True, but those other cameras do not need a $150 battery to work properly or an extra filter to produce black instead of magenta...
That's a point, but once permanently coded, it's done and no more concern. I just went ahead and had my lenses coded by DAG, not too bad $$$, and while there he tuned them up as he saw fit. Sense of comfort.
Same essentially with the UV/IR Cut filters; once acquired in the few sizes needed, it's done and all you need to do is use them! Indeed, I continue to use them on the subsequent digital M models too, as the filter removes more IR than the sensor cover glass does. Just leave the filter in place as the lens is used on different bodies...
Orthogonal
Established
Off topic question, but why does the M8 not have the "correct" filter on the sensor? Was it a deliberate design decision? I get why some cameras omit the AA filter, but a weak UV/IR filter seems unusual.
ZivcoPhoto
Well-known
I have a late model M8.0, low actuation, and I really like it.
Have to dig back through the cobwebs of memory...
This was early days for digital sensors in photography and not all was known. And the M8 was a difficult project largely because of the short flange-to-sensor distance resulting in fairly high angles of incidence of light coming in from the lens. And the wider the angle of view of the lens, and the closer the lens projected in toward the sensor, the more problematical it became. An SLR avoids this issue by having much larger distance flange-to-sensor to clear the mirror.
Digital sensors have their individual sensor sites in recesses and groups of four: red, blue, green, green. If the light from the lens comes in at a steep angle, some sensor sites are shaded by the depth of the pit, resulting in loss of some color information. Sensors "like" to have the light come in perpendicular to the surface.
The M8 attempted to solve this issue by firstly making the sensor smaller than full-frame, 18x27mm rather than 24x36mm. Secondly, and directly relevant to the question, the sensor cover glass was made very thin, only 0.5mm thick, for optical reasons. The thin cover glass resulted in reduced filtering of IR light frequencies.
This was originally thought not to be a problem in photography, and indeed it seemed to benefit B&W tonality. Like others early-on, I didn't think it would be a problem... until I came home from a Mediterranean trip and saw the brownish-greens of foliage and the magenta tint of artificial black fabrics due to reflected IR. Leica had become aware of this too and began a program of supplying two UV/IR Cut filters free to each M8 customer.
The M9 was a big technical achievement, as it was then widely thought a full-frame M camera was just not feasible. IIRC, addition of micro-lenses near the cover glass aided the light paths, while a thicker cover glass at 0.9mm took care of most of the IR problem. Most, but not all IR was filtered out, so I have continued to use UV/IR Cut filters on all digital Ms. Most other digital cameras have thicker cover glass than this, even.
Orthogonal
Established
Have to dig back through the cobwebs of memory...
Thanks for the answer - an interesting chapter in digital camera history!
rbsinto
Well-known
I own none, which is one more than I want or need.
RBSinTo
RBSinTo
Damaso
Photojournalist
I have exactly one that I got second hand almost ten years ago. After a quick trip to get tuned up in NJ it is working just fine. I almost got a used M240 a few months ago but decided to wait and have been happily clicking away with my very loud M8...
jarski
Mentor
this question was pondered/blamed/defended/etc. months on end around time when this thread was started. I think it was a mistake or lapse in quality control, which I much prefer Leica doing and learning, rather than remaining in increasingly marginal film camera manufacturing.
Gid
Well-known
Well, I just picked up my fourth (could be fifth - hard to remember) M8. Love the size, weight and simplicity. Bad news is that I see a path leading to the M262 or possibly M10
leicapixie
Well-known
The sensor "problem" in Leica is way simpler!
Kodak designed filter to be like film, esp. Kodachrome!
Kodachrome had a 'magenta' bias..
Any tester of the camera found "them perfect" keeping
quite in true sense of the Mafia..
The special filters had to be hastily done when buyers saw their their "wunderkinds" awful colors esp. on cloudy days, shade, darker areas..
I suspected those sensors in other cameras..
I wrote Kodak and was replied " none of my business".
The Japanese would tell me..and did.
I like CCD sensors Kodachrome and so all my digitals are so equipped.
Yes! They are all old by digital standards..
Kodak designed filter to be like film, esp. Kodachrome!
