Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hankg

Sign a petition for menu selectable lens profiles

Recommended Posts

Guest guy_mancuso

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok, let's assume you are correct. The Board of Directors could say: "However, since the coding is mostly needed because of their engineering screw-up that requires filters, let's rub-salt in the wound and make it harder and more costly to resolve the problem really piss some customer's off that then file a law suit and wipe out not just the profits but the revenue from all of our lens sales just so we don't lose the one or two lens sales we would lose by helping our customers out."

 

Is this what you are suggesting is a good business decision?

 

 

Well I was going to follow up on this part because there was the IR issue came to light that was not expected so the coding becomes even more important for the end users. So now this becomes a even harder decision for them because it becomes a matter of fairness to the M8 owner themselves . What do we do , just to be nice do we just say okay here it is or can we charge a small amount for it and make it a seperate option for folks.

 

These are just some idea's and not knowing what will happen but figuring out what is best all around

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok, let's assume you are correct. The Board of Directors could say: "However, since the coding is mostly needed because of their engineering screw-up that requires filters, let's rub-salt in the wound and make it harder and more costly to resolve the problem really piss some customer's off that then file a law suit and wipe out not just the profits but the revenue from all of our lens sales just so we don't lose the one or two lens sales we would lose by helping our customers out."

 

Is this what you are suggesting is a good business decision?

 

Guy and I were on the phone discussing this as you posted. My position is that the M8's IR-problem is indeed the reason that there should *not* be an extra charge for a lens menu. The need for filters and the resulting cyan drift make coding, essentially, a necessity for color work with 35 mm and wider lenses. One can use Cornerfix (which is excellent) but that's a workaround and it requires one to remember which lens was used for which picture.

 

I'm with you on the value of not rubbing salt in the wound but, again, I don't think a lawsuit is even something that should be mentioned. There's no reason for anyone to be suing Leica over M8 issues.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guy,

Bottom line, if there weren't CV lenses available, I doubt I would have bought the M8 and started down this path. I am a perfect example of how Leica can expand their user base and over time have a long term customer.

 

Exactly, and there are potentially thousands more customers like you.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
Guy,

I understand and respect your opinion on this but have a look at my post above. Bottom line, if there weren't CV lenses available, I doubt I would have bought the M8 and started down this path. I am a perfect example of how Leica can expand their user base and over time have a long term customer.

 

Terry it is a very good point but sort of a seperate issue in a way because now Leica has come out with lenses that are more affordable too. But you are correct and many folks are left short in the pocket getting the M8 and now need glass for it. totally understand that but Leica is not making a coding for you directly and your 21mm skopar they will make the code for a Leica 21mm and you will cheat and use that. You have to understand it is for there company and products that they build for and not 3rd party lenses, this part is the legal issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would Leica want to invest money in order to allow people to use competitors lenses?

 

A lens menu will be useful to people who own Leica lenses, both those that are not yet coded (for various personal logistical, etc. reasons) and those that cannot currently be coded.

 

A more open system sells more cameras, as the gentleman above (new to RF) demonstrated. Selling more cameras, long term, also means selling more lenses.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
Guy and I were on the phone discussing this as you posted. My position is that the M8's IR-problem is indeed the reason that there should *not* be an extra charge for a lens menu. The need for filters and the resulting cyan drift make coding, essentially, a necessity for color work with 35 mm and wider lenses. One can use Cornerfix (which is excellent) but that's a workaround and it requires one to remember which lens was used for which picture.

 

I'm with you on the value of not rubbing salt in the wound but, again, I don't think a lawsuit is even something that should be mentioned. There's no reason for anyone to be suing Leica over M8 issues.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

I agree on both counts Sean , now the question is were do they go from here on how to make everyone happy at the end of the day. i brought up that whole post to get folks thinking in Leica's shoes on what is the best solution overall. But your correct the IR issue leaves a open door on what should be done overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No, they wouldn't need that. The camera already has provisions to specify "off, on and On+IR/UV".

 

I'd suggest that people not worry too much about theoretical implementations of the system. Also, Leica is not unable to multi-task with their engineering work. Work on one aspect of the camera does not bring other work on the camera to a grinding halt. This isn't a serial Christmas tree light circuit we're talking about.

 

It is "said" that there are two people working on the M8 firmware and, if so, I think their efforts are better directed elsewhere.

 

Sean, you've obviously given some thought to how this might work so perhaps you'd like to enlighten us. The devil, as they say, is in the detail.

 

If you think 3 entries in the menu is enough, what would I do to get the camera to recognise that I'm taking a coded lens without a filter off, am putting an uncoded lens with a filter on and therefore need to specify the change in both lens type and filter status?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[...] Zeiss and CV do not currently have permission to include these lens codes in their lenses. I've been discussing this issue with both companies since late last summer. The ball is in Leica's court and they are free to make whatever decisions they feel are best.[...]

