's upcoming micro-4/3rds compact model will probably be a good choice as well.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0013DCOZ...;pf_rd_i=507846

Actually there are a few ways to look at it that come up to about $3000-$4000.  Used M8's are about $2500.  There are Leica lenses brand new for $1500 and Zeiss lenses for under $1,000.  Don't know anything about the compacts.

[dalethorn]

Actually there are a few ways to look at it that come up to about $3000-$4000.  Used M8's are about $2500.  There are Leica lenses brand new for $1500 and Zeiss lenses for under $1,000.  Don't know anything about the compacts.

Comparing apples to apples, the M8 with short lens is going to be about eight(!) times as expensive as a (for example) Panasonic G1, another "special" small camera. So if you're going to pay that much, you'd really want to know exactly what you're doing, which would seem to make these comparisons pointless.

[dseelig]

I have picked up a g1 played with a few compacts. The M8 warts and all blows them away. It depends on your needs or wants. If you are looking to take snapshots buy a g1 or some other camera. If you love the look of the world at f 1.4or microcontarast that you will not see from any other samll camera then get a leica. David

[sergio]

The only Leica I have had in my hands is an M2 from 1950 something, and I have now developed some Neopan 400 and it looks pretty good. A lot better than shot from my old Nikon FM2 with a 35 f2.0 AIS which was a very nice camera for street stuff. I am using an old Elmar 50 f2.8 retractible lens, probably as old as the camera itself and it is a very nice performer. The overall look is very nice, and since it is a retractible lens it is very compact, though on the heavy side, however it is a joy to just hold it in ones hand.

I dug out negatives from 15 or something years ago and was surprised with the technology itself. I archived some negs a decade and half ago, not one single thought afterwards, took it out and they were perfect. I wonder if I stored my HD with backups for 15 years and not even think of them ever and that they turn out ok. I think a piece of paper and a pencil is still unbeatable technology no mater how many iphines,palms,pcs,macs or whatever. Definitely if I want my images to last my lifetime and hopefully my children's (very young still), I need to put precious images on paper. In the long run technology made shooting safer, but at the compromise of unattended permanence. And I say safer, because it is not necesarily easier. Just safer because you can review you have the shot. And it transferred all the money involved in the process of making photographs from your local market to some foreign corporation. Maybe some thoughts for a new thread. And its not a rant.  

[Anders_HK]

I am looking to buy a small camera that is light and makes the best possible image-quality for the days I don´t feel like carrying my Hasselblad.

Is anybody using the Leica M8, Epson or the compact Sigma? How good are the files compared to those from the larger cameras?

Any experiences are very welcome.

Henrik

Henrik,

I sold off my DP1 earlier this week and bought an M8 the week before.

DP1 - Capable of higher image quality than any camera its size. That said, I found it does take some adjustment to get there which feel tedious. The raw files are also on latest spec macbook pros a tad slow to read. It does not quite feel like a camera in my hands... a problem I found with most digital cameras. Mine was back from service a second time. This time they had polished so it looked new, thus good time to sell it.

M8 - Feels like a camera. In some ways it reminds me of the Canon Av-1 which I had during twenty years. File quality is not up to that of my Aptus 65 (neglecting MP differences), but very high and higher than any other camera its size (or neglecting MPs I dare say than any digital camera less than MFDB). Images are sharp, not like cameras with an AA. Similar to my Aptus, raw files when read at defaults look already good and require little adjustments. Colors look good,but are different from my Aptus, perhaps partly relating to the Kodak sensor in the M8 compared to the Dalsa in my Aptus. Exposure should be made right. With much adjustments it seems that the files do not hold up well. Contrary to what I have read I find that the camera expose very excellent. I also find it awesome in use as an infrared camera and for black and white, using red, yellow, green filters.

Do read up much of the M8 and its limitations. It came with problems when it was new, but seems Leica has worked out most. It is a rangefinder, thus require some understanding of it and how to operate a camera. Actually, I find it simpler to use than a DSLR! It is a camera with a sensor in it, not a computer with lens on it like dlsr and p&s. Following sites have much info on M8 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/ and http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/.

