Not sure i will fix it.

[guy_mancuso]

Before everyone starts throwing rocks at me . hear me out first. let's go through the issues the light streaking if it is a replacable assembly board or a tweek of the sensor than i will probably go ahead and do this . I think all of use will. Okay moving on to the next issue the blobs are gone with the IR filter , so no real fix there . Now let's think about the magenta cast. leica built this camera for optimum image quality at the sacrifice of IR light passing through. They figured from what i can gather that keeping the IR filter not as strong to eliminate the cast but to gain high corner sharpness and stay away from lens aberrations and such. These guys are not dumb. What they are trying to do is give you a body around these amazing lenses and give you ultimate quality. Now lets say they actually did that with this design and to be brutally honest these files are sharper than my DMR and the detail looks better , so this camera moved a notch above the DMR. Now here is the curve ball , if we consider what they have done to be the best design to get the most out of the glass than adding more internal IR light would degrade that orginal design that they set after in the first place. i admit it is bad but let's think about this. If they add more and it actually cause less resolution quality are you willing to do that to save from using the external filters

I am working late but i am thinking openly here . I have a DMR and a M8 and the M8 is produceing higher quality images do i really want to take away that if a change in the design may actually degrade my system to keep the magenta out . Now i am talking either a IR coating or replacement of the IR glass here. Now i still want a c1 profile for the filters and the firmware upgrades plus the streaking issue resolved . But i have to stop and think about the sensor and the magenta cast. I hate filters too so don't think I own stock in B+W company, although it maybe a good time to own it. We keep calling this a mistake from Leica but i am not so sure it is, it actually is a benifit in a certain way. maybe i am working too hard this week and 5 hours of sleep a night is getting to me. But if you put this into prespective and take out the emotional yelling at them and actully think of the bottom line is image quality and what it is today is actually the best for it, do you want to play with more internal IR that will degrade the image. Hmmm a thought to Ponder

[rob_x2004]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

I have a DMR and a M8 and the M8 is produceing higher quality images

I realise this is completely off topic, and of no interest to anyone else at all except me, but in what instances or circumstances is the eight delivering better files than the huchback with a brick?

[msadat]

i, like you love the camera and i own the dmr also and agree with you on the sharpness. i just wish the roll out of the camera was better (alot) and these thing that we are finding now, was stated before. i still would have bought one. matter of fact, i paid 4800 extra for a spare battery!!

[guy_mancuso]

I think the Micro detail is better and also the look of it is sharper , what is not correct is the color at the moment, so my color issue i am leaving out of it right now, that will come with profile but the files looks much sharper and better detail.

[guy_mancuso]

Well Ii am not saying anything about how this was brought to the public and all that . If it was wrong or right or whatever at this point what is done isdone. So let's look at it from a shooters point of view instead of the poltical one. Do you give up something for something else that you can correct or do you go for a easy way out and take the short path and lose a little. Hope that made sense

Personally i gave up the blame stuff after the first day problems arrived ,my goal is to get this shooting to the best possible conditions that provide great images and get us out there shooting

[j. borger]

Guy,

You put to words what i was thinking all day and night.
I do not plan to send it in for sensor adjustments before i have heard/read reports about imagequality compared to the current state of the m8.
I am interested in a fix of the streaking issue though ........ perhaps a drive to Solms for a "Custom-fit"

[guy_mancuso]

I think we all want the streaking issue solved and any other liitle quirks that we need fixing via firmware and such . But the sensor if we have to add or coat that sensor , i really have to think about the effect it will have on image.

[osera]

What you could do is wait to see what the fix is, wait for the reviews and owner experience, and then get a second M8. Maybe don't wait for reviews/feedback. Compare them side by side for yourself. If the new camera is better, send the original for the upgrade. If not, sell the new one, or keep it to have one of each.

There's a big cost in doing this, obviously, but if you were considering a second anyway, maybe not more than you were planning.

[guy_mancuso]

Allen that is a very good thought plan because i am thinking of a second one anyway. Of course i am speculating on what that fix maybe also

[lxlim]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Before everyone starts throwing rocks at me . hear me out first. let's go through the issues the light streaking if it is a replacable assembly board or a tweek of the sensor than i will probably go ahead and do this . I think all of use will. Okay moving on to the next issue the blobs are gone with the IR filter , so no real fix there . Now let's think about the magenta cast. leica built this camera for optimum image quality at the sacrifice of IR light passing through. They figured from what i can gather that keeping the IR filter not as strong to eliminate the cast but to gain high corner sharpness and stay away from lens aberrations and such. These guys are not dumb. What they are trying to do is give you a body around these amazing lenses and give you ultimate quality. Now lets say they actually did that with this design and to be brutally honest these files are sharper than my DMR and the detail looks better , so this camera moved a notch above the DMR. Now here is the curve ball , if we consider what they have done to be the best design to get the most out of the glass than adding more internal IR light would degrade that orginal design that they set after in the first place. i admit it is bad but let's think about this. If they add more and it actually cause less resolution quality are you willing to do that to save from using the external filters

