More fun with the Leica M8
Böwser
http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00QTrU
Aparently, if you mount this thing on a tripod and shoot vertically, it
falls apart. Yes, really.
My sympathies to any of you who shelled out $5K for this trash.
Hap S.
The more detailed thread with photos of more camera body failures (and other
camera problems, focusing, color-balance, IR filter errors, etc.):
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/25121-base-plate-failure.html
As they say, "You get what you pay for!"
In this day and age never has that been a greater lie. Example: I've tested many
makes and prices of polarizers in the past, tested against lab-grade polarizer
material. Some of the $10 generic polarizers easily surpass the $90 top-shelf
brand-name filters. The average purchaser just sees the brand-name and
outrageous price and assumes it must be the best. They don't have the
intelligence nor foresight in how to easily test them for polarizing strength
and homogeneity.
The only thing that is true today is "A fool and his money are soon parted." You
can tell which ones they are, they're the ones who are always running around
yelling, "You get what you pay for!"
ransley
Didnt that camera also have issues with purple discolorations.
Bõwser
"ransley" <Mark_R...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:d43f82a5-5c23-4358...@26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
Yes, the IR filter in front of the sensor is far too weak, so in order to
record accurate colors, you'll need a hot filter on each and every lens. But
Leica will give you two of them! Isn't that precious? Spend $5K on a camera,
and they'll provide a couple of filters to cover an obvious defect.
ransley
> "ransley" <Mark_Rans...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
And the price for an extra filter is something outragous like 350 US.
I cant figure out how they can actualy sell any cameras at those
prices and stay in business, some of their models are simply upgraded
Panasonics, all are overpriced by many times and the dumb design-
performance issues. I wanted one, once, till I read reviews and heard
of the issues.
Alan Browne
> I cant figure out how they can actualy sell any cameras at those
> prices and stay in business, some of their models are simply upgraded
> Panasonics, all are overpriced by many times and the dumb design-
> performance issues. I wanted one, once, till I read reviews and heard
> of the issues.
Leica bled money over at least 5 years through the 2005/2006 FY and has
come into the black in the last two FY's. Nevertheless it is projecting
a net loss this FY and to barely make it to BE in the next FY.
I didn't look at their total debt, but they are paying it down and have
declared net assets of about E100M.
They remain in troubled waters with legal action from shareholders, the
possibility that it be taken 100% private and personnel risks amongst
their most talented engineers. So says the recent AR (though I just
skimmed it...)
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
Böwser
"Rita Berkowitz" <ritabe...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:F9KdnXF_MJ6X4T7V...@supernews.com...
> Nikon,
> other than a dumbass?
I agree, even Nikons are purchased by dumbasses. Sometimes.
ransley
> other than a dumbass?
>
> --
> Stamping out Internet stupidity one idiot at a time. Never empower the
> idiot, embrace it and stimulate it. For more details go to the Usenet
> Stimulus Project page.
>
> http://ritaberk.myhosting247.com
Your posts continue to prove you need to be kill filed. You are the
one that posts internet stupidity.
Dave Cohen
I disagree, I once owned a Leica, if memory servers me correctly is was
a IIIc. Never took a picture with it, I inherited it from my father but
a better motor bike was more in line with my tastes than photography at
that time (1953).
The point is that Leica, together with Contax and other pre-wwII German
cameras were tops, arguably Leica being the top of the tops.
But today things are different, yes both Leica and Zeiss lenses are
still excellent, but so are many others with cameras to match. The Leica
thing is nostalgia and bloody expensive nostalgia at that, and if
performance doesn't match the price then who needs it. Pointing that out
is not internet stupidity. Rita may be controversial but hardly stupid.
Dave Cohen
David J. Littleboy
"Dave Cohen" <us...@example.net> wrote:
>
> The point is that Leica, together with Contax and other pre-wwII German
> cameras were tops, arguably Leica being the top of the tops.
They still are. In terms of putting images on film, the current Leica and
Zeiss Ikon (and discontinued Contax G) rangefinder lenses are the best
lenses you can find in focal lengths up to 90mm. The Contax and Leica R SLR
lenses are nearly as good.
Nikon and Canon are a distant second. Which is why people with gobs of money
put Leica R and Contax/Zeiss SLR lenses on their dSLRs, at gross cost.
(Actually, the new Zeiss lenses for the Nikon dSLRs aren't all that
expensive, and work on Canon with an adapter.)
> But today things are different, yes both Leica and Zeiss lenses are still
> excellent, but so are many others with cameras to match. The Leica thing
> is nostalgia and bloody expensive nostalgia at that, and if performance
> doesn't match the price then who needs it.
The last 10% of performance always costs more than the first 90%.
Diminishing returns.
Leica messed up big time with the M8. Arrogance on their part, I'd guess.
