After all the pimping and shilling of a camera the Big Cheese never laid hands on, not to mention his fake M8 pictures and erroneous specs, let's see what the Leica experts have to say.

The Leica M8 is so bad considering its $5000 USD price tag that the famous Puts Leica shill had to sharpen and add contrast Photoshop-ly to try and make the M8 test image look better than the Canon 5D's. This is what the Puts shill did write: "I increased the contrast in the M8 image and sharpened both images. Keep in mind I was starting with the jpgs from the review. The original 5D detail looked almost posterized compared to the M8 -which seemed to have a lot more midtone/quartertone tonality to work with." I dunno, I still think Canon's 5D is better. See test photos below.

Notice the sharp detail, takin with a Canon 5D. Now take a look at the 2nd photo, taken with the Leica M8. It's fuzzy and magenta-ish.

Henning W. of Vancouver, BC wrote a shilling M8 hands-on review. Here are some highlights: "...your hands miss the grip that the wind level gave you...the shutter is not particularly loud, either in firing or winding...it doesn't have a high frame rate...The covering is fine grained and a bit too slippery, especially since I missed the wind lever for holding the camera with the right hand...Frame lines were bright and useable, and came up in the pairs that you would expect due to the traditional lens mount activation... There is no 'dedicated' button for ISO (full stops from 160 to 2500)... I didn't like was that after selecting a menu item, such as 'B&W', you had to press the 'Set' button, or the selection didn't take. If you just lightly pressed the shutter release to get out of the menus and into the shooting mode after selecting the B&W mode, you would still be in colour."

Lastly, from Tom Abrahamsson's review: "Leica kindly lent me an M8 to try out. I suspect that they thought 'If he likes it, we are on the right track!'...the prints that my local lab pulled were a bit flat...The additional thickness coupled with the rather slippery covering had my right hand cramping up after a while. I did get used to it, except when I switched between a M2 and M8. My hand wanted to 'crush' the M8 to M2 thickness! The lack of a film-advance arm is somewhat disconcerting as it does feel like an M and you are forever trying to pull out a lever to hook your thumb behind...I cant see it bright light and as I have to take off my glasses to see it in subdued light...and chimped through what I shot and deleted the misses or boring stuff. The fine print says 'artist’s rendering.'"

So there you have it from the 3 "experts"---honored with receiving the camera before its official debut so they could boost about its Heavenly characteristics to the Professional Leica photographers, fondlers and keyboard trolls. Personally I'd go for the Bessa or its glorified Zeiss version known as the Ikon---for it's longer throw. (35mm photography at its sharpest: Even the best SLRs with their sharpest lenses can clarly be topped: by the Zeiss Ikon rangefinder camera with its supersharp Carl Zeiss ZM-lenses. See for yourself.)

Jorge's Open Letter to Leica

Daddy’s $5,000 toy is a piece of shit. He and the other shills get their fellow Leicaphiles excited about this camera before it’s released. Now that everyone has blown $5,000, Jorge is using the RFF forum to shame the executives at Leica. Who should really be ashamed of their behavior? The GAS bags at RFF, of course! This "open" letter was posted all over the Internet on Novermber 9, 2006.

"Dear Leica and Leica USA.

As you are well aware of by now, there have been numerous issues reported about the new flagship M8 camera regarding banding, WB and IR. There are many posts here and around the internet which show the problem clearly and undeniably. How is it possible that none of these issues were noted in the development and testing phase of the camera?. Did Leica know this and just think the consumer would accept it?

As most M8 owner here on RFF including myself and on other sites, we have eagerly awaited for the release of this camera with very high expectations. We are loyal and committed customers to the Leica brand and the unmatched quality of their lenses. This is one of the reasons we have all waited so long before jumping into the digital arena. At the same time we recognize that no new product is released without any flaws that should eventually get worked out. We believe Leica will address the issues being encountered. However, while reading on one of the forums, It seems that Leica is recommending the use of an IR filter and 6 bit lens coding to work around the IR issue which is yielding a purple / magenta cast on blacks. After many of us have spent $5,000.00 on a camera body and several thousands more on lenses, it is quite a surprise to hear Leica suggest the consumer buy a filter and get their lenses coded to fix a problem owned by Leica. This is not the way to garnish new customers or retain the loyalty that has kept the company alive. Leica, please tell us how you are going to address the issues at hand without the consumer incurring an additional cost and please tell us when we can expect to see the issues resolved. Many of us still have hope in the product. We just ask that Leica does what is right for the customer.

You are more than welcome to reply to our audience here if you like.
Sincerely,
RFF"

(Edited several times by a few Pnut members)
Note: "Big Cheese" speaks for all RFF members (without having asked them).

Phil Askey has Egg on his Face

"Leica M8 Hands-on Preview, September 2006 by Phil Askey and Simon Joinson," published on dpreview..."Leica statement on M8 issues Friday, 10 November 2006. Leica has today issued a statement on some of the issues experienced by early M8 owners including IR color casts on certain fabrics and occasional banding. Phil Askey: note that we have been working closely with Leica on this, obviously it made sense for us to delay our review until these issues have been resolved." Phil's update 12/11/06: "just to clarify my position on the M8. When I wrote my preview article (based on a pre-production camera) I didn't notice any problems, but mostly because I didn't take many photographs with the camera (and a lot were in B&W)...At that time I was under the impression that the M8 was not shipping until the end of November, as things turned out cameras were already on their way to dealers...."

M8 and Sean Reid Bashing on RFF

Ha, ha ha. This is funny as hell. GASbags and goofs arguing over a $5,000 manual focus digital camera that has some serious performance issues. Check out Jorge's "Action Alert" shit on the first link but he can't use it for the Google cached version. Don't know what I'm taliking about? Click here.

Ben Z writes, "Having read Sean's recap of what Christian Erhard told him as Leica's official word on the magenta-cast issue (that we'll need to buy special filters for all lenses and that and new firmware will only help if a lens is coded, thus aside from added cost ruling out the use of older Leica and all Voitlander lenses) I have lost all confidence there will ever be an M8 in my travel bag."

Grober writes, "We just all steamed about the extra UNPLANNED expense of at least $1000 additional to get all our lenses 6-bit coded right away AND the added cost to buy lots of stupid IR filters. Yeah, that's the word for the evening: THIS IS STUPID, LEICA! I'll decide about refusing the UPS shipment tomorrow before the normal UPS delivery time rolls around on our sundial."

Nksyoon writes this about Sean Reid, "It seems some people who were upset with him over the Ascender/Seal saga went over to FM and complained about his plugging his site - he got banned from FM. There's someone on the Leica forum at photo.net bashing him as well over not discussing the M8's flaws in his initial reviews. So now it seems he feels most welcome at the Leica User forum."

Sreidvt (Sean Reid) writes "Actually Fred banned me because I publically questioned the way he enforced his rules, which is very inconsistent. Others questioned him as well and were either banned or warned by PM to close their mouths. My wife was banned as well. Fred deleted the thread where I questioned him....etc., etc. He banned Jorge too and he seems to ban anyone who challenges him. He then deletes their posts and rewrites history."

Ywenz writes, "Why none of the earlier reviewers saw the magenta blacks. It took no time for the actual owners to spot these issues. I saw your review again since the story broke and I see magenta blacks in all your coloured pictures. 20/20 hindsight this is easy to spot, but does your review procedure skip over this part of the image analysis?"

