Re: Possible serious Issue with AWB & M9?

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The problem is high frequency junk that comes superimposed on the 50 Hz mains. It can be caused by electronics in the house like dimmers and fluorescents and it can come from outside sources. The filter I use is basically a 1:1 transformer that isolates the whole system from the mains.

 

Jaap,

 

You have to remember to rub the special Monster Cables snake oil onto it daily to ensure proper operation ;-D

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

:D

[chris_p]

For the record, I have exactly the same problem.

Excessively warm (yellow/orange) images with AWB when lit by tungsten or low voltage tungsten halogen (no energy saving fluorescents involved).

No problem with flash or daylight.

I assume firmware updates will address this.

I find that selecting White Balance 'Auto' in Lightroom 2.6 (as opposed to 'As Shot') provides a rough and ready fix when reviewing images.

[Jet]

D&A

 

Thanks for the post on AWB. I was beginning to think it was my new M9. I too will look forward to new firmware adjustment.

 

Jet

[D&A]

You're most welcome.

 

I generally find when making certain observations (especially troubling or puzzling ones)...that it's best to get a consensus before jumping to any conclusion. I too am certain that this will ultimately be addressed in a future firmware update. Thanks!

 

Dave (D&A)

[kuspen]

For the record, I have exactly the same problem.

Excessively warm (yellow/orange) images with AWB when lit by tungsten or low voltage tungsten halogen (no energy saving fluorescents involved).

No problem with flash or daylight.

I assume firmware updates will address this.

I find that selecting White Balance 'Auto' in Lightroom 2.6 (as opposed to 'As Shot') provides a rough and ready fix when reviewing images.

 

Same symptoms here.

[viramati]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I find the AWB on my M9 in tungsten light is just awful almost bright yellow!!! I only shoot in RAW so it can easily be sorted but is a real pain. Hope a firmware update appears soon

[DFV]

I find the AWB on my M9 in tungsten light is just awful almost bright yellow!!! I only shoot in RAW so it can easily be sorted but is a real pain. Hope a firmware update appears soon

 

Guys, you don't knowhow happy you make me when you say this. Because it is exactly what happens to me. Now I am sure that there is nothing wrong with my M9 and the problem is (and I am sure will be) fixed by new firmware as the M8 once was.

 

I have given up on AWB for some time now so the problem to me is minor. I set my WB to daylight and shoot away like I used to with film. Later I correct indoor shots, even with the M8.2 that had a "decent" AWB.

 

I have NEVER shot with a camera that had an AWB that actually worked properly. To be honest, I doubt there will be one for some time since proper AWB adjustment requires logarithms that are very demanding on chipsets. All are simply substandard. Whether it is a Nikon, Canon, Panasonic or Sony. Only accurate on maximum 70% of the shots and spot-on on about 30%. In most cases minor differences will not be noticeable but can be fixed if you really have a good shot. By now I am used to fix it on LR anyway.

[innerimager]

I carry an expodisc and custom WB all my artificial lighting. Takes a second. One reason to do so not mentioned in the thread (I think) is it facilitates better high iso noise management. If an incorrect WB leads to saturating the blue channel, this can't be fixed when correcting the Raw file WB, the noise remains. ....Peter

[bacampbe]

Anyway, about the importance of AWB - it is important if one wants to enter German wildlife photography competitions. WB changes in RAW developing will count as digital manipulation and disqualify the entry. As will "more than standard" levels and curves - at the jury's discretion:eek: A very luddite bunch over there. Despite 95 % digital entries they would like to turn the clock back to Agfachrome.

 

Hopefully not much of said wildlife will be illuminated with compact fluorescents, or even old-school incandescents, right?

 

(edit: Wow, I can't believe I used my first post for snark. I _thought_ I had posted here before. Apologies--I'll be good now.)

[scott kirkpatrick]

I carry an expodisc and custom WB all my artificial lighting. Takes a second. One reason to do so not mentioned in the thread (I think) is it facilitates better high iso noise management. If an incorrect WB leads to saturating the blue channel, this can't be fixed when correcting the Raw file WB, the noise remains. ....Peter

 

I don't think it matters whether you use a custom setting, before shooting (obtained with an Expodisc diffuser, for example, or a large neutral grey card), or do the correction after shooting based on a shot of a grey card or just keeping the white shirts white, now that we have uncompressed DNG files, and can do all these manipulations using 16 bit pixel data. If the blue channel is weak and noisy, boosting it in camera will make that noise more obvious, but overflow is unlikely. I've found doing black and white conversions of very low light stuff, that a profile which filters yellow in and blue out cleans things up noticeably. And that is nondestructive editing. If I don't like the result, I can do it over.

