Will There Be New Firmware Updates for the M8?

[chris_tribble]

Originally Posted by scott kirkpatrick

Can you find that thread, as I missed it.

scott

Scott - the link's here...

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...tml#post501412

Still waiting!

Best

[jaapv]

High ISO improvement might be possible - they did so on the DMR.

[photolandscape]

So it appears there are probably at least half-a-dozen substantial improvements that could be made via Firmware upgrades on the M8.

Given the declining world economy, the high price and performance issues we've seen with the M8, and I'm guessing a decline in M8 sales in the past few months (primarily due to the original demand being satisfied), will Leica continue to support the M8 with Firmware updates? It costs time and money, both of which could be in short supply, but why wouldn't Leica pursue this aggressively? The recent AWB improvement was worthwhile and much appreciated. But why stop there? If there is a reasonable possibility that green banding, battery/sudden shutdown issues, SDHC use, and all the other things mentioned here can be eliminated and solved, what are we waiting for? It's a competitive world out there, and when one reads about the capabilities of the Sigma DP1 and considers that, despite its limitations, it can perform at a very high level for 1/8 the cost of a new M8 and a Leica lens, doesn't it make sense to continue to keep Leica's loyal customer base reasonably content by showing some effort and working to reconcile the problems we all are aware of?

[jklotz]

Myself, I'll take the M8, warts and all, just give me better high iso performance.

[barjohn]

Don't forget improved JPGs too.

[chris_tribble]

Originally Posted by photolandscape

It's a competitive world out there, and when one reads about the capabilities of the Sigma DP1 and considers that, despite its limitations, it can perform at a very high level for 1/8 the cost of a new M8 and a Leica lens, doesn't it make sense to continue to keep Leica's loyal customer base reasonably content by showing some effort and working to reconcile the problems we all are aware of?

Not convinced that a fixed focal length point and shoot is real competition... check out MR's comments at Luminous Landscape Sigma DP-1 Review and Sean's emerging (and less damning) review. the DP1's interesting, but it isn't an alternative to a digital RF IMHO.

[marknorton]

I've just read the LL review but have not seen Sean's review as I am banned from his site.

It seems clear that there is more work to do on the camera but I do not think it should be written off just yet. Add a zoom lens, sort out the dismal ergonomics, LCD, flash, slow focussing and I think it could have the makings of a much more interesting small Leica than the endless succession of cooking PanaLeicas we've got used to seeing. Think revised Digilux 2.

Better yet, provide the DP-1 with a Leica M mount and see what it can do. Leica DL anyone?

[JGW]

Originally Posted by chris_tribble

Also assured by Leica that they were looking at separating shutter release from re-cock to give you a "stealth" mode... (correspondence with Stefan Daniel on this issue was reported in the forum).

I really wish Leica would do something about this. I can't use this M8 in certain situations when working professionally: during television recording etc., sometimes even for general documentary where the M would be normally chosen because it is/was quiet. Back in the analogue days I was often allowed to continue working because I was using a Leica rangefinder! For those who think there would be more problems having to let the camera whirr afterwards, you just move the camera down, or under your coat or whatever; you've got the picture by then anyway. This was always an option I would use with previous Ms; often slow, natural movement can help you get pictures because you're more harmonious to moments changing around you.
Though this is hardware, I wrote to Stefan Daniels back in May '07 about the abysmal framelines; his reply was that Leica had had many complaints about this and new framelines would be made available to be retrofitted. Well, where are they? Accuracy during use is far more important than hard glass on the monitor. I'm not just moaning, I love my M8, but during the obvious design difficulties in creating this digital M, just a few simple choices would have made it such a special camera, which it still isn't.
JGW.

[kameraguy]

Originally Posted by chris_tribble

Also assured by Leica that they were looking at separating shutter release from re-cock to give you a "stealth" mode... (correspondence with Stefan Daniel on this issue was reported in the forum).

Just found this thread and am happy to hear this bit of news Chris. Maybe our letters to Leica have helped.

[kameraguy]

Originally Posted by scott kirkpatrick

Can you find that thread, as I missed it. I'm in favor of unlocking recock so that it occurs when you lift your finger in single shot mode. The noise of the recock is more obvious (much more after the shutter upgrade) than the noise of the shutter itself. I guess it is still worth a usability study to see if when you take a series of shots in the space of, say, a minute, it is more distracting to have "snip-crunch......... snip-crunch...." for 10 shots or "snip.... crunch.... snip.... crunch" with twice as many sound bursts, each shorter. Maybe we wouldn't want that after all. I'd appreciate hearing from one of the audio maestros that have looked at the tapes with the new shutter to see what repeated shots sound like with a 1-2 sec separation.

scott

Scott, here is the thread:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-...lent-mode.html

Now let's hope this feature finally comes to fruition. I think Konica had the right idea with the Hexar AF many many years ago...