Sean Reid writes, "Actually, there are not magenta blacks in several of the pictures, including the fruit series. Let me ask you a question, if that color cast was so obvious in those pictures, why did the several thousand people who read the article not notice them either? The fact is, the magenta cast was not at all obvious in the pictures I took but I wasn't doing product pictures with black velvet backgrounds, etc.. In hindsight, some of the jackets seen in the pictures might have a cast, one man's hat, etc. But it wasn't very obvious to me initially nor, apparently, was it very obvious to readers. It's easy for us now to look at those pictures and say 'Aha, this seems to have cast, this doesn't, etc.' because we're all looking for the artifact now. But when I photograph at an event with thousands of people, I don't remember what everyone was wearing. To evaluate the color I looked most closely at the fruit series (as discussed in the article). Fruit and vegetables, however, don't seem show much of the IR effect. By the way, an alternate conspiracy theory suggests that I purposely published only pictures with no cast....hmmm...people's imaginations run wild. Did Tom Abrahamsson mention a magenta cast in his review? Did Ed Schwartzreich or any number of other people who posted informal reviews on the web? Either we're all in a conspiracy together or it really wasn't that obvious. Unless one shoots a certain kind of work, it isn't all that obvious until one goes looking for it. BTW, you must have seen those magenta casts in my pictures the very first time you read that review. Why didn't you e-mail me? I mean, they're obvious...right? How could anyone have missed them. Those pictures were up long before this controversy began. Food for thought."

Patrickjames writes, "I have to say that almost every review I have read is usually off base. I think that most reviewers do not have a clue as to the real world in photography. It does not surprise me that no one caught this glitch, but I wonder if it was caught by a real photographer during the beta testing. If it is indeed an infrared problem, then the cameras are going to have to go back to be fitted with an appropriate filter. Leica screwed the pooch big time on this one."

Willie_901 writes, "Others used the review(s) as some of their prior information about a very important (expensive) decision. For some, spending $5K on a defective/inferior camera is no a big deal. But others may have sold perfectly fine gear to fund a M8 based (at least in part ) on these review(s). That gear is gone. When a reviewer is paid, he or she is a professional reviewer. Professionals have more responsibilities than amateurs. One of those responsibilities is to look for well-known problems in previous digital cameras (banding, WB and IR sensitivity). For instance, Nikon had a banding disaster 13 months ago. A few product generations ago Nikon and others had IR problems with earlier DSLR models."

Jorge Torralba writes, "If anyone saw a magent cast or purple black during the review they never would have know unless mentioned by the reviewer. How would I know the color of something being photographed by someone else. I would just asume it was a purple shirt."

Gabriel M.A. writes, "I thought from the very beginning that selling reviews was a very very shaky idea. You have a paying public? The public has a sense of ownership. And paying for anything, in this age, is a product."

Thurows writes, "Come on people this is a $5,000 camera that produces images of questionable quality that needs a 'fix.' Quit trying to defend it just because it's a Leica. You can buy a $200 dollar digital camera that produces better results. Everyone that bought a camera has the right to get their money back no questions asked and no one should feel guilty for wanting their money back."

Roblumba writes, "And really, you should all be patient to wait some time to allow Leica to reveal their final statement of resolution before making final ultimatums. Imagine if your longtime friend had such problems, would you be so inconsiderate, brash and harsh to your friend. I think Leica is like an old friend for many people here and should be treated like one."

Varjag writes, "Imagine your old friend scamming you for $5000 because he has problems and needs the money."

Pop singer Seal writes, "I think I need to send the whole lot back to Leica for some TLC. Tony Rose has got a 21mm coded in in Chrome and I'm wondering whether or not to indulge seeing as I'm only going to use the M8 on special occasions. Apparently they have stopped production of that lens. I suppose it would be a good one to have although I really only see myself shooting film based Leica RF's from this point on."

Jorge (like a loyal Tony Rose Leica shill) writes, "Grab the 21. One day you will say to yourself, I wish I had picked up that chrome 21. Not to mention it ios like a 28 on the M8."

And the M8 Crap Continues...

November 18, 2006. Although Henning W. and Tom Abrahamsson have been mum since their fabulous M8 reviews, the shills at Pop Photo wrote an M8 follow-up addressing what they should have addressed in the first place. Trying to save face? Yup. But it's too little too late; the damage has been done.

Check out the shilling luminous-landscape review. Leica says the M8 has 16 bit color resolution and this guy says it's only 8 bit. Kodak made the sensor for the M8. How much do you want to bet that Leica goes bankrupt?

Jonathan Knight writes: "I returned my M8 on Monday, got the refund and will wait for the M9, until then matters might be resolved but not structurally, up until that point I will be using my Canon 5D mostly with my Leica R lenses. I bear no grudge upon Leica, after all it was to be expected, I bear a grudge towards our most beloved $hungry wedding photographer and so called reviewer. They should ban him from photography all together, go read his current lame excuses on the LUF, I'd say give him a fishing rod and send him to someplace quiet where one can only fish...But let's not start theses rants again, even if they Sean Reid rants, no...Jorge Torralba's. don't, ... remain friendly now, the poor chap is only trying to feed his family...."

Jorge Torralba starts a new thread: "IR filter avilability heads up. Ken Hansen from NY has a good supply of Heliopan IR cut filters in both 46 and 55 threads. He tells me these are the new ones labeld UV/Digital/Analog which does the same as the B+W filters. I hope we understood each other on the filter description. If so, they are a fraction of the price of the B+W's and are as good if not better. Ken has over 1300 different filters in stock and quite a few of these so called IR filters. Ken is in NY and can be reached at 212-879-3263. Please keep in mind time differences. Here is some info. Any typos or incorrect spelling are due to electronic transfer errors."

stevenrk jumps in: "the Heliopan is NOT the same as a BW IR cut filter. In testing for the magenta issue, presence of the Heliopan made little difference and did not significantly reduce the magenta cast I found. The BW 486 is specifically for removing IR entirely -- which is why it is supposed to also give a much stronger red/magenta reflection at certain angles than the Heliopan does -- and for me the Heliopan is at the edge of what is an acceptable level of colored reflection."

Jorge Torralba: "well, I have 5 filters and none of them cut the IR. Even the heliopan website says these are for cutting IR but no dice. I am sending back. Ken says he will be speaking with them on Monday for clarification." Jorge, don't you mean, "Oops, I got sucked in...again."

Jorge Torralba: "hard to put down my MP. Now that I have the M8 I decided to shoot with the MP this weekend. It is such a joy to shoot with. Not to mention the results I get are just stunning on Fuji PRO 160. I think it will tuen into a tag team effort here between the M8 and MP. I can't see giving one up for the other. Each have their pros. Film still rocks!"

Jorge Torralba: "ordered Luigi half case for M8! I should have it in the next few days. Black with built in grip."

Bottom line: Leica does not know how to build a $5000 USD digital camera and they did not want anyone to find out that their new "baby" was flawed. Screw the Leica customer.

Leica Recalls the M8

Leica announces update plan for buggy M8 digicams! Leica is offering up some quick fixes and a few bonus filters to boot for banding issues, mirror / ghosting effects, IR sensitivity quirks and faulty color rendering.

This Pop Photo article claims the Leica M8 is not worth the price and thinks this recall is just a band-aid solution. "...To solve the IR sensitivity problem, Leica is going to give users two free filters to attach onto the lens. A better solution would have been to fix the IR issue in the camera, but what do we know? – Jason Chen...."

Puts Shilling the M8 - Part 4

"Cutting to the chase, here's what he says," Jonathan Davis did post on the Pnut.

