Firmware 1.102

[AlanJW]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One of the interesting things about the new firmware is the selection menu for the WATE. It is interesting because it is now obvious and demonstrated that Leica has the technological capability to allow lens focal length selection via the firmware and has chosen not to do so. As has been discussed, they may have their reasons for not allowing the selection (avoiding user error), but everyone who wants this should sign the petition that has been posted. The suggestion that we need to be protected against mistakes is completely inconsistent wth having a camera with manual controls. It seems ok for us to leave the ISO at the wrong point, use a specific WB and forget to change it, or simply set an f/stop or shutter speed incorrectly, or misfocus --- but somehow if the wrong lens is selected on a menu, a disaster will occur. So my vote is to keep this item in our laundry list and stay vocal on it.

[Advertisement]

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

[scho]

Bill,

I have no confirmed or measured information on this, but if you go back to my original post when the Leica UV/IR filters were first shipping, I commented that it looked as though the reflectivity of the Leica filters was a bit less strong than the B+W filters. I have both versions that I have tested a bit on longer focal length lenses (35 and 50) and see no visible differences in the images. On something as wide as the WATE, or CV15, my thinking is that the slight differneces in filter design and reflectivity could make a bit of difference. I have a 39mm Leica UV/IR filter on my CV 15/4.5 lens right now and using the WATE coding at 16 in the new menu, I get no cyan contamination at all. I have not tested a B+W filter in that configuration, as I do not have one. My suspicion would be that there might be a bit more cyan drift at that super wide angle, just from my casual observations of the two filters earlier on. Again, I have no measurements to baset this on, but do know that the Leica UV/IR filter on my CV 15 codes as a WATE at 16 produces a darn near perfectly corrected (vignette and cyan drift) image.

 

LJ

 

I just tried my CV 15, coded as a WATE set for 16mm, with a B+W 486 UV/IR cut filter and it is also essentially perfect - no detectable cyan drift. If you chimp your shots on the LCD you can get a quick before/after preview. When the image first comes up on the LCD you can see the cyan corners and then after a couple of seconds the processing kicks in and the cast disappears.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Bill,

Here is a procedure that will allow you change to anything you want:

 

1. Set the exposure number in the menu to "Standard"

2. Format the SD card in camera.

3. Reset the File Number in the menu.

4. Set exposure back to "Continuous"

5. Take one image

6. Shut off camera, remove SD card and place in card reader to computer.

7. Access the image in your Finder or Explorer (Mac or PC); rename the image number to whatever file number/image number you want. I would suggest Lyyyxxxx, with "y" being your preferred folder number and "x" being the frame number you want to start with. (You are making these changes to the file name on the card in the card reader.)

8. Properly remove card from card reader and return to camera.

9. Press "Play"; file will now display with newly renamed folder and file number. (Use "Info" to see this data.)

10. Expose another image to confirm and check file numbers.

11. Format SD card, and you are good to go from that point on.

 

You can use this procedure as often as you need or care to, but I have outlined a way that allows you to keep your file numbering on "Continuous" so you have some idea of how many total frames you may be taking.

 

Hope this helps.

 

LJ

 

Thanks, LJ. I followed the instructions and (at least on this alien camera) I have to rename both the pair of files (I shoot dng + jpg) and the directory under the DCIM directory.

 

The first time I tried this, I only changed the file names, and the camera said where were no files to be displayed.

 

I reformated and this time changed the file names and the directory name. I decided to move to 102 for the time being.

 

Works like a charm. Thanks.

[Shootist]

Bill you could make your life easier if you change the camera to DNG only before you do the file name/number change. Once it is changed you can set it back to DNG+Jpg/DNG (Only)/Jpg (Only) and the naming/numbering will carry over.

[wparsonsgisnet]

This is definitely not the way it should work.

It should turn on fully when the switch is turned to S, C or Timer.

I suggest you and Bill contact Leica support and send the camera in to be fixed.

 

There is a joke about the fellow who works for the circus and who takes an old friend to work with him one day.

 

They are standing between the bleachers talking and this fellow is saying:

"See how there are different acts in all the rings? Here come the elephants now and they're gonna ... awww! There he goes again. Making a mess all over the end of the ring.

 

"I'm the guy who has to clean that up. Man, I hate this."

 

Whereupon, his friend says, "If you don't like the job why don't you find another one?"

 

"What, and leave show business?"

 

The suggestion that I send this mainstay of my photographic life off on a trip of unknown duration is very unsettling. The (silly) extended turn-on sequence does me no harm, and it actually intriquing.

