Firmware is on its way !?

[andybarton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well you've got a good day for it Andy

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/130583-certainly-beautiful-day.html#post1372290

 

 

Not sure about the match - our opponents usually bring out the "graduates". Our average age must be 45

[Pintpot]

[

 

Not sure about the match - our opponents usually bring out the "graduates". Our average age must be 45

 

Line and length, line and length.and pitch the ball up! It's the best way to get 'em out.

Tony:)

[SJP]

Not particularly wishing to revive this thread but needs must:

 

A gray card has two independent functions (i) color balance, (ii) exposure, amount of light or whatever equivalent measure you prefer.

 

1 If you are taking pictures of "various" images and there is any likelyhood of a white piece of paper or some white paint (or even some cumulus clouds) in one of the images then point (i) is covered. Not that this gives the best results but it may make some of us happy. Even better strategy is to shoot DNG and make some presets in C1 (daylight, evening, incandescent etc.) that are to your own liking.

 

2 Exposure can be judged quite accurately using: grass, sidewalk, skin, brick/concrete wall. And (shock, horror) you can even use exposure by guestimate just like in the M3 & M2 days. My dad never used any form of light measurement other than the experienced eye and some "presets" analogous to the sunny 16 rule.

 

So where does this fixation on the gray card come from?

 

Having said it is useful to measure for the higlights with digital (M8) and check one or two shots for too much overexposure. I started using -2/3 EV on the M8 and now I am back tp 0 EV compensation, this is purely governed by exposure technique & personal preference.

 

Underexposing by 1 - 2 stops is useful if there is a lot of contrast in the picture and there is plenty of light.

[Nicoleica]

Well I think that they should print the exposure advice with the little pictures, on SD cards. It worked well for film, even if you did have to rip the box apart after they stopped putting it on a sheet of paper folded up inside. :D:D

[pgk]

So where does this fixation on the gray card come from?

Grey cards are/were very useful under controlled lighting conditions, far less so when lighting was variable and pointless IMHO for digital when one can take a shot and adjust appropriately from the histogram. Not entirely sure what this has to do with the OP title though.

[Guest BigSplash]

Assuming that you are shooting in the DNG (raw) format, the white balance set in the camera has no effect whatsoever on the image (whether manually set or Auto) except to record that value in the metadata. It will affect your low resolution preview on the LCD and any JPEG stored only. You can use it as a starting point in your converter if you default to as shot but it may be re-set with zero detriment at any time.

A properly illuminated grey card in the same light can certainly provide a useful reference. However many grey cards are not in fact neutral as they are intended to provide a metering reference, not a white balance reference. The Whibal range (which has neutral white, grey and black) are a better choice. No doubt there are some others.

Rotinely under-exposing by one or two thirds EV can work as a conservative approach and apparently it is a popular technique. However you should be aware that you are not using a significant proportion of your camera's possible dynamic range. The brightest stop potentially containing fully half of the recordable linear tone values (which get re-distributed in processing).

 

Very interesting and informative..thanks. I wonder now why I routinely shoot with -1/3EV.

I sure would like to have the M9 firmware feature on the M8 that allows automatic bracketing.

 

It seems to me that in a given scene you are going to have areas of high illumination and low also. The challenge then is to get the light measurement correct for a given aperture that is either the average for the scene or the area of interest. Are you saying that by forcing -1/3EV or -2/3EV the result is that I am effectively limiting the cameras ability to handle the high and low spots in the scene?

 

If it is the case then is it not in any case better to slightly underexpose so that in post processing there is more freedom to correct. Finally is this not something that firmware should take account of?

[stunsworth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Are you saying that by forcing -1/3EV or -2/3EV the result is that I am effectively limiting the cameras ability to handle the high and low spots in the scene?

 

By underexposing you are potentially reducing the ability of the camera to handle the highlights correctly. I say 'potentially' because with the M8 I too factor in -1/3 of a stop because I feel the possibility of blown highlights is more of a potential issue. When the light values of a scene exceed those that the sensor can capture, compromise it the order of the day.

 

Because of the linear nature of the sensor if you underexpose by a full stop you are potentially throwing away half of the 'bits' of the sensor. Imagine you are are photographing a scene where the values recorded by the sensor are exactly 1 to 255 without any part of the highlights being blown. The sensor is recording the full range possible. If you then underexpose by a stop the highlight that was 255 will now be recorded as 128. The lowest value the sensor records can't be lower than 1, so effectivly the brightness range you are using to record the scene has dropped from 1-255 to 1-128. I.e. you are not using half of the available sensor values. I've simplified the numbers to make them easier to follow, but the principle is the same.

 

as ever, this is an extreme example, and other factors may mean you have to underexpose by a stop. It would have been better if the sensors worked in a logarithm fashion, but they don't, so we have to cope with their linear nature.

[hoppyman]

Frank many people do routinely have their digital camera set for -1/3 or -2/3 EV (when shooting in auto of course) and are completely happy. The rationale is that you are less likely to clip highlights. That's a choice for practical convenience offset against not capturing the largest possible range of tones (which get redistributed in several ways during the file's processing). The nature of the process is that the brightest stop (the one you are not using all of) contains fully half of the possible tones. Whether or not that matters in practice is a more contentious discussion. One of our resident experts (Sandy) is not convinced that it is the best approach for example.

 

Keep in mind that the clipping indication on your LCD is conservative for reasons that would make yet another post of mine too long.

 

I've seen the M8's useful dynamic range quoted as 8 stops (Erwin Puts). Naturally you are losing some of that range if you underexpose. So you have less not more room to correct (less tonal values). I don't follow what you mean regarding the firmware correcting for dynamic range. Unless you are referring to shadow adjust or similar functions in dSLR firmware?

 

I'd be surprised if any future M8 firmware update added the bracketing capability but that is definitely another topic.

 

Very interesting and informative..thanks. I wonder now why I routinely shoot with -1/3EV.

I sure would like to have the M9 firmware feature on the M8 that allows automatic bracketing.

 

It seems to me that in a given scene you are going to have areas of high illumination and low also. The challenge then is to get the light measurement correct for a given aperture that is either the average for the scene or the area of interest. Are you saying that by forcing -1/3EV or -2/3EV the result is that I am effectively limiting the cameras ability to handle the high and low spots in the scene?

 

If it is the case then is it not in any case better to slightly underexpose so that in post processing there is more freedom to correct. Finally is this not something that firmware should take account of?

[lct]

Setting for -1 EV is like underexposing by one f-stop. Usefull to avoid blown highlights but enhances digital noise a well. No problem at low to medium isos with good raw converters though.

[menos I M6]

This is a very strange thread, but as we are taking exposure compensation now, I might as well chime in ;-)

 

It depends really on how different folks meter and develop.

I usually shoot +1/3 or even +2/3 EV, when using AE mode.

Rarely do I clip highlights, but I really go for the shadows, to have some leeway there, as the digital M has comparable bad under exposure behavior.

[Yogibear]

FWIW: a member of the German M8 Forum reports having found Version 2.005 in his M8 after a repair- or adjustment job at Leica.

[rondeb]

FWIW: a member of the German M8 Forum reports having found Version 2.005 in his M8 after a repair- or adjustment job at Leica.

 

Link to this?

[mby]

Link to this?

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/forum-zur-leica-m8/124076-so-wie-isset-denn-jetzt-mit-6.html#post1375534

[MikeMyers]

After reading four pages of what I consider very silly posting, I gave up and jumped to the end.

 

For those of you fighting with each other, why can't you just each post your own opinion? Why does anyone have to argue with each other - instead, anyone who wants to, ought to be able to post their own opinion (along with their reasons).

 

 

For everyone talking about whether the M8 series is or is not "current", it's still shown on this page: Leica Camera AG - M-System

As long as it's shown right there, between the M9 and the M7, those who want to think of it as a "current product" are justified in feeling that way.

 

As to where the future will lead, BOTH cameras are excellent. It doesn't have to be an "either/or" choice, as they're not the same and some people may very well prefer either one over the other.

 

As to the firmware update, reading between all the lines of text up above, I figure it's more likely to happen sometime than not, but why spend time with so much discussion about it (let alone fighting over it)?

 

I've got an M8.2.

If Leica came out and said a firmware update was coming on 10/10/2010 I'd keep on using my camera.

 

If Leica said a firmware update was never going to come, I'd still keep on using my camera.

 

Until it happens, or not, what difference does it make?

 

Anyway, just my opinion, after reading far too many agitated pages. :-)

[Yogibear]

Last friday I have asked CS-Support of Leica-camera by email if and when an M8 Firmware update can be expected and found the following answer in my mailbox this morning:

 

Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachfrage an den Leica CS-Support.

 

Ein M8 Firmware-Update wird in wenigen Tagen verfügbar sein. Wir werden aber unsere Kunden zeitnah über das Erscheinen der neuen Firmware über unsere Hompage informieren!

 

Vielen Dank für Ihr Verständnis!

(Thank you very much for your enquiry with Leica CS-Support.

An M8 Firmware-Update will be available within a couple of days. We will inform our customers timely about the release of the new firmware on our homepage.

Thank you for your understanding!)

[mikki]

Wow, that looks great. Now let's not turn this thread into some fight this time :-)

[wda]

Interesting! Thank you for sharing this information.

[Guest jarski]

Anyway, just my opinion, after reading far too many agitated pages. :-)

 

begin of thread is full of hooey, but we're getting there rumors about 2.005 getting stronger

[Jark89]

Thanks for the info. Looking forward to it!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bill]

Y'know, what? I sincerely hope you are right. However, this was posted by Leica Camera on Facebook today at 10:00:

 

"Leica will present all new products at the "Ateliers SNCF" in Arles and await you on July 6 in the antique theater for the Oskar Barnack Award projection."

 

Followed quickly by:

 

"let me reformulate that: Arles will be too early for the new firmawares and certainly for any brand new product but will give you a chance to put your hands on those nice products for which the waiting line is pretty long!"

Regards,

 

Bill