New M8 and M8.2 Firmware Available 2.005

Now available, the new firmware 2.005 for all Leica M8 and M8.2 owners…

What has improved? Nothing really but they did fix that issue it had when shooting in C mode. Some would get the dreaded “shutter fault” and this will fix it!



  1. @Filip – I think you might be correct about Leica not being able to commit indefinitely to something like that. The solution would have to be something such as what Michiel says and done through a 3rd party. What about this as a business model. A company that offers to strip out the sensor in a M8/M9 and replace it with a state of the art sensor for $3,000. Lets face it, after 3 or 4 years it will be a miracle if the camera’s computer and sensor is still working as it should and it will be years past any warranty/passport. Nothing to lose really? The company is “Kodak approved” (doubt Leica would want to be involved) and it is good to go. I know the Kodak M9 sensor is M9 specific and has the infrared layer etc to save users from the filter but then again…who cares about the filter? Would I mind having to put filters on my Leica glass if it meant always having a state of the art sensor? Nope. Filter me up and I am good to go! Nikon D3X sensor with Leica glass… happy days! Who is with me?

  2. I still maintain that one chassis for life is the way to go. It is in keeping with the (old) Leica philosophy and would build a loyal base. They burned a lot of bridges when they brought out the M9 and basically dropped the M8/M8.2 guys, leaving them with the old sensor and goodbye and good luck. Not cool. One of the main reasons Leica have been so expensive (and successful) is the durability and no matter what anybody says, durability these days is all about the sensor and the processor. If that cannot keep up (and none can) with advancing technology then it (and the camera that it is attached to) are on a one way trip to the tip. It makes absolutely no sense putting together an indestructible camera body if you have a self-destruct button (a permanent, fixed sensor) inside the camera. That would be like designing a handmade, expensive milk carton that could not be refilled. There is a reason that milk cartons are cheap and don’t last long – they don’t need to last longer than the amount of time for the milk that they contain takes to go off. In the camera world, the camera body is the carton and the sensor is the milk. With film, you never had (still don’t have) this problem. It never made sense to me having a fixed sensor, it still doesn’t.

    The R9 dmr is the best idea that Leica ever came up with and they should do the same for the M9 but don’t charge £5000 for the dmr, charge £3,000 and update it every 3 years. If they do this, I am not sure who will buy, but I will be first in line.

    • @Stephen: this, of course, makes absolute good sense. Businesswise I don’t know. Sometimes designers/developers make decisions that don’t last a lifetime.

      One thing is certain about the future of digital photography: whatever the “real” need, full frame is the way to go for quality photography, and sensors (and in-camera processing) will keep improving.

      So anyone that can design ánd manufacture a camera body that will last, with enough flexibility to accomodate any future full frame sensor technology is on to a winner.

      Except for one thing. The punter wants a “new model” every few years. Wé may not want to, they do. Look at the “updates” the car industry inflicts on us.

  3. well I think that keeping the same chassis would make engineering it a little more tricky and definitely adds barriers to whatever new stuff would show up in the future, it’s a pretty hard core promise for a company to say something like this…

    + what about us waiting for cheaper 2nd hand bodies from you guys? 😀

  4. “perpetual upgrade program” sound familiar? 😉

    I myself would appreciate a lighter, waterproof, more ergonomic body and would hope leica invests efforts into the body as well.

    The sensor is good enough– buy the processing could use improvement.

  5. Not to start a war over environmental impact, but replacing the insides of the camera every year (or three) has way more impact than what the electronics are wrapped in. That metal is nothing compared to the sensor and computerized parts. Which isn’t to say an upgrade program isn’t a good idea on the whole, but on strictly environmental grounds it’s probably only marginally better than just buying a new camera and selling on the old one second hand or recycling it through an e-waste recycler.

  6. For sure and the turn around time for Leica would be swift. Rip out the 18 mp sensor and put in the new whatever mp sensor with related processor, Leica accurate checks to make sure everything is spot on. Throw in a service for good measure and focus check and send back – charge $3,000 and you are good to go for another 3 years. It is simple, not À la carte so the process can be streamlined. They only have to do it once every three years and can spend the rest of the time focusing on new optic R&D. I personally would sign up now.

    It would solve Leica’s continual struggle to keep up with demand for the M9 (which will only be repeated if they create a M10 one day). As anybody knows, it does not matter how good or how much in demand your product is – if you can’t deliver the product timeously, you can’t make money. Cashflow 101.

    @Steve – on a serious note: With your contacts at Leica is this something we could propose? I have even thought of the name for the programme: The Leica oMega programme. What do you think? Possible?

    • @Stephen: I guess it’s all about margin. Or something else. I don’t know if Kodak’s CCD sensor used in the M9 is dedicated M9 stuff (surely to some extent), but it doesn’t take more than a telephone call or an email to tell ’em

      “Hey Kodak guys, if you ever update your sensor, give us a bell and send over a few, we’ll stick ’em in these surplus M9 bodies we fabricated over the weekend”

      And the charge the punter $3000. Business-wise, it makes sense.

  7. Stephen B: That’s a great idea. You should suggest that to Leica. It’s also environmentally friendlier than having to replace the whole body.

  8. I still say they should offer the M9 as a permanent base camera and offer to update the digital guts every three years to state of the art for about $3000. It would speed up their cashflow and save them having to keep creating the whole body. Imagine the profits and the happy customers that know their chasis is for life. That way for $1000 a year you get the state of the art leica (after the initial outlay of course!).No more digital rot affecting a superb body. Leica For Life. What do you think guys? Should we suggest this business model to Leica?

  9. Atleast leica supports there products longer then anyone else. Only makes sense since they charge more then anyone else give or take a D3X and 1ds M3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.