But the lenses are as good as it gets.
--
David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan
ransley
DJL so a Zeiss can work on a Canon with an adapter, is there increased
image quality compared to Canon lenses, what do you use with your 5d.
David J. Littleboy
"ransley" <Mark_R...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
DJL so a Zeiss can work on a Canon with an adapter, is there increased
image quality compared to Canon lenses, what do you use with your 5d.
<<<<<<<<<<
People claim the 21/2.8 Zeiss Distagon is wonderful. I've not tried it. If
Zeiss reissues it for under US$1,500, I might buy one, but at US$3,000, I'll
pass. The other Zeiss lenses are less interesting here. The Canon 35/1.4
(which I don't own) and the Canon 50/1.4 (which I do) are very good, and the
Canon 24TSE is a great 24mm lens unshifted.
Remember that with its fat pixels, the 5D doesn't really stress lenses all
that much; the lowly Tamron 28-75/2.8 produces lovely sharp images from
f/5.6. It's really only at 21mm and wider that one begins to get interested
in something other than Canon. And even there, in real life, the 17-40 is a
great landscape lens at f/11 or f/16. At f/5.6, the Zeiss 21/2.8 tromps all
over it, but I don't shoot landscapes at f/5.6.
Also remember that the 5D with Canon superwides looks way better in the
corners than any 35mm film camera can, even with Zeiss or Leitz lenses.
If Canon ups the pixel count significantly, Zeiss lenses will become more
interesting.
Alan Browne
I posted a link some time back to a page written by a combat
correspondent/photog.
http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html
He took along the M8 and found that in real life situations, it was not
a very useful camera and that color consistency was atrocious.
Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
mention image quality.
SammySpade
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote:
>Böwser wrote:
>> OK, I think it's time to nominate the Leica M8 as "Turkey of the Decade."
>>
>> http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00QTrU
>>
>> Aparently, if you mount this thing on a tripod and shoot vertically, it
>> falls apart. Yes, really.
>>
>> My sympathies to any of you who shelled out $5K for this trash.
>
>I posted a link some time back to a page written by a combat
>correspondent/photog.
>
>http://web.mac.com/kamberm/Leica_M8_Field_Test,_Iraq/Page_1.html
>
>He took along the M8 and found that in real life situations, it was not
>a very useful camera and that color consistency was atrocious.
>
>Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
>and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
>mention image quality.
Wow. Every photo (the M8 ones) in that article aren't even up to the quality of
a $150 P&S camera when using the same settings. I don't think I've ever seen any
camera do that nasty color-cast vignetting that are in some of them. That would
be nearly impossible to fix in editing. Even the start-up time on most any P&S
camera is faster than the M8. Thanks for re-posting the link. It's nice to know
that every P&S camera out there is drastically better than a $10,000 Leica+Lens.
I enjoyed this section of his commentary:
"SD card removal:
As I said earlier, in Baghdad I frequently cover the scenes of car bomb. It is
illegal to shot these scenes until they are completely cleaned up, and the Iraqi
police frequently confiscate flash cards and cameras if they see us shooting.
Occasionally a photographer is beaten bloody. One of the ways around this is to
try to sneak a photo and have a spare SD card to swap out; the police end up
confiscating a blank card and the images are safe in your pocket. ..."
I have had to document many life-threatening situations in the past--poachers,
drug-runners, illegal police-actions, etc. The stealth quality of nearly any P&S
camera is mandatory for this type of photography. It isn't uncommon for me to
have to swap out memory cards discreetly, put one in the camera with some junk
photos on it, and then hide the card with the incriminating evidence in my boot
or sock, or quickly toss the memory-card aside in the brush where I could come
back later when it's safe to retrieve it. In fact I had to do that again just
last month when documenting poachers in a wildlife sanctuary. They wouldn't
think twice about leaving your carcass where the 'gators can get rid of the
evidence. If nothing else, at least someone going over the crime scene would
eventually find the memory-card that was tossed aside. I can't imagine any
photojournalist, or any photographer for that matter, buying a camera where you
have to half-disassemble a camera to swap cards.
Thanks for the fun read.
michael adams
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:goCdnSWujoo9dDjV...@giganews.com...
: Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
: and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
: mention image quality.
Indeed.
All Leica were trying to do was try and maintain the qualities
for which they've always been renowed, in the face of the totally
different demands being made on the familiar body shape by digital
reproduction.
It's not particularly edyifying to watch people jumpimg up and down
in glee over their failure, in what's turned out to be a difficult if not
impossible task.
