DMR Firmware V1.3 or Collectors & Historica

[gdb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica WILL be at PMA 07: check this link:

 

PMA 07

 

Cheers

Gérard

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[mjh]

Would it be conceivable for a third party to release firmware and charge for it?

No. Writing firmware requires intimate knowledge of the hardware, which third parties don’t have.

[rsolomon]

3rd party, interesting idea, i would be willing to pay, most software & hardware companies charge maint for upgrades....

 

It would be great if Imacon would provide firmware to DMR users for a fee .

 

ofcouse this is just day dreaming and i realize could not happen..... but i guess it is a potential solution

 

Rich

[loretdem]

My theory is ultimately more positive than most of the posters here.

 

I think Leica faced a tough choice.......Build a whole new production run of DMR's (probably at least 1000 units). This is in the face of dealers still having DMR's for sale from the first production run(s). The chances of selling out a new production run of DMR's may have been slim due to the fact that the new R digital, (and yes I believe there will be one by Photokina 08) will be announced well in advance of the show. Once that announcement is made, say goodbye to sales of the DMR. Everyone, including most of us here, will want the new machine. This would lead to a situation where Leica may find itself having to do a buyback of a fair amount of that last production run.

 

I look at all the people selling off their beautiful R glass and I predict there will be significant price increases when the new R digital is announced. That's why I am keeping all of mine except a few duplicates in focal length.

 

Woody

The most sound reasoning I've yet to read here. You are definitely doing the smartest thing.

 

-Carlos

[hdg]

I think the V1.2 will come soon. But also I think this will be the last one.

I think there will be no further production of the DMR because there will by no real need.

I think there will be no DMR II. But I also think there will be a RD10 in the very next time.

But the most important part is that there will exist a support with regard to the DMR.

 

Regards Hans, very happy with his R9+DMR+V1.2

[rsolomon]

Hans,

it seems the definition of support is where the issue is.

 

usually support takes on two different paths

 

1. funcationaly stable: this is for things that are "broken" relative to current published specs - no enhancements

 

an example : fix warm monitor issue or user profiles issue

 

 

2. actvie maintainance: enhancements to exploit functionality, ie new features or upgrade to published specs.

 

an example: lower noise at 1600 iso or change jpeg fine to 8mp from 4mp

 

 

i for one was hoping to see a wonderful piece of hardware be utilized to it full capabilities,

Addtionally i don't automatically think an R10 (ff digital) means upgrade to R9 + DMR. In the same spirit is the M8 an upgrade to the M7 ..... i think not - it's clearly different but one could argue whther an upgrade

 

To me the moves you mention would clearly put leica in the "me too camera body catagory" and I would expect annual upgrades to then take place - this path leads them to the the "throw-away circut-board world", clearly different then the "invest in a system" world they helped establish

 

On the other hand it re-enforces evertyhing we really know about leica - leica is about lenses NOT camera bodies, and i expect even an R12 (dare i say - it will be here one day) will still take R lenses....just not the acessories (winders, DMR, drives, focus screens, cases, etc...)

[rsolomon]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hans,

it seems the definition of support is where the issue is.

 

usually support takes on two different paths

 

1. funcationaly stable: this is for things that are "broken" relative to current published specs - no enhancements

 

an example : fix warm monitor issue or user profiles issue

 

 

2. actvie maintainance: enhancements to exploit functionality, ie new features or upgrade to published specs.

 

an example: lower noise at 1600 iso or change jpeg fine to 8mp from 4mp

 

 

i for one was hoping to see a wonderful piece of hardware be utilized to it full capabilities,

Addtionally i don't automatically think an R10 (ff digital) means upgrade to R9 + DMR. In the same spirit is the M8 an upgrade to the M7 ..... i think not - it's clearly different but one could argue whther an upgrade

 

To me the moves you mention would clearly put leica in the "me too camera body catagory" and I would expect annual upgrades to then take place - this path leads them to the the "throw-away circut-board world", clearly different then the "invest in a system" world they helped establish

 

On the other hand it re-enforces evertyhing we really know about leica - leica is about lenses NOT camera bodies, and i expect even an R12 (dare i say - it will be here one day) will still take R lenses....just not the acessories (winders, DMR, drives, focus screens, cases, etc...)

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Richard Number 1 is a given but Number 2 is something we will have to see what decsions will be made in that regard. They won't leave the DMR in the dust as far as service and repair. The question is the other support like firmware and enhancements and that as far as i know has not been determined from what i have been told.

[hdg]

Richard, in a certain way you are right.