"My view is this: the image quality that the M8 delivers and the sheer joy of using the M camera, is the best argument to select the M8 as the main camera. (I sold my 5D). And the M7/MP stay in my bag loaded with Spur Orthopan and slide film (Velvia 50) when I need or want the ultimate performance of the Leica lenses. Quite a strong endorsement of the M system in general and the M8 in particular, J. Davis." Here's the link.

Fabien Penso: "how much did he get paid to say that?"

Stuart Richardson: "I am sure the secret Leica Mafia wired him 800,000 euros to his Swiss bank account...."

Eric Friedemann: "my view is that if a $5K digital body I just bought exhibited banding, mirror/ghost images and magenta/purple IR exposure in dark areas of images, I'd return the camera for a full refund and I'd wait to purchase a new one until all problems had been resolved without the need for in-front-of-lens filters that will only work properly with new or converted 'coded' lenses."

Dead Metaphor: "as an added bonus, it makes people in Africa look purple! how cool is that?"

Jonathan Davis: "then is the IR cut filter the Purple-People-Eater of the '50s song?"

Pico diGoliardi: "would someone smarter than I am please look at the EXIF data on the Leica_Eye image (http://imx.nl/photosite/leica/M8_4/leica_eye.jpg)? Is it, in fact, a 1:1 scaled properly to the scanned film image (http://imx.nl/photosite/leica/M8_4/kodak_eye.jpg)? Or not?"

Andrew Hull: "ahhh, the Leica hack. Next thing he'll say that the M8 image stands up to 4x5 film LOL."

Things the M8 does wrong (not the big ones), by John Camp

I at first thought taking the bottom off to replace the battery and memory card was cool. Now I've done it one too many times, and I don't like it any more. I'll live with it, but there were better ways, especially for cold areas, like Minnesota and Germany, where you may be working in snow and with gloves; a hinged door with a latch would be better, IMHO.

Both my shutter speed and on-off switch are too loose. I've both accidently turned the camera on, and accidently shifted from 'A' to 8000.

There should be an alternate battery charger that leaves out the car-charger option in favor of smaller size. I'm willing to pay for it. I wonder if these batteries are used in other machines, and there might be a workable alternate battery charger somewhere? The problem comes in air travel, when it's one more big thing to carry. (Cell phone charger, Mac laptop power supply, M8 power supply, etc.)

I seem to be carrying more little bits and pieces -- the 1.25 magnifier, the little tiny magnifier case, the Whibal cards. I'll soon add eight (!) filters, and probably have to start carrying the filter wrenches I bought for my film cameras.

The release was okay -- but I also bought a soft release, and that's better.

The black grip finish is too slick; the Leica grip makes it lots better, but the finish on that is also too slick.

The little round LCD window on top is cute, but a larger window that also displayed ISO, and had a back-light feature, would be better. Although I have to admit that I am getting used to accessing the ISO through the 'set' button, and it's not really that big a deal anymore -- two quick pushes and you're ready to change.

The Leica-supplied strap does not match the quality of...well, most straps. I threw mine away (after destroying it for the rings) and now use an Upstrap.

December 8, 2006. Torralba's M8 is for sale!

December 18, 2006: "a reality check with the Leica M8 The long anticipated digital Leica M8 and it's rocky introduction into the market has been the hot topic of discussion on internet forums. Bump 1. The first batch of M8's were experiencing problems with banding and green blobs which appeared as ghosting...In addition to to this, there is the dreaded infra red sensitivity issues which renders blacks as purple... Bump 2. It now appears that there could be a possible issue with the upgraded cameras. As reported on RFF and other sites, there is a vertical band which appears on images shot at high ISO...Reality Check and smooth sailing: the reality of the matter is that Leica has produced and exceptional product that many have been waiting for. The Leica M8 is a dream come true for photographers wanting a digital camera that will yield unmatched results...I have seen the banding issue, I have seen the green blobs and I have seen the purple blacks...Conclusion: I for one will not forsake the shooting experience...if you want to take pictures and produce the best image quality possible with a 35mm camera, stop looking for problems and enjoy the M8. You are but a few privileged to have such a camera that others envy and only dream of. I look forward to a second M8 body when more are available."

Frank Scheitrowsky jumps in with, "Jorge, a short while ago I saw that you posted an ad offering your M8 for sale. What's up that that?"

Jorge Torralba responds, "I was going to sell it to buy an upgraded one. Then I was told by my dealer that I could just swap it."

FED: "in reality, Jorge is only privileged with owning a pristine Leica M8 because he doesn't care about his childrens' education and the camera shop won't take back his German piece of junk."

Puts Shilling the M8 - Part 5

Jonathan Davis did write this on the Pnut about Leica M8 Part 5: "note that his verbal description of how he segmented the test pattern is contradicted by the chart showing how he segmented it. (This problem may have been corrected by the time you read this.)"

Nels: "wow. Look at those charts. Erwin, the hypnotist." Here.

Stuart Richardson: "I think Nels has the right idea, those hypnotic test charts are programmed to make you spend 5000 dollars on an M8...."

Jonathan Davis: "for the record, here's the discrepancy between his paragraph and his chart. First, the paragraph: "For easy comparison I have segmented the charts in four parts, together producing the complete chart. The presentation is always the same. The top row has the full aperture and the bottom row has the stopped down apertures, from 5.6 to 11, depending on the widest opening of the lens. The left column shows the centre portion of the image and the right column the edge position. See scheme below." And now, the "scheme below," from the chart...."

Dead Metaphor: "Erwin should just join NASA and be done with it."

Ruben Osuna Guerrero: "he comments the Zeiss Planar, Leica Summicron and Leica Summilux 50mm in the last section, but I see only 2 graphs."

karl keung: "just like M8, grand idea, but not quite completed yet."

Karl Graf, "(Re: In previous parts I have compared the M8 performance with a high-end DSLR and with film. The results lead to the summary conclusion, that the M8 image quality is superior to film.) Better than film? What about the magneta?"

Brad: "the magenta is intentional - to get similar results to the walmart/costco processing most here use."

Jerry Kirkwood: "so we have a comparison of the same lenses shot on a Leica M8 and on film digitized on a desktop scanner, both downsized for the 'net, and therefore proving nothing. I suppose he can do whatever he wants with his time but with a finite number of days here on earth I would rather not spend them in my basement surrounded by test patterns scotch taped to the wall."

Jorge Torralba: "you are casting judgment without even owning the camera. I can say that a Ferrari has many flaws and I would not own one. But I would be doing myself an injustice if I were to bail out on a Ferrari based on what someone else wrote. I bet that when his car is not in the shop he has more fun and gets better performance than anyone else. The same with the M8. My M8 performs well enough beyond expectation and I actually get to use it. It does not even need to go into the shops. Unlike those who just say I told you so or I rather buy a 5D. Those will never enjoy the M8 and are missing out because of poor judgment on their side. I bet if I decided to giveaway an M8 instead of the Bessa you would be happy to accept it and praise it."

Toby Askey: "but at the same time don't you think that M8 owners have brought this on themselves by grossly overstating the abilities and significance of this camera before anyone had in their hands. Trolling is a two-way street, so don't be suprised if the overly positive is met by the overly negative whereas the truth lies somewhere in the middle. It wasn't too long ago that I was almost convinced the M8 was going to end world hunger, reconstitute the ozone layer and find Jimmy Hoffa, imagine my dissappointment to discover it was just a camera."