 

Man, I would hate to send the M8 off.

[Shootist]

I just tried my CV 15, coded as a WATE set for 16mm, with a B+W 486 UV/IR cut filter and it is also essentially perfect - no detectable cyan drift. If you chimp your shots on the LCD you can get a quick before/after preview. When the image first comes up on the LCD you can see the cyan corners and then after a couple of seconds the processing kicks in and the cast disappears.

 

I take it this menu option only is displayed when you have a coded WATE, or Lens coded as a WATE, attached to the camera.

[LJL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Bill,

I never had the problem with multiple directories, and that may have been a step I forgot about. Sorry. I just do not recall having to change folder names under the DCIM. Also, I do not shoot DNG + JPEG, so I only had one file to rename. Glad you pointed out the additional item....makes it work more completely now.

 

Glad that you got things fixed for the file naming at least.

 

LJ

[LJL]

I take it this menu option only is displayed when you have a coded WATE, or Lens coded as a WATE, attached to the camera.

 

That be correct, Ed. And it took me a few tries to finally get the CV 15 coding to work, but now it does so flawlessly.

 

LJ

[jlm]

Bill:

thanks, but I only wanted to see the Leica retaining ring, and it looks like that method (split-ring) is too hokey.

[Shootist]

The suggestion that I send this mainstay of my photographic life off on a trip of unknown duration is very unsettling. The (silly) extended turn-on sequence does me no harm, and it actually intriquing.

 

Man, I would hate to send the M8 off.

 

I agree with you 100% and I don't do photography for a living. Even though I have a M3, or 2, to fall back on I would really miss not having my M8.

Luckily I have not had any problems, YET.

[scott kirkpatrick]

Has anybody else checked out the ability of 1.102 to remove red vignetting in IR-rich lighting like tungsten? It's dark here, so i loaded the new firmware, and got out my coded 24/2.8 asph with a B&W 486, focus at infinity, lens detection ON + UV/IR and shot an incandescent lamp from fairly close through several layers of Kleenex (no Pringles lid available at the moment). Green corners persisted in the view on the lcd. Guy's evidence is pretty clear that daylight and perhaps strobe shots are nicely corrected (although he is using Leica filters, and I don't have one for the 24). The right correction to make does depend on the distribution of colors present, so this is a potential limit to what the firmware can give us.

 

scott

[wparsonsgisnet]

Bill,

I never had the problem with multiple directories, and that may have been a step I forgot about. Sorry. I just do not recall having to change folder names under the DCIM. Also, I do not shoot DNG + JPEG, so I only had one file to rename. Glad you pointed out the additional item....makes it work more completely now.

 

Glad that you got things fixed for the file naming at least.

 

LJ

 

LJ, it worked as described, with the small addition I mentioned. That addition may only be required for the two of us who have an M8 that requires a 2-step turn-on method.

 

Perhaps it is fitting that this company that produces lenses that give such magical and mysterious images to make a few cameras that are mysterious.

 

It's nice to have this worked out since it mystified me previously. I tried just to set the numbers back and then reset in the menu, but those options appeared intermittently in my menu system.

 

There are always mysteries about Leicas.

 

The M4 has a self-timer lever. If one sets the camera on 1 second exposure and also uses the self-timer. then the camera delivers a 1 1/2 secoond exposure.

 

The M6 (pre-ttl) turns off the battery when the shutter speed dial is set to B(ulb).

 

At least 2 M8's have intriguing turn-on sequences.

 

Thanks again for the help.

[finkaudio]

Bill,

I have no confirmed or measured information on this, but if you go back to my original post when the Leica UV/IR filters were first shipping, I commented that it looked as though the reflectivity of the Leica filters was a bit less strong than the B+W filters. I have both versions that I have tested a bit on longer focal length lenses (35 and 50) and see no visible differences in the images. On something as wide as the WATE, or CV15, my thinking is that the slight differneces in filter design and reflectivity could make a bit of difference. I have a 39mm Leica UV/IR filter on my CV 15/4.5 lens right now and using the WATE coding at 16 in the new menu, I get no cyan contamination at all. I have not tested a B+W filter in that configuration, as I do not have one. My suspicion would be that there might be a bit more cyan drift at that super wide angle, just from my casual observations of the two filters earlier on. Again, I have no measurements to baset this on, but do know that the Leica UV/IR filter on my CV 15 codes as a WATE at 16 produces a darn near perfectly corrected (vignette and cyan drift) image.