 

In the meantime I have made more than 10000 pictures with my R9+DMR combo and I feel it meets my requirements. I am an old-fashion photographer using only the manual way to catch the landscape. I think the R9+DMR could be my last aquisition.

 

And there will be the R10 and the R11 and ... May be I will buy them. But a Leica never will be a me too camera because of the excellent lenses. Further you must think at the possible new and younger clients. They will not accept such a big drum of minimum 2.5 kg.

 

Regards Hans, on the way with R9+DMR (+C-Lux), Vario 21-35, Vario 28-90, 2.8/100, 2.8/180 + 2x Ext.

[Guest rubidium]

This whole ill-founded expectation of an improved DMR firmware release is silly. In my opinion, this procrastination with the DMR firmware is simply indicative of the fact that they have given up on it and they won't admit so. While the DMR may be a complicated instrument, I have encountered plenty of other digital devices of far greater complexity for which the bugs and/or the introduction of additional capabilities in firmware have been resolved in a matter of days or at worst weeks.

 

Think about the countless unpaid "hackers" out there capable of reverse engineering and improving upon Apple iPod or Motorola Razr firmware - just for the fun of it, or to tout a marketable talent to prospective employers on a resume. I can't believe for one minute that Leica cannot identify an individual that would be willing to work for them for real money and quickly fix the problems with the DMR firmware - that is, unless Leica simply doesn't want to.

 

Leica should: 1) Admit that they aren't going to improve the DMR firmware and put an end to the wishful thinking of DMR owners, and 2) Release the code and other necessary tech specs to allow someone in the user community to make the fixes. It isn't "rocket science," and after all, it is a "discontinued" item, isn't it?

 

Jim

[timbedsted1234]

This whole ill-founded expectation of an improved DMR firmware release is silly. In my opinion, this procrastination with the DMR firmware is simply indicative of the fact that they have given up on it and they won't admit so. While the DMR may be a complicated instrument, I have encountered plenty of other digital devices of far greater complexity for which the bugs and/or the introduction of additional capabilities in firmware have been resolved in a matter of days or at worst weeks.

 

Think about the countless unpaid "hackers" out there capable of reverse engineering and improving upon Apple iPod or Motorola Razr firmware - just for the fun of it, or to tout a marketable talent to prospective employers on a resume. I can't believe for one minute that Leica cannot identify an individual that would be willing to work for them for real money and quickly fix the problems with the DMR firmware - that is, unless Leica simply doesn't want to.

 

Leica should: 1) Admit that they aren't going to improve the DMR firmware and put an end to the wishful thinking of DMR owners, and 2) Release the code and other necessary tech specs to allow someone in the user community to make the fixes. It isn't "rocket science," and after all, it is a "discontinued" item, isn't it?

 

Jim

 

Jim,

 

I couln't have put it better myself

[mjh]

It isn't "rocket science,"

The DMR has a more powerful CPU and much more memory than Apollo 11 had (or the first space shuttles, for that matter).

 

The assumption that developing firmware for digital cameras was easy is quite wrong. For one thing, a camera doesn’t just have to deal with well-documented formats and protocols, like a mobile phone an MP3 player has, but with real world data. Auto white balance, for example, requires a lot of artificial intelligence (i.e. heuristics) to get it right – most of the time.

[Guest rubidium]

I certainly accept Michael's point regarding the technical challenges of processing "real world" data. I'm the first to admit, based on my own experiences, how easy it is to get trapped into solving a limited set of "special cases" only to discover how poorly those solutions later apply to situations where conditions depart from those encountered in the special cases.

 

However, this is not the issue that frustrates me, and perhaps my post erred by implying that it is easy to develop *algorithms* for the DMR. Rather, my concern is that it appears firmware version 1.1 started out doing reasonably well at addressing white balance on the DMR display. Version 1.2 introduced a setback from that watermark for the sake of advancing other capabilities, like accepting 4GB SD cards, etc. I can't help but get the impression that 1.2 was the victim of careless programming as opposed to a failure to advance the state-of-the-art in image processing.

 

Technical issues aside, the consumer deserves more than just silence. If Leica does not intend to get this firmware resolved, then they should say so, or better yet try to initiate an aftermarket solution strategy. I for one would be willing to pay for a third party developer to put the final polish on a rather expensive investment.

 

Jim

[rsolomon]

Stopped by Leica NJ this week.....

 

DMR: no more new production to happen (as we heard here before), there will be continued support, i specifically asked if continued support meant ongoing firmware updates: answer i don't know... it does mean part replacements at minimum

 

Firmware 1.3 will be out - it is in testing, requires both Kodak and Imacon to produce and test. will address "warm monitir issue" and a 4gb card at a minimum, they could not say ANYTHING else on any other issue. i asked about a number of functions that have been discussed, the answer over and over was "i don't know".... if somebody does know they are NOT in NJ to my knowledge.

 

Asked about R10: answer: i don't know

Asked about when we would hear, answer : i don;t know

Asked when you will know: answer i don;t know

 

i was surprised at the interest level from leica to provide this information..... almost as if the "i don't know" is a good answer.... nothing about who does know, who can find out, or followup about providing information when they do know....from that standpoint i was disapointed in the service i received.

 

i told them that if you told me the senior leadership team at leica does know, but for company reasons we can not share, that would have been more acceptabe to me rather then the toddler' s game of : waiting for me to stop asking questions because every answer is i don't know...

 

oh well at least firmware 1.3 will come out..

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

i told them that if you told me the senior leadership team at leica does know, but for company reasons we can not share, that would have been more acceptabe to me rather then the toddler' s game of : waiting for me to stop asking questions because every answer is i don't know...

{snipped}

 

Hey Richard

I can tell you this: Leica senior management does know the answers to all those questions, but for business reasons can't share that knowledge with you.

 

There. Feel better? LOL!!!

 

Just kidding you, really--thanks for finding out about 1.3 firmware!

[bono0272]

Firmware 1.3 will be out - it is in testing, requires both Kodak and Imacon to produce and test. will address "warm monitir issue" and a 4gb card at a minimum, they could not say ANYTHING else on any other issue. i asked about a number of functions that have been discussed, the answer over and over was "i don't know".... if somebody does know they are NOT in NJ to my knowledge.

 

oh well at least firmware 1.3 will come out..

 

 

Which implies although if it is a truth that Leica is really working on the new DMR firmware, they have no confidence to get the problems fixed in a short while. That's why so far there is no information being published in the Leica homepage about upgrading this firmware, so that is just a rumor to the public and if finally Leica gives up then the company has no responsibility at all.

 

It seems that this DMR firmware is really a 'rocket science'...

[barjohn]

The DMR has a more powerful CPU and much more memory than Apollo 11 had (or the first space shuttles, for that matter).

 

The assumption that developing firmware for digital cameras was easy is quite wrong. For one thing, a camera doesn’t just have to deal with well-documented formats and protocols, like a mobile phone an MP3 player has, but with real world data. Auto white balance, for example, requires a lot of artificial intelligence (i.e. heuristics) to get it right – most of the time.

 

If any of these cameras can get the white balance right by reading the ambiant light through a known white reference source (filter over the lens) it should be able to do the same from reading the reflected light off a white area on the shutter curtain. This ISN'T rocket science.

[Jamie Roberts]

If any of these cameras can get the white balance right by reading the ambiant light through a known white reference source (filter over the lens) it should be able to do the same from reading the reflected light off a white area on the shutter curtain. This ISN'T rocket science.

 

But they won't get the white balance right by reading ambient light, John. You need to point that ExpoDisc or coffee filter at the *main* light source.

 

See, ambient is a mix of whatever's out there. The main light source needs to provide enough light to get the target to very high neutral gray (not white).

 

If you have any kind of mixed or low light, most AWB fails.

 

Add to that the difficulty of reading the reflections of the light (which has its own problems) at a fraction of a second (exposure time) and you'll see why Canon and Nikons and little digicams have a dedicated WB sensor. That's the only way you've got a hope.

 

Besides, this is a DMR thread, and we're NOT talking about the M8, the DMR will always, always, always have crummy AWB. It doesn't even have a white shutter blade to work with, since the R8/R9 are *film* bodies, without any provision for WB sensing.

 

So I'd give that up if I were you On the DMR, especially, you take a custom WB, set the WB, or correct in post. Don't even think of trying to use the AWB.

 

(Actually, I think the same for the M8 too ).

[barjohn]

You are right Jamie, I forgot that the body was a film body and I don't know how their photo sensor works but there is undoubtdely little or no data connection between the sensor back and the film camera front. I knew I should have had that margerita before I started posting instead of after:)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ptomsu]

Without reading through the complete thread here -.... was there any statement at least from Leica? I assume NO again!

 

So what does it tell? They are certainly not only ignoring their most loyal customers (who else would have bought a DMR instead?) and they are not interested in their digital future hence.

 

Bad news for Leica!

 

Peter