I went for the Leica 28mm 2.8. Apart from that I will get Voiglander lenses. Read on following site and you will see that some of them are actually up to pair and/or near with Leica in optical department http://www.reidreviews.com/. It is worthwhile to sign up to Reidreviews. He has made very good testing of Leica / Zeiss / Voigtlander lenses, and also have a four-part articule on the M8 and also articles on the Epson RD-1 and Sigma DP1.

My choice was the basic M8 which has identical image quality to the M8.2. Best of luck in your choice.

Regards
Anders

[photoshutter]

Henrik,

It is a camera with a sensor in it, not a computer with lens on it like dlsr and p&s

And Canon 1DS is not a camera with a sensor in it? I'm really don't get it, I have both, M8 And 1DS, and Canon is more camera for me.

[dseelig]

With a canon you are bringing a much different feel to a situiation the size autofocus all the auto exposure modes. The Leica is a more intimate camera both from how people perceive it you are photographing also from the control you have on it. Most of my professional work has been with a canon most of  my personal work a leica. David

[Rob C]

The Leica is a more intimate camera both from how people perceive it you are photographing also from the control you have on it.

How do you know how "people" perceive it?

This sounds to me like so much nonsense that the Leica fans propagate in order to amplify the myth of the marque.

Rob C

[mrenters]

How do you know how "people" perceive it?

This sounds to me like so much nonsense that the Leica fans propagate in order to amplify the myth of the marque.

Rob C

I think what dseeling is trying to say is that people don't notice or object to the M8 (or any other compact or cell phone camera) as much as they do DSLRs.  Walk down a street with a DSLR around your neck and people will notice.  Do the same with an M8 or other compact camera and nobody cares. My wife and I were walking down a street once, she with a Canon 5D with a 24-105 and I with an M8 and people would stop and comment on how nice a camera she had.  Nobody said anything about the M8.  It is a "quaint camera like grandpa used to use" and non-threatening.

Martin

[vantomas]

Doing jobs I use Canon gear, but off-duty i learned to love my M8. It is a fantastic piece of equipment. Well built, relatively small, not too heavy, pretty easy to focus and not so expensive any more. I got mine for 2500 EUR in Germany. And a fantastic 35/2 Summicron lens at ebay for 800 EUR. When shooting canon and leica side by side, people thereafter always go for the leica image. I had the G7, the G9, the G10, DP1...and i sold them all after a while. The sensors are too small, the images just don't have it. And besides that a Leica looks better with a suit.

best,
thomas

www.dashuber.com

[DonWeston]

I know this question may seem like insanity, but has any compared actual large prints over say 14x21 of either an EP1 or Pana G1 to an M8. How the prints compare? Lot of what is seen on a monitor may not be visible in a print??

[Anders_HK]

I know this question may seem like insanity, but has any compared actual large prints over say 14x21 of either an EP1 or Pana G1 to an M8. How the prints compare? Lot of what is seen on a monitor may not be visible in a print??

Hi,

No I have not, but...

... just look at the RAWs, and... when look at posts on internet of M8, even from folks who do not know how to shoot the image quality is impressive.

I very much enjoy the M8, it is now my small camera, been through point and shoots, including DP1 and G9 which both where juck, the M8 impress me as a CAMERA with IMAGE QUALITY. No other camera its size or smaller has.

My other cameras at moment are Leaf Aptus 65 on Mamiya 645 AFDIII, Shen-Hao 4x5 w/Velvia 50 SLIDES   , Mamiya 7ii. Thus a perspective of what I say of M8. The M8 is for sure a keeper, it is a CAMERA with which I can shoot.    Granted the others I mentioned of small cameras were computers with a lens, and do include the Nikon D200, D50 to that, had them too but long gone.

Back to your question, if files are that much better than EP1 and Pana G1, then why question that the files from M8 print superior?

The M8 is really really lovely   , but one need understand it is a rangefinder. Also that need those IR UV block filters, which are advantage really, because can shoot infrared with a snap. Also great for B&W using B&W color filters...  

Anders