I am working late but i am thinking openly here . I have a DMR and a M8 and the M8 is produceing higher quality images do i really want to take away that if a change in the design may actually degrade my system to keep the magenta out . Now i am talking either a IR coating or replacement of the IR glass here. Now i still want a c1 profile for the filters and the firmware upgrades plus the streaking issue resolved . But i have to stop and think about the sensor and the magenta cast. I hate filters too so don't think I own stock in B+W company, although it maybe a good time to own it. We keep calling this a mistake from Leica but i am not so sure it is, it actually is a benifit in a certain way. maybe i am working too hard this week and 5 hours of sleep a night is getting to me. But if you put this into prespective and take out the emotional yelling at them and actully think of the bottom line is image quality and what it is today is actually the best for it, do you want to play with more internal IR that will degrade the image. Hmmm a thought to Ponder

I agree with you here, Guy. The only reason I am considering Leica rather than getting a 5D is the Leica lenses(image quality) and rangefinder accuracy (focus quality, if there is such term). For myself, the adding of 486 filters is relatively minor if I am adding a whole system to my scope of work and my bottomline.

Get some sleep though Nothing affects my decision making and emotions quite like the lack of sleep.

Alex

[rick_dykstra]

Ha. Last night I was thinking, "Good time to buy shares in B&W!"

They've sent the Bad Kreuznach police out to round up the old B&W guys who left on redundancy two years ago. "Schnell! Zere is ein vorldvide emergency! Back to verk! Ve need Infrarot glass und filterhaltercirclescrewythingywhatsitschwartzen. Und chrom. Schnell!"

One old guy asked, "Was ist los? Fur Iraq? Afghanistan?"

"Nein! Fur WW III, Solms vs die welt! Schnell!"

[rick_dykstra]

I'm thinking that Stephan Daniel's message related to the streaking and maybe the green blob. Isn't it a bit of a leap to assume that his message referred to the IR sensitivity?

I think you're on the right track Guy. Once a photographer has a body working s/hes not too keen to hand it over to be "fixed". 'Cold, dead hands' comes to mind.

[drjon]

I also posted this against the Erwin Puts-Magenta thread but believe it may have some value here. I feel that Guy's thinking is spot on - well said.

There are none so blind as those who see only magenta, streaking and green blobs et al. Leica got their PR wrong as Erwin Puts rightly states; but the engineering compromises they made were the correct ones in my non-expert opinion. Having studied physics at university I can confirm that gravity is a bitch and wave optics even worse. The M8 is what it is; buy it, don't buy it, depends on how you want to use it. I want the Leica M lens imprint on my photos most of the time - and my hit rate will be a function of my poor skills rather than how often I encounter the magenta inducing subjects.

I think it highly unlikely that Leica will touch the sensor or glass cover and my M8 will defintely not be going back for such a re-fit in the very unlikely event that Leica get bounced into adopting such an unwise course of action. IR filters and improved AWB performance would be reasonable fixes for me. It appears that profiling can also go a long way to eliminate magenta issues, if not completely.

For professionals and others who cannot live with these compromises, they can choose to forego the M lens and the M8. For the rest of us mere photographic mortals I am very confident that the M8 is destined for greatness even if we are not.

[Jamie Roberts]

Originally Posted by guy_mancuso

Allen that is a very good thought plan because i am thinking of a second one anyway. Of course i am speculating on what that fix maybe also

Guy--as another DMR owner, I agree, this thing is kicking its butt for 1) overall sharpness (though the prints won't be *that much* different, I keep telling myself 2) better ISO performance (1250 is completely fine in normal lighting) and 3) hand-holding longer shutters.

Wow. I can't believe I just wrote that. It is a KickA** camera, even unfixed. Really.

But you know what, and maybe this is my lack of sleep talking (I hate insomnia!) but I think I would accept a slightly less sharp design if it was as sharp as the DMR. No?

It would still be faster, easier to focus, and easier to handhold...

[Peter D Lux 2]

It's a good thing you started this thread Guy. Tired or not.
I think we cannot put enough emphasis on this issue.

Like I said last week in another thread you've started;

Re: Cut Filter: Must See This

Me too. Fully agreed. If that is what it takes.
Let's go for max image quality!

Peter

[osera]

Originally Posted by Jamie Roberts

...

But you know what, and maybe this is my lack of sleep talking (I hate insomnia!) but I think I would accept a slightly less sharp design if it was as sharp as the DMR. No?

...

Interesting point there, Jamie.

I think that maybe I would prefer my sensor to get every last bit of lens performance AND have optimum IR sensitivity/resistance. But if these are mutually exclusive and there has to be a compromise somewhere. I'm not sure if I would want to sacrifice any lens performance.

Maybe these are mutually exclusive and maybe not. Maybe for the digital rangefinder it will take another camera generation to solve. I mean, buyers might refuse to accept the lens vs. IR sensitivity compromise that the Leica has made here. But will buyers accept a compromise the other way? Or insist getting it all before "approving" it?