Click here for some Canon 5D pics compared with Leica M8 pics. (The 5D wins hands down!) Jorge really got sucked in. Screw the others who got sucked in via Jorge's shilling.

Dec. 19, 2006. Jorge Torralba did write this: "why I still love film, browsing through some older shots, I realized film still rules...colors and tones are pretty good."

Michael Reichmann's, "M8 Take 2"

Dec. 25, 2006. Highlights: "the initial release of cameras suffered from a number of problems, including bright light streaking and green ghosting...very strong infrared sensitivity---black to appear magenta, and also unwanted shifts in other colours...and a newly discovered banding issue." The shilling conclusion: "...in the end...the only way you'll take the M8 away from me is from my cold dead hands." Read all of "Take 2" here. Now for some comments from the pnut gallery.

Ross J: "why didn't Michael Reichmann publish these problems in his indepth review? How much did Leica pay him?"

Tom Boyd: "he's just trying to cover up and save face like all the other Leica shills."

daniel taylor: "but in the end, as I wrote initially a couple of months ago ? 'the only way you'll take the M8 away from me is from my cold dead hands.' Well, at least until the M9 is announced!"

Mario Mazariegos: "M9 maybe for me...."

Anand N. Viswamitran: "Reichmann's very likely to desert the M8 when the M9 is here (as Daniel comments). More power to him that he can afford the latest and greatest, of course, but I can't see him wedded to the M8 for ever."

Tony Polson: "after his first 'review' of the M8, I am surprised that anyone here takes Michael Reichmann and his 'reviews' at all seriously."

karl keung: "the power switch (off/c/s/timer) is very loose, there is almost no click, it just glides through all the setting...."

charles stobbs: "isn't the infrared 'problem' really a problem with our eyes?"

Mark Chappell: "this is like saying that if your shoes are too tight, your feet need to be adjusted."

Stephen Persky: "currently, I wear filters over my eyes. However, soon I might take them to a service center to get micro lenses over the sensors adjusted. Those filter are a huge problem with glare and ghosting especially at night. I might be able to sue my parents for not properly testing before releasing me into the world. That being said, my eyes produce some of the best quality images I have ever seen, and you could only take them from my cold dead eye sockets."

Jerry Kirkwood: "I could swear he flat out said a while back Leica asked him not to publish the straight dope. Maybe I dreamed it?"

Michael Reichmann: "...Fact: I saw the green ghost issue, didn't understand it, asked Leica what it was, they said they didn't know, and then asked me to hold off mentioning it until they had a few days to figure it out. They never got back to me. I published the review without mentioning it. My mistake. I should have. Mea culpa. Fact: I reported on the extended IR sensativity extensively problem in my first review. At the time I didn't know that a profile fix couldn't fix it, or what its eventual effects would be. No one did for a while afterward. I also didn't see it in more than a few frames out of some 2,000 taken with the first test camera, and didn't sufficiently appreciate its significance. Leica never made any request of me or anyone else that I know of ijn this regard. Fact: I didn't see the light streaking problem until I had shot close to 3,000 frames, then when I did reported on it in my second review. Fact: I didn't see the rainbow streaking problem until very recently. Few people did and didn't know how it was caused. I happened to be the first to figure out what caused it, and immediately described it in my second review. Fact. Digital has proven itself to be far superior to film, just as I predicted it would 6 years ago. Does anyone seriously doubt this anymore, or does that old tired debate need to be resuccitated once more. Anyone who wishes to intellegently discuss these matters is welcome to do so on the forums located on my site. I am reluctant to enter these debates on other people's sites, but when I am misquoted feel it appropriate to set the record straight."

Stephen: "don't quit your day-job fella."

Nels: "Saw an infrared, Rainbow over the horizon, Green ghost at its end. (my first attempt at haiku, inspired by a dream about shooting with an M8)"

Karl Graf: "yes, yes, digital is better than film as predicted, the M8 included... right, Michael."

RFF's Big Cheese Now Working for Leica!

Dec 28, 2006. Yup. Leica M8 shilling has gone into overdrive on rangefinderforum.com with several new M8 (shilling) threads each day. (RFF has become the National Enquirer of camera forums.) Just take a look at this thread:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33686 - or click here.

See jaapv's OP and further M8 worship. Oh, and see Jorge's post - which seems to slam the door on film gear at RFF. Do you think jaapv works (shills) for Leica? And is Leica slipping a few bucks to Jorge? Is Jorge then 'straight' with the IRS? Is Jorge posting as jaapv? Note the post by Athena. Here are a few examples:

"Unashamed M8...Each shot leaves me stunned." ---Jaap, Hellevoetsluis, Netherlands.

"This is great to hear." ---Geoff Smith, Brooklyn, NY.

"An honest assessment of the M8, I will buy one soon." ---Robert, Newtownards, Northern Ireland.

"And the second body will be chrome as well." ---Richard Marks, Sheffield UK.

"Glad to read of your resolve and pleasure in the M8." ---MCTuomey ("arrested development") USA, Michigan.

"Jaapv, I am with you here. I have the M8 and am more than satisfyed with it. I will keep my MP since it is a work of mechanical art. Nothing comes close to its function and feel. I wish the M8 lloked and felt like my MP. Having said that. The MP will be my last film camera. Although I mainly shoot the M8 now and still do some work with the MP, I may actually go for another M8 in black." ---Jorge Torralba (Big Cheese).

"The problem is that the same people who were chanting it’s going to be great and banging the leica drum before the launch are now chanting “its better than you think” and banging the same drum, it makes it difficult to know the true position. Personally I can’t come to terms with the crop factor so I try not to comment, or on the rd1 for that matter, but of late it’s been difficult find threads that don’t involve the m8 or rd1." ---Stewart McBride.

"I appreciate the conversations about the M8 as a learning experience. I look forward to when they 'cool down' and become discussions." Rover (Curly), Moderator.

"It could be cognitive dissonance: affirming that one's original bad decision was actually correct by doing it again. Or it could be that after all the griping, the problems are really minor and it really is a great camera after all." ---Topdog1 (Ira), New Jersey.

"On a side note I really do understand why every loves the Leica M system. It really pains me to complain about Leica in general." ---Ken Tanaka.

"I am confused by this entire thread. It seems that everyone posting who has purchased a M8 now plans on purchasing a second one? The actual number of such persons are few - but such a strategy will have the effect of doubling sales of the M8! At least for this 'select group.' This is a curious development - to say the least. Since the reports I've heard are that this camera has many problems - isn't this strategy a bit like the gambler down on his luck deciding to double or nothing? I mean, why wouldn't a first adopter now wait for the problems to be resolved before buying a second camera? Clearly, from a risk management standpoint - any wise current owner would wait for a resolution of the issues rather than do as the OP proposes. Then again, perhaps the OP has a not revealed agenda for making such a grand pronouncement? Hera always told me, burn me once,, shame on you; burn me twice, shame on me!!" ---Athena.

Yet Another Shilling M8 Review

Photo.net Patron Prolific Poster, feb 13, 2007 john kelly writes: "again, remarkably, Rangefinder Magazine has done something well. The current issue has a thoughtful, practical-sounding M8 review by somebody who's used it hard and didn't stop to worry about magenta blacks. Makes me want an M8."

Larry Kincaid responds with, "For some reason, it's available on the magazine's web site at:
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Feb07/"

Brad: "Rangefinder Magazine has done something well? Really. And not a single word about magenta casts and the need for external filters. And that's a good review?"

Barry Fisher: "The last paragraph I'll bet you was either stolen from Putz or handed to him by a Sohlms marketing pip. The paragraph arises to the heights of the purist expression of mythic/marketing/mental wanking I've seen since, well Erwin himself."

Dennis Wong: "Really. And not a single word about magenta casts and the need for external filters. And that's a good review? REALLY, because folks like YOU have said enough about it! Don't we need to repeat this a zilllion more times? BTW, have you bought or used any Leica lens lately?"

Bobo Atkins (Photo.net Hero and mod): "I agree. Keeping it quiet is certainly in Leica's best interest. Who want to read facts like that in review...."

Russell Brooks writes, "M8 - first day. Superficial impressions: doesnt sounds like a Leica loud, and wind-y. Off/S/C button is too easy to bump. Shutter speed wheel feels plasticky and sounds cheap when turning. I cant tell which framelines are which anymore. My favorite lens (35mm pre-ashp Lux) doesnt mount. My screwmount lenses will be hard to 6-bit code because the adaptor has a cut-out where the sensor would read. I dont want too shoot too many keepers since I've been led to understand that we really need the filters and coding to get the most out of the camera. Otherwise I like it. I'll learn to live or work around. I only wonder how much of the rangefinder advantage(over SLR) we lose with the M8. Let's see how I feel about the camera as I get to know it better...."

Months Later the M8 was Introduced....

"How long for 'factory fix' recall?" writes CPeter Jørgensen (May 26, 2007; 12:15 a.m.) "I have an early M8. I got a recall notice from Leica as well as the paperwork to request my two filters. I delayed sending the camera to Leica USA, but finally sent it about 8 weeks ago. Leica confirmed that it was shipped back to Solms and the expected return was 3 weeks. It has been 8 weeks and still waiting. What is the experience of others whose cameras have gone to Germany for the recall? Also, I assumed this trip to the factory would provide a "Magenta fix" and I wouldn't need the filters. I see from recent comments that this isn't necessarily the case. Does anybody know what they do with your M8 when it goes back to the factory? And how long does it take to get it back. Are they just collecting them there until the magenta fix is worked out? Anybody know anything about this whole mess? Thanks."

"bob peters" answers: "The only thing I know about this whole mess is that users of any other camera brand wouldn't tolerate it. In fact, users of any other product at all wouldn't tolerate it. How long can Leica survive on the goodwill of it's users? 'Sorry, I've just sold you a 1ds mk2 / d200 and blacks come out magenta. These free filters will fix it but if you've got more than two lenses then you'll have to buy some more filters. And if you've got wide angles you'll have to get the lenses coded so the filters don't vignette. Oh, and the filters increase the risk of flare too. Tell you what, I'll recall the camera too, tell you it'll take 3 weeks to partially resolve the issue, and even when it's taken 8 weeks I still won't contact you and let you know what's happening.' No offence intended but there's a very thin line between loyalty and being a mug."

An Angry Leica M8 Customer

Jeffery Smith: "Shutter Fault I had used my M8 very little (mostly trying to decide which lens I would use on it regularly) when I got an 'Err' message in the viewfinder. The LCD read "Shutter Fault". I thought that, since the shutter didn't respond at all to the shutter release, maybe the battery needed recharging. I recharged it and tried again. Same thing...no response...'Err' in viewfinder...'Shutter Fault' on LCD. One other person on the LUG had that problem once. He fiddled with the controls, turned it off and on, and it started working again. Didn't work for me. Someone suggested reinstalling the firmware upgrade. Nope. Another suggested taking out the battery and allowing the internal battery to poop out completely. No go there either. Twice I was able to get it working again by turning the shutter speed dial here there and everywhere. But when I would turn it off and turn it back on again...'Err'...'Shutter Fault.' Now is the disappointing part. Several emails to Leica Camera (USA) went unanswered. I finally emailed the president who, in turn, forwarded my email to the head of the service department. No response. I tried calling and emailing the head of the service department about 10 times in one day. No response. No response from emails. One response from voicemail (when I returned his call, no response). All subsequent voice mails and emails have gone unanswered. I finally decided to talk to someone else (the lady who answers and tells me that the service department manager is never there), and she told me to send the camera in. I did so. It arrived there 10 days ago. No response from them, and not available by phone. Right now, I have paid $500 and still owe my credit card thousands more for a camera that lasted for 2 weeks. I'm not a professional photographer and, as such, my money doesn't seem to spend as well as a pro's. When one plunks down for a camera that costs thousands of dollars, part of the money is, I thought, for service after the sale. That does not appear to be the case for non-pros. In desperation, I emailed the president once more for help. He has not responded to the email. Besides my house and my cars, this is the single biggest investment I have every made in a single piece of merchandise. And I still owe 90% of the purchase price to my MasterCard. My wife doesn't know that this has happened. Fortunately for me, she doesn't frequent this forum. I am 57 years old, and they have made a complete fool of me. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=184' "

Ludwig goes Ape in Defending his M8'S Honor

From CVUG (cvug@cameraquest.org), one fine day in June '07

A few of the CVUG Guidelines

• "Flaming and uncivil behavior on the list is strongly discouraged. Flame posts will get you removed from the list. Spirited discussion is strongly encouraged, but be nice to each other."
• "Please stay on topic with Cosina Voigtlander and photography related posts. Save discussion for such topics as hats, underwear, war crimes, religion, etc for your private email, instead of uselessly cluttering the inboxes of CVUG List members who subscribed for ON topic discussions."
• "Witty replies: Some lists have members under the delusion that everyone subscribed to read their often ill conceived attempts at humor and quick repartee. Please save smart-ass replies for private email, or the stage if you really are a comedian."

Have these guidelines been broken?

Michael A Shapiro wrote: "OK. Nothing earth shattering: Luminous Landscape has some good articles and reviews of lenses, some of which were written by Sean Reid at http://www.reidreviews.com. It is worth paying the $30 to gain access on that site. He compares all the available lenses from CV, Zeiss, and Leica. In fact, S Gandy loans him lenses to test."

Frank Granovski wrote: "Reid was one of those early Leica M8 reviewers who never mentioned the M8's magenta and banding issues and later got slammed about it on RFF and other forums. Paying this biker for his shilling is stupid."

Michael A Shapiro wrote: "Frank, that's the stupidest logic I ever heard. He writes great in-depth reviews with examples. His analyses are fair. He also explained about those early reviews. Besides, all equipment has some issues, and if you want the tool, you put up with the idiosyncracies. He saved me a lot of time and money, and I was happy to pay him for access to this kind of information."

Frank Granovski wrote: "Why didn't he disclose the M8's problems? Did Leica pay him?"

Kit Laughlin wrote: "Frank, I have to agree with Michael about Sean's reviews; I was the first subscriber to his site (reidreviews), I believe. That investment has repaid itself many times, and I re-subscribed. AFAIK, Leica and CameraQuest lend Sean these lenses for review and, as far as I can see, his reviewing of the Leica lenses as being the best is—well—because they are the best. OTOH, he very fairly points out that the CV equivalents are a fraction of the cost for most of the performance. And his reviews were why I did not invest in either the Epson RD-1 or the M8. Neither are ready for 'prime time' just yet, IMHO. Jut 2¢'s worth Kit"

Andrew Harrison wrote: "Frank, when are you going to realize that no matter which site you post on, nobody is interested in your continual bagging of the M8. Andrew."