[scott kirkpatrick]

That's disappointing -- so they heard this suggestion from Guy (as well as from others, I suppose). But I know that for every Guy who says this makes a lot of sense there will be another who says that "I couldn't work that way," so I suspect that this one is still not a clear winner in Leica's eyes. I'm not holding my breath. Now SDHC support has been promised by Leica, not just suggested to Leica.

scott

[Shootist]

Originally Posted by scott kirkpatrick

That's disappointing -- so they heard this suggestion from Guy (as well as from others, I suppose). But I know that for every Guy who says this makes a lot of sense there will be another who says that "I couldn't work that way," so I suspect that this one is still not a clear winner in Leica's eyes. I'm not holding my breath. Now SDHC support has been promised by Leica, not just suggested to Leica.

scott

Not only is it NOT a clear winner, it would totally defeat the Continuous mode or be nearly impossible to implement.
Shutter does NOT recock until you release the button on S mode and then does the total fire/recock on C mode.

To my thinking the M8 simply does not have the base memory to implement some of the features listed in the various threads on this board. I think that is why the fixing of the white balance took so long, they had to rewrite the firmware to make room for the WB changes (which in MHO is very good now).

[jimmy pro]

Originally Posted by Shootist

Not only is it NOT a clear winner, it would totally defeat the Continuous mode or be nearly impossible to implement.
Shutter does NOT recock until you release the button on S mode and then does the total fire/recock on C mode.

Obviously it can't apply to C mode but I don't think anyone's so stupid to expect it would. I don't get why you think it couldn't apply only to S mode, and, in fact, could have a menu option for instant or delayed motor action. After all they are 2 different modes that already act in 2 different ways, that's the point of having 2 seperate modes. Remember the M8 is basicly a computer that takes pictures, it's a matter of writing the firmware, not designing some contraption with cogs and springs and levers to do the job.

To my thinking the M8 simply does not have the base memory to implement some of the features listed in the various threads on this board.

Well even if your speculation is correct, I bet there are a lots of people who'd pay for adding more "base memory" as part of an upgrade--a real upgrade--that'd let the photographer decide when to recock the shutter. Me I'd like to see the function sent off to one of the back buttons as an alternate option to recocking by letting go of the shutter release. That way it wouldn't be necessary to keep your finger on the shutter release until you wanted to recock.

[pastafazul]

Is there any chance that we could get true 16 bit with a firmware update?

[charlesphoto99]

Originally Posted by pastafazul

Is there any chance that we could get true 16 bit with a firmware update?

I doubt there's the processing power built in that would be needed for that. Maybe a future upgrade of the processor is in order? Of course soon enough you'll have a $9000 hobbled together M8 - may as well buy an M9 or whatever the next iteration will be.

[jimmy pro]

Originally Posted by pastafazul

Is there any chance that we could get true 16 bit with a firmware update?

Pastafazul??? LOL, it's pasta e fagiole.

I keep hearing that song (was it from Grease?) in my head "Gimme more gimme more" I just don't get what's wrong with the IQ out of the M8 that anyone for any practical purpose needs to be better. OK, not counting the high-ISO noise, and even that looks more filmy than digital, so at least for me, in those lowlight shots I actually like the M8's affect more than the HDTV-look of my D3.

Jimmy Provenzano

[fotografr]

It was recently confirmed by a high level Solms official that a new firmware upgrade will allow M8 users to make and receive calls by removing the baseplate and speaking into the battery compartment.

Hello? Can you hear me now?

[diogenis]

Originally Posted by fotografr

It was recently confirmed by a high level Solms official that a new firmware upgrade will allow M8 users to make and receive calls by removing the baseplate and speaking into the battery compartment.

Hello? Can you hear me now?

That's impossible!
If you take that plate out, the camera will lockup saying you have taken the baseplate out

[pastafazul]

Originally Posted by jimmy pro

Pastafazul??? LOL, it's pasta e fagiole.

yea, it's a nickname. The misspelling is on purpose I suppose.

as far as the processing power of the camera, from my understanding the camera process's 12 bit to 8 bit and up to 16 so how much more power would it need to just process 16? I'm hoping this is a firmware update they have in mind because this is my biggest complaint with the camera.