Yes it cost far too much, yes it turned out to be a pile of crap,
yes Leica were the Nazis camera of choice, but it was a noble enterprise
neverthless IMO.
michael adams
...
ransley
> "Alan Browne" <alan.bro...@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
For a camera maker that has been proven for over 80 years to make the
best equipment to put out a crap product with several stupid defects,
the weak body and lack of proper filter makes one wonder what kind of
drunk cheap idiot tested and approved their design. The mistakes were
so obvious. Nobody is jumping for glee but rather are happy they didnt
mortgage their house for what should have been a great camera, to last
their lifetime. Everybody wants one, few can afford one. What is so
difficult about making and testing a piece of equipment when that is
your business, there are millions of tough little good cameras made
every year by many companies. Leica should go out of business for
rebadging Panasonics at double the price, the failure of the M8 and
Leicas lack of customer support of the issues. At the outragous prices
people shelled out these issues should have been fixed free. I am
happy I will now never want or consider a Leica body.
Allen
<snip>
> For a camera maker that has been proven for over 80 years to make the
> best equipment to put out a crap product with several stupid defects,
> the weak body and lack of proper filter makes one wonder what kind of
> drunk cheap idiot tested and approved their design. The mistakes were
> so obvious. Nobody is jumping for glee but rather are happy they didnt
> mortgage their house for what should have been a great camera, to last
> their lifetime. Everybody wants one, few can afford one. What is so
> difficult about making and testing a piece of equipment when that is
> your business, there are millions of tough little good cameras made
> every year by many companies. Leica should go out of business for
> rebadging Panasonics at double the price, the failure of the M8 and
> Leicas lack of customer support of the issues. At the outragous prices
> people shelled out these issues should have been fixed free. I am
> happy I will now never want or consider a Leica body.
It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have bought
Leitz.
Allen
Bõwser
"Allen" <all...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
news:TJKdnXM219hwfDvV...@giganews.com...
And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines, none of
them have ever failed. All run perfectly.
David J Taylor
>> It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have
>> bought Leitz.
>> Allen
>
> And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines,
> none of them have ever failed. All run perfectly.
Strange that - I had just the same experience with Vista 32 here. Must be
something in the mains!
David
tony cooper
The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
upgrade to fit a new OS.
If I was concerned only with the stability/functional aspects of an
OS, I'd have no problem buying a new computer with Vista. It's the
integration with my extant programs that concern me.
--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
David J Taylor
[]
> The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
> stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
> this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
> being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
> upgrade to fit a new OS.
>
> If I was concerned only with the stability/functional aspects of an
> OS, I'd have no problem buying a new computer with Vista. It's the
> integration with my extant programs that concern me.
I can appreciate that, Tony, but so far I haven't found any modern
software (say from year 2000 onwards, intended for Windows 2000 or XP)
which won't run. I understand that 16-bit software won't work (but
perhaps it might under a virtual machine), but the only 16-bit software I
still have is from 1999 and would not be transferred to a new PC in any
case as it runs on its own dedicated machine. I have seen some software
which has a 16-bit installer, but even that software worked if the files
were simply copied from another PC. A note to the author quickly resulted
in a 32-bit installer version!
I do hear that some hardware manufacturers have been rather late in
producing drivers for their hardware, and I may be about to encounter that
problem myself with a new PC install for someone else shortly.
Cheers,
David
Alan Browne
> "Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:goCdnSWujoo9dDjV...@giganews.com...
>
> : Too bad, the M6 and prior Leica's were favoured by combat correspondents
> : and photogs for their reliability, simplicity, compactness not to
> : mention image quality.
>
> Indeed.
>
> All Leica were trying to do was try and maintain the qualities
> for which they've always been renowed, in the face of the totally
> different demands being made on the familiar body shape by digital
> reproduction.
>
> It's not particularly edyifying to watch people jumpimg up and down
> in glee over their failure, in what's turned out to be a difficult if not
> impossible task.
Don't count me as 'gleeful'. It's always a benefit to the industry to
have companies dedicated to excellence.
(OTOH: it is a bucket of cooling water for those blinded by faith).
Leica, from the linked report, did not do enough design engineering,
user consultation and user testing before release. They were under very
high pressure to get their camera into the market as film camera sales
were all but dead.
Leica, although posting rare earnings in the last two years after 5 or
more of losses (and forecasting a loss this year and 'maybe' break even
next year) made the error of rushing the M8 to market before it was
really ready for photographers.
> Yes it cost far too much, yes it turned out to be a pile of crap,
> yes Leica were the Nazis camera of choice, but it was a noble enterprise
> neverthless IMO.
Americans, Brits and many others (military and other agencies) did not
throw out their extensive inventory of Zeiss and Leica (and other)
equipment in the war; but used same to good measure (Likewise Browning
in Utah used to send the "HP" pistol to Germany complete to engraved
eagle and swastika before the war...)
