Leica M8.2 or...

[Torpedo]

I'm a moderate photography fan. I've had a couple of good reflex cameras for 35mm film, but since digital took over film, my only digital camera is a Canon Ixus 50 which makes OK pics.

I've been considering to get a decent or maybe more than that digital camera, but there are so many options... All I know is that I'd like to avoid huge cameras (my favorite one was my Pentax A1) and now with digital LCDs maybe a reflex isn't that necessary.

I started to look at some options and then the Leica M8.2 came out as a compact, versatile and probably great quality one, which would allow me to swap objectives. The problem is the price. At about USD6000 just the body and USD1300 a 50mm lens, looks kind of very excessive. So, do you think is there anything in that camera justifying that price? Are there other options which for size, versatility and quality can come close at a way more affordable price point?

[Neusdoorn]

Short answer: Run away.

The thing is, a SLR is still the best thing going for active photography, in my books.

You can get "bridge" cameras which have a tiny LCD in the viewfinder, so they simulate a SLR despite not having a mirror. In my opinion, they're junk. Electronic viewfinders are worse than no viewfinder at all.

I like seeing what I'm shooting - It may be less of an issue with a digital rangefinder as you can quickly review your shot, but through-the-lens viewing is still important to me.

You might try a Pentax DSLR with a set of their pancake lenses - 21, 35, 40, 70mm. Admittedly, they're all expensive for their performance, and slow.

Really, I think if you're not willing to compromise on size, the best option is an entry-level DSLR, such as Pentax's K2000, or a Canon XS/XSi. They tend to be lighter and smaller than the semi-pro alternatives, but one of the boons to a large DSLR is when you have a reasonably large lens on, you have a sturdy, easy-to-hold body. I feel some of that's lost with smaller bodies, plus lower-end models tend to use cheaper materials, and substitute hard plastic for rubberized grips.

If you merely want something better than your current point-and-shoot, there are better models - But you simply can't get the high-ISO performance, focusing speed, or general responsiveness out of anything but a DSLR.

[grawk]

Leicas aren't for casual photographers. They're for collectors, and for obsessives. They're worth $8000 if you think they are. If you're trying to justify buying one, there are lots of cameras that will let you take good pictures for a lot less.

[Torpedo]

thxs mates, the review is very clarifying. I didn't expect such performance from a Leica Maybe some of those problems have been amended in the 8.2 iteration, but I wouldn't be risking such big bucks to discover they haven't.

I'll investigate some small body Pentax or Canon if any.

[Neusdoorn]

thxs mates, the review is very clarifying. I didn't expect such performance from a Leica Maybe some of those problems have been amended in the 8.2 iteration, but I wouldn't be risking such big bucks to discover they haven't.

I'll investigate some small body Pentax or Canon if any.

You're more dangerous than you know. Back in the early 90s I was pretty into photography, had a good few grand invested. Sold it off to help fund a car better than the beater I had been driving. Flash forward to the early 2000s and I got a crummy point-and-shoot which turned out nothing but noisy, blurry images unless it was on a tripod shooting something stationary.

In early 2005 I decided enough was enough, and picked up a used 20D with a 50/1.8. Since then I've replaced both, (30D and 50/1.4, respectively.), got a 580EX, 70-200/2.8, 85/1.8, 17-40/4, a nice tripod, and a few other things.

Suffice to say, I'm back where I started, financially. Headphones and photography are constantly battling for funds.

[Knuckledragger]

The best digital camera with swappable lenses right now is the Nikon D700. It performs better at IS06400 than most DSLRs do at ISO1600. It plus a Nikkor 35mm F/2, 50mm F/1.8 and 85mm F/1.8 will do 99% of what most photographers need. At least until one becomes afflicted by the terrible urge to photograph birds.

The Canon 5D Mk II is also very good, but it does't have the insane high ISO performance of the D700. Canon does make a nicer assortment of lenses, if you get past the steep prices. The EF 35mm F/1.4L, 85mm F/1.2L and 135mm F/2L are three of the best prime lenses made for 35mm, period. The new 24mm F/1.4L appears to be no slouch, either.

If you're seriously in the market for a DSLR, I suggest reading Ken Rockwell's page. He's nut, but his reviews aren't influenced by anyone's marketing department. I also suggest reading The Online Photographer. Mike is probably the best photography writer on the web. He's less technical than K-Rock, but his snark and eloquence invariably make for great reading. I'd avoid DPReview for most things, they're not owned by Amazon, and are usually the photographic equivalent of Stereophile.

[Torpedo]

I know I know, photography is an expensive and dangerous hobby. Fortunately it didn't catch me deeply enough. I just got a Vivitar zoom and a wide angle for the Pentax, and kept the original lens of the Nikon, which maybe could serve me well if I get a Nikon DSLR. I liked the Pentax more than the Nikon, but I needed it to be compatible with the endoscopy gear in the hospital Now we're not using it anymore, all is digitally recorded now.

Thanks for the links. I used to check DCR and following their recommendations I got the Canon Ixus (it had other model name in the US). It's an almost 3 years old model, just 5Mp but serves me quite well. I love the portability thing. To be honest I've become too lazy to go carrying a SLR body and several lenses on my trips, but somehow I miss taking good pictures as I used to do when the Pentax was my main camera -though I still keep it-. That's why I think that I could use a DSLR which is small and light enough. I think the D700 and the EOS 5D are bigger than I'd be happy using on a regular basis, but I'd need to try them in my hands.

[guzziguy]

If you like the Leica lenses and cameras, check out Panasonic cameras. They use Leica lenses and often you can find the exact same camera for a lot less. You just can't mind it being labeled "Panasonic" rather than "Leica".

[grawk]

I'm pretty sure there's not a panasonic version of the M8 tho

[Torpedo]

If you like the Leica lenses and cameras, check out Panasonic cameras. They use Leica lenses and often you can find the exact same camera for a lot less. You just can't mind it being labeled "Panasonic" rather than "Leica".

Very true, thanks for the reminder, I've seen some of their Lumix small cameras displaying the Leica logo... I'll check them, they might have a model which is the size and versatility of the M8. I love adjusting the camera the old style, without having to run through uncountable menus and submenus. Just choose the ISO then combine speed and diaphragm by rotating two wheels to get the desired depth of field or quickness for moving objects, and decide if you want some over or underexposure. Clean, clear and fast.

[Cankin]

How about this?

Epson R-D1 Review

Epson RD-1 Lens Report

[Torpedo]

Thanks mate, looks nice, but a bit expensive. I'll investigate it.