 

scott

[jaapv]

Interestingly, Leica once had a camera with a perfect AWB. The Digilux 2, which had an external WB sensor. Now the M9 has a built-in white and grey card on the shutter. If they just put the D2 WB sensor next to the exposure sensor. But it is probably a foolish thought...

[DFV]

Interestingly, Leica once had a camera with a perfect AWB. The Digilux 2, which had an external WB sensor. Now the M9 has a built-in white and grey card on the shutter. If they just put the D2 WB sensor next to the exposure sensor. But it is probably a foolish thought...

 

Yes, that one was VERY close. Ultimately I think that internal sensors are not the solution. There is just too much in between and you would be back with the same problem as the current cameras. What about placing something "discreet" on the outside? Let's say, between the Logo and the focusing window...

 

In any case, perfect AWB is something to try to achieve but not really to get obsessed about.

[a.j.z]

I am new to Leica but I am a little bit surprised about this discussion. I got the M9 in addition to my Canon 20D, which also does not have a perfect white balance in artificial light (like all other cameras I used before). The manual white balance offered by the M9 works very well and is very easy to use. As my understanding of Leica was that it is preferable (if not compulsory) to have manual control of everything, why not also white balance?

 

Besides, as already mentioned by others, if you use RAW, it is normally just one or two clicks to get things right.

 

Nevertheless, I would not mind a firmware update with a perfect AWB (but the issue of the magenta color cast using some wide angle lenses is more important to me).

[wlaidlaw]

I am new to Leica but I am a little bit surprised about this discussion. I got the M9 in addition to my Canon 20D, which also does not have a perfect white balance in artificial light (like all other cameras I used before). The manual white balance offered by the M9 works very well and is very easy to use. As my understanding of Leica was that it is preferable (if not compulsory) to have manual control of everything, why not also white balance?

 

Besides, as already mentioned by others, if you use RAW, it is normally just one or two clicks to get things right.

 

Nevertheless, I would not mind a firmware update with a perfect AWB (but the issue of the magenta color cast using some wide angle lenses is more important to me).

 

Andreas,

 

You make a good point and most of us here, from time to time, will use MWB, often with a grey card, Expodisc or similar device. I was taking IR photos today with my M8, Visoflex III, 280 Telyt and a 720 Nm filter. In that case, there is no option but to use MWB. However if you are in a situation such as for example a wedding, you will be frequently moving from one lighting situation to another. It is impractical to keep resetting a MWB. With the 2.004 firmware on the M8, that situation is possible, although it still struggles a bit with both tungsten and more particularly, modern low energy lighting. The M9 AWB is pretty good in daylight situations but really quite bad in artificial. It really struggles with skin tones, simultaneously making caucasian skin tones too ruddy and darker skin tones, muddy looking. Now this is correctable, especially with the skin tones tool in C1 V5 Pro but if you have a big batch of photos, each one has to be processed individually, which is a lot of work.

 

Wilson

[innerimager]

I don't think it matters whether you use a custom setting, before shooting (obtained with an Expodisc diffuser, for example, or a large neutral grey card), or do the correction after shooting based on a shot of a grey card or just keeping the white shirts white, now that we have uncompressed DNG files, and can do all these manipulations using 16 bit pixel data. If the blue channel is weak and noisy, boosting it in camera will make that noise more obvious, but overflow is unlikely. I've found doing black and white conversions of very low light stuff, that a profile which filters yellow in and blue out cleans things up noticeably. And that is nondestructive editing. If I don't like the result, I can do it over.

 

scott

 

For B&W I definitely agree Scott. I'm not convinced about color conversions, I think there can, at least occasionally, be a price to pay if the image is captured with a very incorrect WB. Anyway, it would take me much more time to test this for myself than just to continue doing manual WB in artificial light, ;>) best...Peter