thrid Posted March 31, 2007 Share #141 Posted March 31, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I say that Leica should add the ability to write out uncompressed DNG files. You choose what you want. Nobody shoots a Leica M like a Canon 1D mkIII. It's not a photographic machine gun, so I don't think an increase in write times is a big deal. In general we look, wait and then grab the decisive moment with a single shot. I would gladly trade improved image quality for a drop in fps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 31, 2007 Posted March 31, 2007 Hi thrid, Take a look here Official Response from Leica on Laundry List. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thrid Posted March 31, 2007 Share #142 Posted March 31, 2007 Oh, and also ask Leica to increase the area of coverage that the framelines show. Right now they are off by a good 20%, which is ridiculous, even for a rnagefinder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
robsteve Posted March 31, 2007 Share #143 Posted March 31, 2007 Oh, and also ask Leica to increase the area of coverage that the framelines show. Right now they are off by a good 20%, which is ridiculous, even for a rnagefinder. The Leica M framelins have always been sized for the close focus limit of the lens. You will find they are more accurate when used up close, such as 1m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted March 31, 2007 Share #144 Posted March 31, 2007 The Leica M framelins have always been sized for the close focus limit of the lens. You will find they are more accurate when used up close, such as 1m. Yep, I know all about that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted April 2, 2007 Share #145 Posted April 2, 2007 This is the graphic presented in the article of the LFI magazine. The origin is at the top left. The OX axis (horizontal) represents the intensity of the light, from shadows (at the left) to highlights (at the right). The OY axis (vertical) represents the number of tonal variants, from 0 (at the top of the graph) to infinite (at the bottom). To sum-up, the M8's DNGs provide more tonal resolution than a linear 12-bit file only in the deep shadows; more tonal resolution than the typical linear 8-bit files (JPG and TIFF) in the midtones; and even less information than linear 8-bit files in the highlights. 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 Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/19830-official-response-from-leica-on-laundry-list/?do=findComment&comment=218072'>More sharing options...
ho_co Posted April 2, 2007 Share #146 Posted April 2, 2007 The Leica M framelins have always been sized for the close focus limit of the lens. Actually, they were previously accurate for a greater distance (2 or 3 m as I recall) but that meant that at close distances you would get less on the film than appeared in the frame. With the M8, Leica reset the framelines to be accurate at 0.7 m so you will not get less to the sensor than you expected. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted April 2, 2007 Share #147 Posted April 2, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Kudo's to Leica for being so responsive. Now with the compliments out of the way, on to my rant I'm not buying this explanation. They trust the user to turn lens detection on and off and make decisions about exposure compensation and ISO selection via menus all of which can be left at a setting that can screw up your photos if you forget about it. But they want this one feature to be decided by the camera in 'point and shoot' mode. Leica M is all about direct manual control by the photographer. This is a feature users should demand. I understand some marketing guy might think the present set-up gives Leica an edge. But I think this is wrong-headed and simplistic. Any thing that makes the M8 easier and more flexible in use, and gives users more options will accrue to Leica's long term benefit. The long line of used Leica lenses, CV and Zeiss M compatible products, all these options make the Leica M platform more attractive to users and work in Leica's favor and expand the market it serves. If the reason for the lack of this option is an engineer wanting to protect us from ourselves then that would be even worse. When in doubt always let the photographer have control! I am in 100% agreement with all of the above. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandymc Posted April 3, 2007 Share #148 Posted April 3, 2007 This is the graphic presented in the article of the LFI magazine. The origin is at the top left. The OX axis (horizontal) represents the intensity of the light, from shadows (at the left) to highlights (at the right). The OY axis (vertical) represents the number of tonal variants, from 0 (at the top of the graph) to infinite (at the bottom). To sum-up, the M8's DNGs provide more tonal resolution than a linear 12-bit file only in the deep shadows; more tonal resolution than the typical linear 8-bit files (JPG and TIFF) in the midtones; and even less information than linear 8-bit files in the highlights. Another way to look at this is to look at levels per exposure zone (or stop). The way that it plays out for an M8 DNG versus 12- and 14-bit linear encoding is: Levels per zone Zone Leica DNG 12-bit 14-bit 0 7 4 15 1 4 4 16 2 4 8 32 3 7 16 64 4 9 32 128 5 14 64 256 6 18 128 512 7 27 256 1024 8 37 512 2048 9 54 1024 4096 10 74 2048 8192 Bottom line is that in zone 0 (deep black), you get 7 levels vs. 4 levels as the LFI article states, in zone 1 the same, and from there on, an M8 DNG has fewer levels that a 12-bit file. However, 7 levels vs. 4 in very dark blacks is an advantage that is marginal at best, given that that is also where any noise is. Sandy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveP Posted April 5, 2007 Share #149 Posted April 5, 2007 Did we ever get a response on whether the current 50/2.8 can be collapsed on the M8? There are many threads, but no final answer I can locate. I have read that the manual says no, many people do it without problems, Leica USA reps are saying you can, Leica USA tech support says no and it's not depth but rather side clearance. Could we get a definitive answer and if no, why not? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dspeltz Posted April 5, 2007 Share #150 Posted April 5, 2007 yes you can use the current 50mm f/2.8 elmarit collapsible on the m8. I use it often. It is really very nice for walking around with minimal weight and size. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
timwalker Posted April 5, 2007 Share #151 Posted April 5, 2007 Guy... I think number 27 was written by me... and just FYI that problem actually didn't show up until I switched to 1.092. Thanks for all your work on compiling this list and soliciting Leica's response. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted April 5, 2007 Share #152 Posted April 5, 2007 Thanks Tim , Okay I will bring it up again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 5, 2007 Share #153 Posted April 5, 2007 Did we ever get a response on whether the current 50/2.8 can be collapsed on the M8? There are many threads, but no final answer I can locate. I have read that the manual says no, many people do it without problems, Leica USA reps are saying you can, Leica USA tech support says no and it's not depth but rather side clearance. Could we get a definitive answer and if no, why not? I can only say: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptomsu Posted April 8, 2007 Share #154 Posted April 8, 2007 In the Nikon community, while the "compressed NEF" issue erupts occasionally, it's really been a bit of a non-issue, simply because many of the high end Nikons (e.g., D200) allow both compressed and uncompressed NEFs as an option. In practice, nobody has managed to convincingly show an example where it made a practical difference. In the case of Leica however, there is no such option, and the debate rages on. Nothing like an absence of data to fuel controversy..... Suggestion to Leica: put in the 16-bit option - even if nobody uses it, at least the noise on the forums will go away. Sandy I suggested this already several times in the German Forum, but it looks that Leica has some reasons why they do not give us both options. No idea what these reasons are, but it looks like it will never happen in the M8 :-( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grober Posted April 10, 2007 Share #155 Posted April 10, 2007 New lenses? I'll take these two: 24/2 and 60/2.8 (with removable macro eyes). Both wearing a USA street price of $2K or less, if you please. -g Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egpj Posted April 14, 2007 Share #156 Posted April 14, 2007 Thanks Guy for taking this up with them. As for my comments: 8 seems to be a quite lame excuse, because one always could use "detection enabled/disabled/manual" and leave the choice to the user. lol @ reply 22 27 has not been fixed to my experience. Dirk I think it is "lame" as well. This is the first comment I have made on the M8 since it came out. Mostly because I canceled my order and got a nice MP3 kit instead. I would be open to purchasing one if only Leica would listen to the customers that want the ability to manually select what lens they have mounted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riley Posted April 14, 2007 Share #157 Posted April 14, 2007 I think it is "lame" as well. This is the first comment I have made on the M8 since it came out. Mostly because I canceled my order and got a nice MP3 kit instead. I would be open to purchasing one if only Leica would listen to the customers that want the ability to manually select what lens they have mounted. this wins my vote for the 'takes the cake' award Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrid Posted April 15, 2007 Share #158 Posted April 15, 2007 I suggested this already several times in the German Forum, but it looks that Leica has some reasons why they do not give us both options. No idea what these reasons are, but it looks like it will never happen in the M8 :-( Anyone up to hacking the M8 firmware? Someone did it with the Canon 300D and unlocked all of the features that made it equal to the 20D. The prototype M8 cameras wrote uncompressed files. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted April 15, 2007 Share #159 Posted April 15, 2007 As I recall, the early cameras delivered 16-bit files, but not DNGs. According to LFI, someone had to write a special decoder to unravel the 16-bit file for comparison with the compressed DNG. Leica could give us an option: in the menu, choose either 1) uncompromised RAW file that needs a RAW converter; or 2) 8-bit compacted DNG as now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted April 15, 2007 Share #160 Posted April 15, 2007 As I recall, the early cameras delivered 16-bit files, but not DNGs. According to LFI, someone had to write a special decoder to unravel the 16-bit file for comparison with the compressed DNG. Leica could give us an option: in the menu, choose either 1) uncompromised RAW file that needs a RAW converter; or 2) 8-bit compacted DNG as now. It would have the additional benefit for Mac users that Aperture would be fully functional with an M8. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.