Bõwser
"tony cooper" <tony_co...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cduda4lncr81pgo0f...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 15:54:15 GMT, "David J Taylor"
> <david-...@blueyonder.neither-this-bit.nor-this-bit.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Bőwser wrote:
>>> "Allen" <all...@austin.rr.com> wrote in message
>>[]
>>>> It makes one wonder if the people who created Windows Vista have
>>>> bought Leitz.
>>>> Allen
>>>
>>> And here's the worst part: I have Vista 64 loaded on three machines,
>>> none of them have ever failed. All run perfectly.
>>
>>Strange that - I had just the same experience with Vista 32 here. Must be
>>something in the mains!
>>
> The most common complaint I hear/see about Vista is not about the
> stability of the OS, but about compatibility of older programs with
> this OS. Many of us have older ("older" in the computer sense of
> being purchased one year or more ago) programs that we don't want to
> upgrade to fit a new OS.
True that...
Where I work, we have two enterprise apps that need to be updated, which
means pushing a new app or two out to 80,000 seats. But the IT Security
folks want to make the move to Vista sooner, not later, so away we go...
michael adams
"Alan Browne" <alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> wrote in message
I was possibly a bit over-hasty there. While Leicas with Eagles and
Swastikas are well known, and prized as collectors' items, apparently
some members of the Leitz family were instrumental (no pun intended)
in helping Jews escape their otherwise inevitable fate. Although there
were rumours that it was at Eishenhower's request as a pre-war Leica
owner, that the factories be spared in bombing raids, in fact they were
already earmarked as being useful in helping in post-war German
reconstruction. I discoverd all this 5 minutes after making the rather
glib Nazi remark. They also like Becks beer in the U-Boats as
confirmed by many photographs - Leica presumably in "U-Boot Krieg".
It would have been nice to think that that classic shape of rangefinder
camera could have survived into the digital age, nevertheless.
michael adams
...
Grimly Curmudgeon
drugs began to take hold. I remember ransley <Mark_R...@yahoo.com>
saying something like:
>I cant figure out how they can actualy sell any cameras at those
>prices and stay in business, some of their models are simply upgraded
>Panasonics, all are overpriced by many times and the dumb design-
>performance issues. I wanted one, once, till I read reviews and heard
>of the issues.
Ditto. Mind you, I was willing to wait until used prices came down a
bit. There's no way I'd pay even used prices for the M8 now, though.
I'm just really disappointed that a name that stood for quality and
reliability has become so debased with this crock of shit.
--
Dave
Greggor Campbell
>OK, I think it's time to nominate the Leica M8 as "Turkey of the Decade."
>
>http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00QTrU
>
>Aparently, if you mount this thing on a tripod and shoot vertically, it
>falls apart. Yes, really.
>
>My sympathies to any of you who shelled out $5K for this trash.
From:
http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/25121-base-plate-failure-15.html#post632457
I inserted some missing currency conversions.
===============================
"Quoted today repair estimate...
Well, I got the reply from Leica about my camera with broken bottom plate.
Talked to the importer today, and they quoted Leica HQ's repair estimate at
NOK 6,726 plus VAT = NOK 8,407.50 ( equivalent to USD 1,553.11)
Quite a bill... Includes labour NOK 5,636 (USD $1,041.40), material NOK 840 (USD
$155.21), shipping NOK 250 (USD $46.17) plus VAT (25%). Comments were "Impact
damage. A piece of the camera housing is broken off." Also got the same on the
snail mail today. I knew it would be frustrating when the 'repair charge' would
be quoted, since the 'impact damage' all happened while the camera was swiveling
on the tripod, and I consider this to be of normal use. The camera was never
dropped so the body shell is scratch free. My Norwegian importer says this was
'the first such case' they have seen. Well, I tried to be as impartial as
possible on my reporting to the forum of what happened. So there. Think need to
cool off my head.
oslo terry"
===========================
Total cost for the body alone is now well in excess of $6,500, and it still
takes crappy photos worse than any $100 P&S camera. That's true for 100% of all
M8s, the cracking body only happens to some, so far. After that repair cost it
still has the body defect that will crack again if you put it on a tripod in
portrait orientation, which Leica conveniently calls abnormal use / abuse of the
camera.
Four forum participants have so far reported the same problem (a fraction of a
percent of all M8 owners), and also reported to Leica who claim they've never
heard of this happening before.
7,080 hits if you do a Google search with:
leica m8 (baseplate OR base-plate OR latch OR shell OR cover) (cracked OR broken
OR failure)
This is the sign of a company trying to undermine itself and call it quits. The
CEOs must be transferring funds into something more lucrative today, like their
pockets.
Anyone getting their M8 repaired only brings to mind that saying about a fool
throwing their good money after bad. A repaired cracked body isn't going to fix
those useless images that it creates.