Frank Granovski wrote: "Don't care. Free speech isn't against the law. My point was why pay Reid after he didn't really review the M8? If he did (really review it), why didn't he disclose the M8's problems? How many of his other reviews, which one has to pay for, are also like that?"

Gary Ingle wrote: "You agreed to care when you signed up for this list. Frank, you already posted the URL to this diatribe...If you want the leading edge, don't expect perfection. If you think someone has pulled the wool over your eyes, feel free to complain a little but then give it up. Holding a grudge just makes yourself mentally unhealthy and unhappy. There are not a lot of secrets left to impart to prospective customers so there's no useful purpose (a redundant phrase?) in going on. By the way it is looking more and more like there's an Olympus DSLR in my future. The first digital I've held in my hands that actually felt like a /camera/ instead of a Personal Digital Photo Assistant. (An M8 was the second. Haven't picked up an Epson with my own fingers yet.) gli"

Andrew Harrison wrote: "Hmmmmm, free speech at the detriment of another is called slander, is it not? Lay off, what happened to polite conversation about photography and CV gear?"

Michael A Shapiro wrote: "Check out his work for free on Luminous Landscape. If you find it useful, then pay to access his own site. I, for one, found the free info helpful enough, that I was willing to pay for more. And Frank, you may not care, but I and, apparently, others do. Quit turning everyone's exchange of information into a three ring circus with you in the center ring!"

Andrew Harrison wrote: "Hmmmmm, free speech at the detriment of another is called slander, is it not?"

Frank Granovski wrote: "Slander? Look at those member posts complaining about Reid not disclosing the M8's problems in the review. Truth seems to push buttons....."

Sandy Harris wrote: "It depends. Sometimes it is fair comment. Of course, sometimes, it is ludicrous ranting or brand-boosterism. Lay off, what happened to polite conversation about photography and CV gear? M8 or RD-1 are on topic here, since they are commonly used with CV lenses. Being polite is often a good idea. What is your problem with some strong criticism here? The M8 is a $5000 camera from a firm with a reputation for quality, albeit at stiff prices. The thing has a well-documented flaw, an obvious design error. Leica deserves some flak here. And, yes, a reviewer who waxed lyrical about the M8 without detecting the flaw deserves some, too. It is hard to say how much; we all see it with 20-20 hindsight and test shots chosen to make it obvious, but missing it in an initial review seems understandable."

Frank Granovski wrote: "Michael A Shapiro, Your personal comment was off topic. The topic was Reid's reviews. I simply reminded those few who didn't know about Reid's M8 review where he failed to disclose the M8's big problems. The member quotes confirm this distrust. So why pay to read Reid reviews unless, perhaps, it's to reaffirm and justify that it's okay for doing something about the GAS."

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Frank Granovski starts trolling the CVUG as he did on photo.net where all were glad when he finally left. Time to leave, Frank? Didier"

Bill Smith wrote: "Didier: Whatever he did on photo.net can never compare to what he did on RFF! Overdue to leave, Frank. Bill"

Frank Granovski wrote: "Trolling? Sounds like calling the kettle black. I stand by my opinion based on the lack of any mention about the M8's major problems and what I read from RFF members' comments about his review. I don't trust his reviews based on this and on the fact that he (along with Jorge Torralba) also got the boot from a couple of camera forums."

Note: Jorge Torralba has been using this name and e-mail lately: M Uyehera

Jorgen at epixx wrote: "Frank, he got the boot on some forums because he promoted his website. If you don't like what he stands for, don't read him. Like many others here, I've had great pleasure from reading his articles. The M8 got off to a bumpy start, but people know that now. No reason to keep repeating it."

Frank Granovski wrote: "Re: 'The M8 got off to a bumpy start.' Kind of makes you think twice of 'German quality.' Official Leica statement: 'There are men and women whose cultivated tastes admit of no pretence or insincerity, whose trained minds judge values fairly who demand simply, decisively, the best. They may be few but it is for them that the Leica is made.' The Leica M8 Skinny here: http://www.photopoo.com/m8.htm"

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Wikipedia: 'In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or otherwise inflammatory messages about sensitive topics in an established online community such as an online discussion forum to bait users into responding.' Nothing to add...Didier"

Frank Granovski wrote: "Like I said, you're calling the kettle black."

Kerim Paker wrote: "Which is what I'm reminded of when I have the M8 in my hands... an M5, and, a plastic one at that! Is everyone sure 'trolling' isn't like 'cruising' but for an ugly woman ? K"

Gerry Rosen wrote: "I'm sorry but I had to delurk for this conversation. Memory is not the best source but IIRC a few years ago on another forum, possibly the PN Leica forum, Frank asked for advice on servicing a CL. He apparently ignored the advice to use DAG or Sherry Krauter, sent the camera elswhere, and had the repair botched. He then decided that his CL was typical of Leical. He has been bashing Leica and all things Leica since. Regards, Gerry"

Frank Granovski wrote: "Actually, Sherry Krauter also botched my pristine Leica CL repair not once but twice. After getting it back the second time from Sherry, I sold it; and the buyer (Frank Scheitrowsky) discovered the viewfinder was out of whack (I thought this was normal for Leicas and Bessas). It first went to Horst (local), from the advice of the troll Eric Milner, Beau Photo and Tom B. Abrahamsson. Later, Tom told me to send it to Sherry. All the best, Frank"

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Hi Carl. No matter which lens and which camera was used - this is a nice picture with gentle colors! Hm, how comes black is not magenta? ;-) My Nokton 40 was rather stiff, too, but after one year of daily use it became very smooth, even Leica-like. I sold it after I bought a Epson with it's 1.5x crop factor and 40mm became 60mm. Beside, the bokeh at f1.4 was not totally satisfying for me but this alone wouldn't have been a reason to sell. I replaced it with a 35 asph Summilux which is my most used lens since. Sometimes I miss the Nokton 40's compactness. Didier"

Baba wrote: "Hello out there in Ethernet land: I don't understand why all the passion over a camera that is worth more than several cars. We, my kids/students and moi, are happy with anything that doesn't leak light too bad and where the lens won't fall off of the camera before the roll is done. I know Leica's are nice. I once had an M-2 in the early 80's and I loved it. However, in basic terms the Leica is a box. A very well made box that can catch light. There is no reason to be mean to one another over a light catching box. I know a gentleman in Berkley who can make a light catching box out of a box. I've got a Sharpie pen and I can write 'Leica Lotta Money' on it and say 'I gotta a Leica like you.' Be nice, Be in Good Health, and stop confusing me. baba"

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Baba the poet hits again :-) Dont be confused - there's just one ethernetter which seems to be confused himself... we all know you and you're students make better pictures with trashy cameras that cost less than a replacement screw from Leica or Zeiss... Be in good mood, and Pizza al Gorgonzola & Amarone della Valpolicella 1997 for all Didier"

Jorgen at epixx wrote: "Frank, he got the boot on some forums because he promoted his website. If you don't like what he stands for, don't read him. Like many others here, I've had great pleasure from reading his articles. The M8 got off to a bumpy start, but people know that now. No reason to keep repeating it. Jorgen"

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Wikipedia: 'In Internet terminology, a troll is someone who intentionally posts derogatory or otherwise inflammatory messages about sensitive topics in an established online community such as an online discussion forum to bait users into responding.' Nothing to add...Didier"

Frank Granovski wrote: "again, you're calling the kettle black."