Kodachrome had a 'magenta' bias..
Any tester of the camera found "them perfect" keeping
quite in true sense of the Mafia..
The special filters had to be hastily done when buyers saw their their "wunderkinds" awful colors esp. on cloudy days, shade, darker areas..
I suspected those sensors in other cameras..
I wrote Kodak and was replied " none of my business".
The Japanese would tell me..and did.
I like CCD sensors Kodachrome and so all my digitals are so equipped.
Yes! They are all old by digital standards..
raid
Dad Photographer
I still own and use an M8 with the new shutter, I had to send it once to Leica Camera NJ for removal of hot spots on each image. I have only one M8, plus one M9.
mnutzer
no title
@Raid,
do you remember my M8.2 I used on our meeting at Leitz Park Wetzlar in May 2016?
In his lecture Peter Karbe told us that the M8 was his most hated digital Leica, although an important step for Leica but now only history.
After about ten years of use and over 80,000 shots I exchanged my M8.2 for an M10-P.
Also two analog Leicas and five lenses had to go to get a reasonable price for the very expensive M10-P.
But I had waited long enough and kept my M8.2 because of the sensor problems on the M9 and the for my eyes worse visible focus peeking of the M-240.
Since I have been using the M10-P I haven't wasted a thought on the M8.2 any more.
I'm happy using my M lenses again without the crop factor of the M8, without UV/IR-cut filter, but with the pleasant possibilities of higher ISO ranges, live view and the additional electronic viewfinder.
The only point I complain about is why Leica couldn't have built the M10 about ten years earlier?
TR3B
Established
The last one I had I sold and received a email a week later from the buyer who claimed it had an annoying vertical line in images shot at 1250 ISO. Darn that KAF-10500 sensor. Whats a guy to do!:bang:
I bought a Q.
I bought a Q.
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
Good for you to have an M10-P.
I could buy an M10 today if I had the drive to do so, but having the gloomy COVID-19 outbreak around us, I do not see any usefulness to get a better camera now.
Is the M10 P worth the extra money when compared with a standard M10?
I use the M9 carefully side by side with the M8. My M8 has the new shutter and slower top speed, but nothing else.
Nice to have that quieter new shutter... My chrome M8 has the shutter upgrade and also the viewfinder frameline mask, missing only the sapphire rear screen to become an M8.2. It had a "column fault" about a year after I got it, and I took advantage of the opportunity to send it to Leica to fix that as well as installing the upgrades. It had a second column fault 8 years later.
My black-finish M8 is unmodified from stock, and has not had any sensor faults, but then it has not been used as much as the other. And it is boxed up ready to go to consignment sale...
I am fond of the M8 and have enjoyed using them.
ironhorse
Joe DuPont
I just purchased my first M8 and really disliked the shutter sound until I discovered the discreet setting which made it much more palatable. Still not sure if I like the camera, though. Very different feel from my M3/ M4.
mnutzer
no title
@Raid,
The M10 became my dream camera when it was launched, but I needed time to raise the necessary funds, including selling older Leica cameras and lenses.
If you can buy an M10 as a bargain, you may find it easier to do without the few additional innovations of the M10-P.
Maybe after the Covid 19 pandemic, traders want to get their deals back on track with some special offers?
My M8.2 was much more sought after by dealers whom I offered to buy than it would have been a comparatively similar M8, in which some dealers were not interested at all or only at a price so low that a sale would not have been worthwhile.
Maybe something similar will happen in about 10 years if I want to change from my M10-P to a new M12-P or M13-P?
Just stay healthy!
raid
Dad Photographer
Thanks. You stay healthy too. This is more important than any cameras or lenses. My M8 has the new shutter, but this is it. It did not have a new screen and am unaware of a new viewfinder mask, say. Is it then a M8.2 or M8?
Raid yours might be considered an M8.1, while mine could be an M8.1.5 ! Or both are simply M8u ...
I plan to hold onto that chrome M8 for the near future at least, using the crop factor as an advantage, aiding more frequent use of my widest lenses.
I plan to hold onto that chrome M8 for the near future at least, using the crop factor as an advantage, aiding more frequent use of my widest lenses.