 

I’m surprised Leica hasn’t turned this in to a revenue stream, licensing the encoding to other lens makers under very narrow terms to shield them from having to spin firmware changes or anything. I’d guess they’ve explored this internally but I’d see this as:

 

-- Revenue Steam

-- Little overhead if any at the engineering end

-- Over head would be administratveand legal (drafting terms and enforcing)

-- Don't even need to market it, the lens maker community is not all that big

 

Then from the external point of view, if others wanted to pay the fee they could enter the market on their terms.

 

Then again I’m on the outside of, looking in to, Leica’s business models and wanting to shape it to match my wants. I know, at least where I work, customer requests have to be considered in light of the effort to implement over the return on that investment (e.g. I work for a company, not a charity). But who knows maybe if they got plans around this for the M and the next R...

 

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Mark I'm not sure what the engineers are doing but i almost favor the get rid of the filter idea in the menu . Bottom line is most everyone knows to be using the filter, i know that may not go well with everyone but it really is the fact that both Leica and users agree on. So why have it now. On when it comes up is maybe when it does not see a coded lens. So for folks that have coded lenses this will not come up to bother them but if the camera sees no code than the menu option pop's up you make you lens selection and off you go until you change to a different lens. But the filter part i almost like to see go away, i could be wrong on that but most folks are using them anyway

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think an issue for licensing it to Zeiss and CV would be that they would want the same level of precision for their lenses that Leica provide for their own, even if it is not perfect. That could mean a ton of new corrections with the attendant development costs and storage issues. We do not know, for example, how close Leica is sailing to running out of memory to run the firmware.

 

As it is currently proposed, only a menu of Leica corrections would be available - which might themselves be subject to change over time - and it would be up to the user to pick the one most appropriate to their needs. It's also possible to think of changes to the Leica lens support over time which made support for other lenses less optimal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As it is currently proposed, only a menu of Leica corrections would be available - which might themselves be subject to change over time - and it would be up to the user to pick the one most appropriate to their needs.

 

Yes, that is exactly what I first proposed to Leica when I first started advocating for this nearly a year ago.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark I'm not sure what the engineers are doing but i almost favor the get rid of the filter idea in the menu . Bottom line is most everyone knows to be using the filter, i know that may not go well with everyone but it really is the fact that both Leica and users agree on. So why have it now. On when it comes up is maybe when it does not see a coded lens. So for folks that have coded lenses this will not come up to bother them but if the camera sees no code than the menu option pop's up you make you lens selection and off you go until you change to a different lens. But the filter part i almost like to see go away, i could be wrong on that but most folks are using them anyway

 

Guy

 

I think the issue can be debated without referring to either the moral or legal entanglements. The fact that Leica has announced the Summarits, and God knows when they will deliver if the 28 Elmarit is any benchmark, still doesn't address the entry level folks. The Summarits will be cheap only by comparison to other leica lenses. They are still very expensive compared to offerings by CV. Folks wanting to get into Rangefinder digital photography may already own CV lenses or, after spending almost $5K for the M8 have limited budget for new lenses. These are the people that, over time, will be buying crons and luxes as their disposable income increases. So I think Leica is missing the boat by not making it easy for these folks to get into the M8 and depend on the legend of the great Leica lenses to get additional money later.

 

Just MHO

 

Woody Spedden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lens menu will be useful to people who own Leica lenses, both those that are not yet coded (for various personal logistical, etc. reasons) and those that cannot currently be coded.

 

A more open system sells more cameras, as the gentleman above (new to RF) demonstrated. Selling more cameras, long term, also means selling more lenses.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Sean, you speculate, I speculate.

 

I just say its not that surprizing, that Leica does not hurry to add a function, which makes it more convenient to use competitors lenses on their body.

 

Still I hope they will do it anyways.

 

cheers, Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you think 3 entries in the menu is enough, what would I do to get the camera to recognise that I'm taking a coded lens without a filter off, am putting an uncoded lens with a filter on and therefore need to specify the change in both lens type and filter status?

 

 

People do this now -when I put a coded lens on I have to set the menu to ON with UV/IR if I switch to my uncoded Summilux I have to set the menu to OFF.

 

If they added one more option "profiles" when selected it would bring up a list of profiles to choose from. Maybe they would add 2: profiles and profiles UV/IR. The list would be in submenus that come up when those items are chosen normally they would be hidden from view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Terry it is a very good point but sort of a seperate issue in a way because now Leica has come out with lenses that are more affordable too. But you are correct and many folks are left short in the pocket getting the M8 and now need glass for it. totally understand that but Leica is not making a coding for you directly and your 21mm skopar they will make the code for a Leica 21mm and you will cheat and use that. You have to understand it is for there company and products that they build for and not 3rd party lenses, this part is the legal issue.