Kerim Paker wrote: "I thought 'Troll' was a term used for an ugly looking woman. Bit like an M5 for a RF fiend... Which is what I'm reminded of when I have the M8 in my hands... an M5, and, a plastic one at that! Is everyone sure "trolling" isn't like 'cruising' but for an ugly woman ?"

Didier Ludwig wrote: "Frank Granovski hates everything German and I will defend that country's honour. Didier"

Bill Bingham wrote: "I think that definition includes several six packs of beer being consumed before!"

Frank Granovski wrote: "Not true, Didier. I love the Fatherland and I own a BMW."

Didier Ludwig wrote: "I can agree about the M8 size being closer to a M5 than M6, but plastic - which plastic? Have absolutely no idea what K means with cruising and women. But english is my language #3 only. Didier"

Frank Granovski wrote: "You too, eh? (Re: But english is my language #3 only.)"

Kerim Paker wrote: "Actually what you call my attitude about women was a joke to take the edge off some of the past posts. So was my BS creation to describe what I feelt holding the M8. There's no need to take offence just 'cos you have one. I'm not entirely sure your lack of humour is a reflection of my poor taste in jokes. I am sure that the M8 is made from what you say it is though."

Jeffery Smith wrote: "There is more than one M8 problem. It will no doubt be improved once all of the liabilities are disclosed. It seems like about half of the M8 users have had to return their camera for one reason or another. I got a replacement body from Leica, but don't use it as I'm concerned with having it go belly up again. If I have to carry a back-up camera in case the M8 malfunctions, I might as well lighten the load and carry the backup camera instead."

David Aspinall wrote: "I have watched the debate rage too and fro and here is my 2 halfpence worth... Rd-1 had one, it fell short on quality and reliability M8 - Loaned one by a dealer for a month, went faulty after a week new body with dissapointing quality when compared to working DSLRs ( my kit has to earn money not be male jewelery.) Would you accept a Mercedes/BM/RR/Jaguar with the same track record because that is where the M8 sits in the camera world. Loved and used Leicas my whole life but role on M10 or maybe better ZD-1. I have always carried 2 bodies as an habit because if I am being paid you have to come up with the images but £3000 x 2 when they cannot be relied upon as much as an entry level DSLR - no brainer. Good luck to those who use and love them but would the love fade with no red dot. In passing we should all bow towards Japan and thank Mr K for superb glass whilst asking for a styling update like the 35P2 and the 40 Nokton. David"

Thomas Ettle wrote: "Regarding the M8: I was shown photos taken by available light in a local camera shop (taken through a Leica lens and they were VERY SHARP). More to the point, the camera seemed to be able to allow selective focus and out-of-focus areas similar to film cameras, and the bokeh was very fine. I was surprised the blow ups did not come from a film camera. The smaller image size seemed to make this very difficult, and I was almost thinking that selective focus on most digital photos was virtually a thing of the past, which would be a shame, but Leica seems to have licked the problem. The M8 is hard for me to justify price-wise on what is really my hobby rather than a business, but it seems to be an exceptional camera for most purposes. I may have to pay more than $20,000 for a car, but I choke at $5,000 for a camera. If I win the lottery, it will be on my list... Tom E."

Thomas Ettle wrote: "Are you guys sure you are not confusing the M8 with a Holga? Tom E."

David Keenan wrote: "I've given up on the digital RF concept. I recently bought a Fuji S5 Pro. It's a big camera (based on the Nikon D200) but I often use it with manual focus prime lenses (a Voigtlander 40mm f/2 and a Nikkor 24mm f/2 so far). With these compact lenses I do not find the kit hugely bothersome sizewise. All the advantages of digital (albeit a bit larger and heavier then a RF alternative) and it works great. At less than half the slam of the M8's price tag. I still have my film M cameras but will continue to return to them frequently but a decent digital RF that has all the compelling reasons to use a RF seems a long, long way off -- if it ever arrives. Dave."

Thomas Ettle wrote: "I thought they were made to fill the closet space of doctors."

Bill wrote: "The fact is that Mr Reid's sole test of the M8's ability to render color was to stop by the local supermarket and pick up an assortment of fruit to shoot. Mr. Reid either was not aware of digital sensors' sensitivity to IR or he just didn't bother to test for it. This is not professional journalism and I would never pay even a penny to read anything he writes."

Roger D. Williams "(Re: I've given up on the digital RF concept.) I would have to agree. My best photographer friend is offering to sell me his Epson RD-1 but I am resisting..."

Didier Ludwig wrote: "David I'm quite shure as pro I wouldn't use neither M8 nor Epson as main cameras, but most likely Canon or Nikon DSLRs. A M8 might be useful as third body for special occasions where manual + rangefinder + fast glass makes sense. As amateur I can (meanwhile) live with the Epson's flaws, which, for the moment, are a slighty vertically disaligned finder (but not enough to disassemble it) and an issue with the 75 Summilux which is not focusable on my R-D1s sample (works on others). Could be adjusted, too, I think. I fully agree I would have been in rage if I had bought a M8 and then have had the troubles so many had. It's like buying a Mercedes with unfunctional brakes, and then Daimler offers you a free additional airbag... I was already quite upset after my first R-D1 turned out to be a lemon, and wrote some very critical posts here and at LUG/RFF, but at least had tried to stay objective and solution-oriented. Robert White in UK was then so friendly enough and organized and controlled a new R-D1s for me. It was a long way until I began to like that camera, and it's not because of the red dot on some lenses. But I'm rid of Franks undifferentiated and repeated Leica bashing. He's neither forced to read Reid reviews (which I personally find very useful and informative) nor to buy Solms gear, and no one has asked him to raffle off his strongly prejudiced articles and insults from forums to newsgroups to lists and backward."

Baba wrote: "Thomas: Did you say you know somebody who wants to sell their M-8m because they fell out of love with it?? If so give me the number, I've got a $100.00. baba"

Of course Stephen Gandy gave me the boot for speaking the truth about Reid's flawed Leica M8 review. Stephen Gandy e-mailed me this: "You have been unsubscribed from the CVUG mailing list Thank You for visiting CVUG" Shill out, Stephen. There's no need to shoot the messangers. In the end, it'll be bad for business.

About the star - notice that the poofter wears his Leica (and Rolex) like jewelry

Here is Ludwig http://www.screengang.com/hypertext/site_images/didier.jpg
Animated GIF here: http://photo.net/shared/portrait-bits.tcl?user_id=917391
Phone number and address: http://www.screengang.com/hypertext/about_didier.php

"column of dead pixels in M8," by Gary Sandhu

"Imagine my surprise when my factory refurbished Leica M8, "meticulously inspected," has a column of dead pixels. Tony (Tony Rose from popflash photo) said he'd call Leica and try to find me a replacement, as I'd rather have that then send to Leica for repair (how many months will that take??) , or pay an 8% credit card restocking fee! I'm disheartened, to say the least. It's most evident at higher ISO's (640) and slower shutter speeds (1/30 and less) -- to the point that it would show up on 4x6's. It shows up without brightening or otherwise manipulating the picture; it's clearly visible on the M8's LCD, let alone the computer monitor. Resetting the camera, leaving the battery out, shooting DNG, JPEG at different compressions and different sizes, etc, do not make the effect go away. This is clearly a sensor defect. Here's a very poor picture that demonstrates the effect nicely. Ignore the JPEG compression artifacts. This is the full frame."