[hyper67]

A thought to ponder: If the engineers screwed up the streaking/ghosting problems or the testing phase was insufficient what makes everyone so sure that the same does not apply to the use of a very thin IR cover on the sensor thus the magenta. All I am saying is if it were just one problem then the argument that it was designed the way it was would have been stronger but as it is, it makes me think. Personally I will recieve my M soon and will try to work around the problems as I really think it is worth it....hopefullly Leica can learn from all this

[robert_parker]

Guy

As you know, I'm a committed Leica fan and DMR owner, I'd also like to own a digital M sometime in the future.

I've not taken part in the debate so far but I'd like to add this and hope you and your correspondents understand where I'm coming from.

1) How much of the added sharpness in the M8 over the DMR is really sensor and how much is down to to the excellent M lenses, which appear to have better sharpness than many R equivalents, anyway.

2) It's pretty hard to turn a fault into an advantage, no matter how loyal I want to be - having enhanced IR trasmission is great for a few specialists and astronomers but pretty unhelpful (note we British are masters of understatement) to the rest of the community - unless you invest time and money in work arounds and filters, you have a problem of unreliable colour.

3) This is likely to cause the greatest problems to those who really want to use the M8 in its traditional roll in journalism, weddings, reportage of diplomatic and other public events - unless they happen to have paid out for the right filter, they are going to get an unpredicatable result.

4) Someone said earlier that the eye is a poor measuring instrument but a good comparator - I genuinely beleive that someone viewing a photograph will probably not notice a few microns lost in sharpness (in reality my subjective feeling is the sharpenss is likely to be excellent by other makers standards, even if a little was lost in coatings / internal filtration / firmware) but will notice his son's tuxedo has changed colour.

5) Personally, as someone who would like to go on the M buyers list sooner rather than later, I would rather all the cameras were withdrawn and leica get it right - if the new M8's then came back with good colour and a slight loss in image quality, then so be it - they got quite a lot in the image quality bag to loose if they had to and still be outstanding.

I think the reality is the camera buying world can live with a tiny loss in image quality, when it's so good anyway - it can't live with a camera that you have to use with filters and colour profiling as standard to get a reliable result.

[guy_mancuso]

Originally Posted by robert_parker

Guy

As you know, I'm a committed Leica fan and DMR owner, I'd also like to own a digital M sometime in the future.

I've not taken part in the debate so far but I'd like to add this and hope you and your correspondents understand where I'm coming from.

1) How much of the added sharpness in the M8 over the DMR is really sensor and how much is down to to the excellent M lenses, which appear to have better sharpness than many R equivalents, anyway.

2) It's pretty hard to turn a fault into an advantage, no matter how loyal I want to be - having enhanced IR trasmission is great for a few specialists and astronomers but pretty unhelpful (note we British are masters of understatement) to the rest of the community - unless you invest time and money in work arounds and filters, you have a problem of unreliable colour.

3) This is likely to cause the greatest problems to those who really want to use the M8 in its traditional roll in journalism, weddings, reportage of diplomatic and other public events - unless they happen to have paid out for the right filter, they are going to get an unpredicatable result.

4) Someone said earlier that the eye is a poor measuring instrument but a good comparator - I genuinely beleive that someone viewing a photograph will probably not notice a few microns lost in sharpness (in reality my subjective feeling is the sharpenss is likely to be excellent by other makers standards, even if a little was lost in coatings / internal filtration / firmware) but will notice his son's tuxedo has changed colour.

5) Personally, as someone who would like to go on the M buyers list sooner rather than later, I would rather all the cameras were withdrawn and leica get it right - if the new M8's then came back with good colour and a slight loss in image quality, then so be it - they got quite a lot in the image quality bag to loose if they had to and still be outstanding.

I think the reality is the camera buying world can live with a tiny loss in image quality, when it's so good anyway - it can't live with a camera that you have to use with filters and colour profiling as standard to get a reliable result.

Robert your statements on each point is what we call here in the states the flip side of the coin. I will go to your number one point being a DMR and M8 owner how much is that difference , we really have no idea in the digital realm but we all agree the M glass is better than the R so are we seeing just that difference or are we seeing more with the IR issue and do we really use that extra sharpness. Great debate and thought on just this point alone .
I could go point by point but your right when is good enough okay or make it better okay. The AWB point will be fixed without affecting the sensor per say, streaking, and all that stuff are the separte issue and we all will get that fixed . I guess we really have to see what the fix is and make a judgement call on what to do and than this conversation will come up again with the pros and cons. I just think as bad as we may think it is , it reality it may not be. not trying to put spin on the issue but it certainly has the ball bouncing around in my head.

And I thought I would wake to be called crazy, Well i am but in a good way. LOL

[guy_mancuso]

As i was writing the above reply , it occured to me that I would bet Sean is thinking right along these same lines. i have not read his latest Part 4 review yet . But i would bet a dozen donuts he is thinking the same thing. If this is the best we can get than let's be careful about what a fix we would do. It's interesting that we go from point A to point B in this whole thing and there are subsets involved in these choices. I think as we go forward on this with members of the board, with our Pro's and reviewers plus our engineers and folks of great knowledge on these matters we can come to some great decisions .