I must digress from the subject a little. For Japanese Leica users, "Leica" means the M cameras. And, some of you may have discussed which model can be the best M camera. Is it the M3? The M2 with the 35mm frame lines? Or, do you claim the M4 is the last "real" Leica camera? Of course, I have joined in such discussions. In other words, M cameras for existing Leica users may be like the old Harley-Davidsons with panhead or shovelhead engines, or the vintage custom Fender guitars, or the narrow body Porsche 911. I sometimes find foreign people visiting Japan are using the Leica M6 or M7 rather than old models like the M3, the M2, or the M4. In the United States, the homeland of Harley-Davidson, I saw many riders wearing T-shirts, jeans, and white full face helmets. And, most of their motorcycles were newer models. On the other hand, Japanese H-D riders tend to dress more "American" than the American riders in the US. Anyway, it seems that people like to use newer things overseas.
Let's go back to the main subject: the Leica M8. Before it was released, EPSON had already released the R-D1 digital rangefinder camera. It had so much analogue elements: it employed a watch movement to indicate necessary information and an advance lever only for shutter charging. The effect of LPF was lowered so that lens characters are better reflected on the output. It was a crazy camera made by EPSON fanatics (of course, I'm saying this with my respect) and it took great pictures even in today's standard. When Leica announced the release of a digital M camera, the R-D1 users including myself were relatively calm rather than excited. We were so used to the film M cameras that we didn't like the plain top cover without the advance lever and the engraving, and the body looked thick and fat to us. But, we were surprised by the price tag which was almost equally priced to the brand new film MP or M7 at that time. It was completely unexpected because we expected much higher price, and we used to say that Leica has become serious about their business. One by one, these R-D1 users bought the M8 and I was the first. Since I was using the DMR, I could imagine the picture quality because I thought the M8 had a carryover imager. But, despite the short flange back distance, picture quality was better than the DMR. Also, it reflected the lens characteristics better than the R-D1 because it didn't have the LPF and it had an APS-H sensor. I fell in love with the sharp output. More than anything, I was so happy that I could use my Leica lenses on my Leica body, which was also digital. The advance lever? The top cover engraving? We had totally forgotten about these issues and we even created a justification for Leica Company, "It has a battery. Why need the advanced lever?" Now, where is our old spirit for the lever and engraving? I'm so ashamed of my unprincipled-ness.
Anyway, Leica Company had a great success with their first digital M camera. They could also think about something like the "Leica M" which was announced the other day, but technically and financially, it should have been a little difficult for them to realize the live-view at that time. Still, I cannot help thinking that they made a right decision to plug a digital imager into the M body. In addition, we must note that the M appearance and operation was almost unchanged. Yes, it's just about replacing the film with the digital imager. The Porsche 911 switched from the air-cooled engine to the water-cooled engine when they released the model name "996," but the appearance and the operation feeling were unchanged. Here, I believe that they needed to inherit the tradition actively to coax Leica fanatics just like the Porsche did when they switched to the water-cooled engine. If I have a chance, I'd like to check with Leica Company on this topic.
In this way, Leica Company seamlessly joined the digital photography industry and the M8 enjoyed great sales. There're two interesting things in the Leica M8. The first thing is the output which indicates possible absence of the infrared (IR) filter. You may know better than I do on this topic, but I think it doesn't have the IR filter in the beginning. Is it to increase the resolving power? I don't really know. Color reproduction of the M8 is completely different from later models. I hate to sound abstract, but the M8's output is somehow similar to films although I often have trouble with the very unique color reproduction. Is this film-like output is related to the absence of the IR filter? Again, I cannot provide any evidence because I'm not a specialist and I didn't check with Leica Company. Still, what I'm amazed is that Leica Company must have assuredly released the M8 even though they knew the consequence of going IR-filter-less. In other words, it's like they're saying, "This is the way a camera works." And, such an attitude is common to famous German companies. Let me tell you something I found in our visitation to Leica Company: Dr. Kaufmann is using his M8 with the very first version of firmware. According to him, "It produces nice color." This mischief firmware used to cause the "sandstorm" on the LCD when the playback button was pressed... (*Note that Leica Company used to offer two UV/IR filters to registered users free of charge.)
The second thing I found interesting is that they reduced the maximum shutter speed to 1/4000 for the Leica M8.2, the upgraded version of the M8. Users in the US and Japan complained the "loud" shutter of the M8, and Leica Company converted the shutter to a new quieter one. Plus, for wide open junkies, they added the ISO80 pull setting. These actions made me realize that Leica Company became smarter even without changing their philosophy, and I could fully understand it after I spoke with the key persons. So, please check the interviews, too.