 

So, here is a realistic scenario, I spend $5,000 on the body and then another $4500 to get 3 summarits....for a hobby. Then a spare battery, handgrip, filter and magnifier for another $600 +. Kit is now over $10,000 (before tax). Gulp......hand wringing and much debate if this whole idea is rational in a world of dslr's.

 

Or, I can initially get into the same system with CV lenses save about $3500 (which takes away much of the angst about even buying the system in the first place) and decide as I go how I should spend that $3500 by perhaps picking my favorite focal length and getting Lux's and Crons which is EXACTLY what I just did and will continue to do as I get more confident in my ability and better understand the characteristics of the different lens choices.

 

I would rather have a customer that starts out slowly than no customer at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think an issue for licensing it to Zeiss and CV would be that they would want the same level of precision for their lenses that Leica provide for their own, even if it is not perfect. That could mean a ton of new corrections with the attendant development costs and storage issues. We do not know, for example, how close Leica is sailing to running out of memory to run the firmware.

 

As it is currently proposed, only a menu of Leica corrections would be available - which might themselves be subject to change over time - and it would be up to the user to pick the one most appropriate to their needs. It's also possible to think of changes to the Leica lens support over time which made support for other lenses less optimal.

 

No one is talking about Leica supporting third party lenses or adding any new profiles or taking 3rd party lenses into consideration when optimizing and updating profiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I would rather have a customer that starts out slowly than no customer at all.

 

 

Smart companies look to build long term relationships with customers and look at what the value of the client is over the entire life of that relationship. Fly by night outfits that have little to offer try and squeeze as much out of each transaction as they don't count on return business.

 

Acquisition of clients is the biggest cost for most businesses. Lowering the barrier to entry and making it easier for potential customers and existing customers to do business with you is a no brainer. But it will make it a little easier for someone to use a CV lens? so what? Once someone is on the Leica platform you have the opportunity to sell them on an ongoing basis. I would be willing to bet that 90% of M8 users will eventually buy a Leica lens and more then a few will buy many. The proof? Leica can't supply the demand right now despite competition from CV and Zeiss. Better to lose the sale because someone won't wait months for a lens.

 

As to $1200+ f/2.5 lenses being entry level? Gimme a break. I've got my eye on the 75 summarit but in no way do I consider it entry level.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It is "said" that there are two people working on the M8 firmware and, if so, I think their efforts are better directed elsewhere.

 

Sean, you've obviously given some thought to how this might work so perhaps you'd like to enlighten us. The devil, as they say, is in the detail.

 

If you think 3 entries in the menu is enough, what would I do to get the camera to recognise that I'm taking a coded lens without a filter off, am putting an uncoded lens with a filter on and therefore need to specify the change in both lens type and filter status?

 

For reasons I'm sure you can understand, I can only talk about a system in the hypothetical.

 

Via one current menu item, the camera already has the option to do three things when a coded lens is mounted:

 

1. Not detect the lens and apply no corrections.

2. Detect the lens and apply corrections that assume no IR-cut filter is mounted

3. Detect the lens and apply corrections that assume an IR-cut filter is mounted

 

A, hypothetical, lens menu system would essentially allow the photographer to specify a lens setting so that the camera behaves as if it had detected that lens by its six bit code.

So, for example, there could be a (perhaps optional) version of the firmware that added a new menu item called, for example, "Specify Lens Mounted". The default position for this setting would be "OFF". The other positions could specify focal lengths and a sub-menu could then specify lens models of that given focal length.

 

If a coded lens were detected by the camera's 6-bit sensor, the code detection could automatically supercede any manual lens settings. If a non-coded lens were mounted, the camera's behavior would be dictated by whether "Specify Lens Mounted" was set to off or to a specific lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sean, you speculate, I speculate.

 

I just say its not that surprizing, that Leica does not hurry to add a function, which makes it more convenient to use competitors lenses on their body.

 

Still I hope they will do it anyways.

 

cheers, Tom

 

Yes, we both can only speculate on sales for Leica. But the added flexibility that this system would give photographers is not speculative.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark I'm not sure what the engineers are doing but i almost favor the get rid of the filter idea in the menu . Bottom line is most everyone knows to be using the filter, i know that may not go well with everyone but it really is the fact that both Leica and users agree on. So why have it now. On when it comes up is maybe when it does not see a coded lens. So for folks that have coded lenses this will not come up to bother them but if the camera sees no code than the menu option pop's up you make you lens selection and off you go until you change to a different lens. But the filter part i almost like to see go away, i could be wrong on that but most folks are using them anyway

 

Hi Guy,

 

I don't think there's any need to get rid of the no-filter option in the detection menu. There are some people who do like to use the camera without filters sometimes (myself) or all the time. There are also some times in which the filters pretty much need to be removed (reflections from candles, etc.). I think it should certainly stay.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy