Jump to content

M8 and IR filter -dismal failure


jaapv

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply
@ Tom--isn't that bizarre! Especially not being able to duplicate it many thousands of shots. I wonder what the problem is / was?

 

@ Jaap--great shots! I've tried to make the M8 flare / do silly things in direct sunlight and it keeps me pleasantly surprised.

 

Here's the most I could drag out of the 28/2.8 asph shooting into the sun:

 

74616368.jpg

 

You can count the aperture edges, there's a blob of light floating at lower center, but no vertical streak.

 

scott

Link to post
Share on other sites

No high light band either! Maybe the the light clouds over the sun helped. Attached shots done with no filter, 24/2.8.

Tom

 

Tom ....why does the first shot show a huge vertical band of sunlight at 6 o'clock

and on the second shot at 3 o'clock from the SUN...?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tom ....why does the first shot show a huge vertical band of sunlight at 6 o'clock

and on the second shot at 3 o'clock from the SUN...?

 

The orientation is the same, but the camera was rotated. Notice that the streak is across the grain, and involves many separate readout lines. It also doesn't stop at any special place, like the midline of the sensor. I hope we never see this one again, and can blame it on the Aurora Borealis or something.

 

scott

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest magyarman

This is funny tread! Before was M8 many Leica guys stand in village platz and sing with big voice how is against to God put any filter on front of Leica objectif. After comes M8 is same song with same big voice only change lyric to exactly opposing :D :D

 

All time was use filters by fotographer. What is differents M8? I tell: before was use filter only for make affection what fotographer chose. With M8 mast to use filter fix up what camera make bat. Is default of camera, nothing is change about filter. Filter is filter like always. Why today need proof filter does not make flare if yesterday doesn't need proof?

Link to post
Share on other sites

For once I agree, Blasko. There is nothing special with using filters. But they are not to correct the camera - but to correct the light. Like UV filters in the mountains, blue filters for daylight film at night, yellow filters for B&W etc. And for digital sensors to cut out IR. In the case of the M8 in front of the lens, in the case of all others in front of the sensor. So what. The only protest I ever made was against the use of "protective" filters where it makes no sense. So indeed, nothing new and there should be no "proof" neccesary, but there have been indeed some, that stand in the village square and sing a dirge of doom.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool picture!

 

And, because your lens is greater in focal length than 35mm, no need to correct for cyan drift with the IR filter !!! :):)

 

DH

 

 

Is that true ? I think you dont need a coded lens for focal lenghts over 35mm, but for the cyan drift you need for every focal lenght a IR-Cut filter.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes - it is correct. Cyan drift or Cyan vignetting is caused by IR filters at focal lenghts of 28 mm and shorter because interference filters are sensitive to angle of incidence. It may become visible in certain critical shots.

Link to post
Share on other sites

ISO160, I was able to duplicate artifact by rotating the camera at that time (hence both V and H shots) but not since (~ 4000 pix). I previously posted a sun-at-edge streak (early Jan).

Tom

 

 

That is sensor blooming (the rectangular white area) from photon overload on the sensor, as far as I know.

 

This is not M8 specific; I have shots from my Hassi 503cw with a Leaf Digital Back (17 megapixel) with exactly the same phenomenon sometimes.

 

Peter

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest magyarman
For once I agree, Blasko. There is nothing special with using filters. But they are not to correct the camera - but to correct the light. Like UV filters in the mountains, blue filters for daylight film at night, yellow filters for B&W etc.

 

Digital camera does not need to any filter for correct light. Becaus digital camera got WB (mabe M8 WB not so good, still it has).

 

And for digital sensors to cut out IR. In the case of the M8 in front of the lens, in the case of all others in front of the sensor. So what.

 

So need buy each one lens his own filter. So need make it special tred on this forum proof everyone does not make it flare :D

 

The only protest I ever made was against the use of "protective" filters where it makes no sense.

 

IR filter protect M8 from IR, that is make for you sense, not every body.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital camera does not need to any filter for correct light. Becaus digital camera got WB (mabe M8 WB not so good, still it has).

 

So need buy each one lens his own filter. So need make it special tred on this forum proof everyone does not make it flare :D

 

IR filter protect M8 from IR, that is make for you sense, not every body.

 

 

 

 

there it is, your blown, you have no technical credibility

Link to post
Share on other sites

Digital camera does not need to any filter for correct light. Becaus digital camera got WB (mabe M8 WB not so good, still it has).

 

So what is that funny shimmering thing in front of my Canon's sensor? I do believe you haven't got the faintest idea what you are talking about. Please explain how you think whitebalance has anything to do with the IR sensitivity of digital sensors.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest magyarman

You and Riley take same mistake, you take from mine bat Englisch try make looks like I am stupith. I never no tell anywhere digital camera does not need to any IR filter. Everyone now all digital need such. Japp try make looks like UV ora K2 filter is same like IR filter, so need everyone to accept it like normal. K2, O, YG filter all is not need anymore by digital camera because this can do inside by software. UVa, CC, FLD, 80B, 85 filter all is not need anymore by digital camera because this can do inside by WB. IR filter need by all digital cameras oba this part of sensor. Only why M8 does need it IR filter front every lens becaus Leica does not test enough M8 before to sale.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No- because there appears to be a difficulty with incidence angles on a rangefinder. The problem is that Leica botched up the communication about that or underestimated the impact on some users - not the camera.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Tom--isn't that bizarre! Especially not being able to duplicate it many thousands of shots. I wonder what the problem is / was?

 

@ Jaap--great shots! I've tried to make the M8 flare / do silly things in direct sunlight and it keeps me pleasantly surprised.

 

I was able to duplicate it yesterday by purposefully shooting into the sun and overexposing. Attached shots were done with the 75/2 & B+W 486. The darker one was at f/16 whereas the lighter one was at f/5.6. The shutter-speed was binking for the 5.6 shot indicating the exposure was out of range of the top shutter spped - was shooting in 'A". It was very clear too. Note also flare from the filter or reflection of sun off sensor to the right.

Tom

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...