"M8 focus problems," by Guy Burt - 07/13/07

"There's a thread lower down the list in which I describe the problems I had with my first M8. That was replaced (quickly and efficiently) by Leica UK with a new model. The new one wouldn't focus properly: a coincident image in the VF would yield an out-of-focus shot, with the plane of focus about six to eight inches behind the point on which I thought I'd focused. For portraits in particular this resulted in some very frustrating blurry-eyes-and-sharp-ears shots.

So of course I got on to Leica UK, who were this time less than helpful. I had to badger them into admitting that something might be wrong, and then all they would suggest was sending the camera and lens back to Germany for a check-up. This being ?5000-worth of brand-new kit, I was reluctant. I wanted a new camera that actually WORKED. But in the end I caved and sent my camera to them for them to test.

The 'test process' they used to determine if my camera was faulty was to take photos with it and with another, new, M8 of the inkjet printer on the corner of someone's desk in the Service Department, and then compare the two shots. I was told that as both were the same, there was no fault with my camera, which I knew perfectly well not to be true. I argued on the phone for a long, long time about this, including telling the man at the other end that if he deliberately adjusted focus to be wrong in the viewfinder, he'd find that he got critically-sharp shots from the camera. But for some utterly bizarre reason he refused to do this, even though it would have taken seconds. He just wouldn't.

I ended up taking a day to go to Leica's HQ in Milton Keynes to speak to them in person.

They let me test two other new M8s right there and then. BOTH had the same back-focus problem, although in one case it was much less obvious than in the other. I demonstrated this to them. If nothing else it explained why, when they 'tested' my camera against the other, they "found no fault", since both cameras were as bad as each other.

I was prepared to go on testing cameras all day in the hope of finding one that actually focused properly, but these two were apparently the only two that Leica UK actually had on the premises (which, to be blunt, I don't believe). So my camera and lens went to Germany after all, and have been there for a fortnight now. I've spent a huge amount of money on a premium brand with a reputation for great customer service, and (a) the camera doesn't work, (b) the service department in the UK are happier to argue with the customer than to help, and (c) this seems to be a widespread problem affecting a large number of M8s. In the very end, just as the camera was about to be sent off, the service dept in the UK admitted that they were seeing a lot of cameras returned with this problem ? a fact they'd never mentioned before, while they were trying to make me and my complaint go away.

So the real purpose of this post is to say that if you suspect a back-focus problem on your M8, SHOUT ABOUT IT until Leica actually respond. I'm hopping mad that I'm out of pocket ?5000 for an M8 and 21mm lens that I don't have. I'm now in Spain on a trip which I hoped would be documented with Leica glass, but the camera is, of course, still doing its Grand Tour and I don't know when it'll be back. Meanwhile I'm shooting with a Ricoh GX100, which cost ?400, has a 24-75mm f2.5 lens, focuses just fine, and which I thoroughly recommend. It doesn't have a red dot but so on the other hand its image quality is better than, literally, ANY LEICA I HAVE EVER USED... Kinda depressing, isn't it?" This post found here.

"Testing sharpness on 2 Leica M setups...," by yusuf dacat

Do you ever wonder what kind of losers are stuck in the Leica loop? Surely these Leicaphiles can't all be GASbags...or can they? My short-lived Leica bout left me with a sour taste and shaking my head. Take a look at this thread---a duel of elitist snobs. Here are some highlights:

Francisco Solares-Larrave: "Yusuf, you may want to say that you're concerned about the lens sharpness or the rangefinder focusing, not the camera. Besides using slide film, you can simply go to another lab and ask to have the suspicious negatives printed instead of going the distance and 'test' the kits. I had a couple of suspiciously soft rolls from both, my Nikon and Leica gear, and the problem disappeared when I went to a different lab. If you still want to find out what the problem is, just remember to have some fun while at it."

yusuf dacat writes: "hi guys. I have two leica M (one m6 and one Mp) setups, each with its own 35mm (f1.4 asph) and 50mm lens. I need to sell one of the setups. I want to test the sharpness of the cameras to see which one is sharper but know so little about printing that I am lost as how to proceed. I wonder (from some bad machine prints) whether one of the lenses is in fact ever so slightly softer and whether one of the lenses is back focussing slightly on one of the setpus--namely that I focus on a point close up and wide open and actually the camera is focussing slightly behind the point at which I think I am focussing on. Any definitive, tried and true methods that will not break the bank? I've heard conflicting results from people who looked at the cameras superficially. Thank you in advance."

John R. Fulton Jr: "if you've owned these setups for a while don't you know which is sharper? If you don't know which is better, then what difference does it make? Sell the set you don't use as much."

Steve Levine: "shoot slides, and examine them on a light table with a good loupe. This eliminates the printing stage from influencing your results. Although Im not sure why you are so concerned with sharpness?"

Robert Chadwick answers: "someone else who has no business owning a Leica or is not quite sure of what he's aiming for... the kudos of being a Leica owner or producing good photographs from whatever equipment he's using."

yusuf dacat blows his top: "'someone else who has no business owning a Leica or is not quite sure of what he's aiming for' Is that directed at me? If so, I suppose it was not going to be too long before another internet coward reared their head to malign someone from the safety of their computer terminal. A few things may be of some interest to you: I posted this question under pseudonym because I am not interested in being archived by Google for the rest of my life and I wish to enjoy a certain amount of privacy. Of more interest, may be the fact that I shoot freelance for National Geographic Society. I received a book in the mail this past tuesday from the Illustrations Editor which featured my work alongside other photographers like Ami Vitale. I have shot for the New York Times and my photojournalism has won awards from the Western Knight Foundation and Annenberg. The question of sharpness here is somewhat critical because I am in the process of setting up a show for a Chelsea gallery in NY for the Fall and want to make sure with this new camera that I am not sacrificing quality that I may have already had with the older Leica. If I know little about printing, put it down to the fact that I have been to busy making a living from shooting. Can you say the same? Or do you scour the internet looking for posts to unleash your obvious bitterness and amateurish, unfounded snobbery. That said, I appreciate the good counsel of like-minded, supportive Leica users who posted above and take the time to make this site an invaluable resource in spite of the boorish remarks like yours here."

FED writes, "Hey Frank, Francisco is the RFF GASbag who got pissed on by his cat. To read about this scroll down about half way here and look for the title, MORE CAT CRAP."

"M8 shutter problem - anyone else having it?," by Arthur Plumpton

"Before sending my camera in for repair (which I hope not to do, the delays aren't much fun), I wonder if others are having this problem: When turning on the camera and releasing the shutter, the shutter does not fire. The display reads 'shutter fault.' When I then turn it off and back on again, the problem usually disappears and does not re-appear. However, this morning I got the same display 'shutter fault,' and it required turning the power on and off several times (itermixed with not so polite phrases), before I was able to properly fire the shutter. Am I doing something wrong, or do I really have a shutter bug. Couold it be battery related? If it is a bugged shutter, has anyone else had it, and does anyone know what is happening? Quite puzzled."

Tom Murray responds: "I don't (wouldn't) own an M8 so the only thing I can offer is sympathy. Obviously if its increasingly starting to malfunction and you aren't doing anything different, the camera needs fixing. The problem I had with Leica and it looks like they haven't solved it, is the long turnaround times for repairs and the unavailability of loaners. I think that's a more serious problem than all the faults and failings of the M8 put together. They can surely fix the camera, the problem is the customer sitting on $5K of debt and eating constant depreciation while the camera is off in Germany for god know how long. Maybe its just annoying to the average amature Leica buyer, but its plain unacceptable to a pro. End of rant. Like I said, all I can do is sympathize."