 

LJ

 

Hi,

 

I used the CV15 with the new firmware and it overcompensates with the 486, giving somewhat redish corners. It's OK with the Leica Filter.

 

My 24mm works perfect with the 486 filter. The 21mm needs to be tested, but my guess is it needs the Leica filter.

So my conclusion is: down to 24mm, 486 is OK, below, you need the Leica filter.

 

Best regards

 

KH

[scho]

Hi,

 

I used the CV15 with the new firmware and it overcompensates with the 486, giving somewhat redish corners. It's OK with the Leica Filter.

 

My 24mm works perfect with the 486 filter. The 21mm needs to be tested, but my guess is it needs the Leica filter.

So my conclusion is: down to 24mm, 486 is OK, below, you need the Leica filter.

 

Best regards

 

KH

Hmm..I'm not getting red corners with my B+W 486 using the CV 15, coded as 16mm WATE. Is your CV 15 coded as a WATE, with 16mm selected in the menu? Also, my 486 is "reverse" mounted (threads facing out) inside the lens hood. Wonder if we are seeing filter lot variation or something else. My CV 15 shots are fine with no cyan drift that I can see and certainly no "overcompensated" reddish casts in the corners.

 

Quick sample shot with coded CV 15, set to 16mm WATE, with B+W 486 UV/IR:

L1000616-Edit.jpg photo - Carl Schofield photos at pbase.com

[fotografr]

Can anyone tell me if it is okay for M8 firmware update from 1.09 to 1.102 without performing the 1.092 firmware update? TIA.

 

No problem whatsoever.

[DaveEP]

This is definitely not the way it should work.

It should turn on fully when the switch is turned to S, C or Timer.

I suggest you and Bill contact Leica support and send the camera in to be fixed.

 

Send it off to be fixed? Hmm... we don't yet know it's faulty.

 

The problem is that the version we have may have been designed this way, or perhaps the firmware is in a certain 'mode' that makes it do this, and there is a simple fix (via the keypad?).

 

Until Leica can tell us if it's normal (in which I will live with it) or a fault (in which case I will have to figure out which 4-6 weeks I intend to sleep 24/7 so I can send it in without missing it), we don't know if it even needs sending in at all.....

 

DOES ANY ONE have two cameras that are both the same way (either need the shutter press or not) or TWO cameras that are different (one each way)? I would like to know if it has anything to do with 'settings' in the user profile....

[LJL]

LJ, it worked as described, with the small addition I mentioned. That addition may only be required for the two of us who have an M8 that requires a 2-step turn-on method.

 

Perhaps it is fitting that this company that produces lenses that give such magical and mysterious images to make a few cameras that are mysterious.

 

It's nice to have this worked out since it mystified me previously. I tried just to set the numbers back and then reset in the menu, but those options appeared intermittently in my menu system.

 

There are always mysteries about Leicas.

 

The M4 has a self-timer lever. If one sets the camera on 1 second exposure and also uses the self-timer. then the camera delivers a 1 1/2 secoond exposure.

 

The M6 (pre-ttl) turns off the battery when the shutter speed dial is set to B(ulb).

 

At least 2 M8's have intriguing turn-on sequences.

 

Thanks again for the help.

 

Bill,

Are you sure all of this is not from living too close to Marblehead and all that uranium-rich granite

 

There are some interesting things and sequences to get other things to work, but once we start to get them figured out, seems to work pretty well.

 

LJ

[misha]

Hmm..I'm not getting red corners with my B+W 486 using the CV 15, coded as 16mm WATE. Is your CV 15 coded as a WATE, with 16mm selected in the menu? Also, my 486 is "reverse" mounted (threads facing out) inside the lens hood. Wonder if we are seeing filter lot variation or something else. My CV 15 shots are fine with no cyan drift that I can see and certainly no "overcompensated" reddish casts in the corners.

 

how do you code cv15 as 16mm WATE?

 

when lens detection On + UV/IR option is selected (with cv15 attached) and set, no new selector appears to choose between 16, 18 and 21...

 

thanks

misha

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[wparsonsgisnet]

Bill,

Are you sure all of this is not from living too close to Marblehead and all that uranium-rich granite ... LJ

 

Nope, and I'm trying not to bang my head too hard on the wall of life.

 

Regards,

[Guest tummydoc]

Has anybody else checked out the ability of 1.102 to remove red vignetting in IR-rich lighting like tungsten? It's dark here, so i loaded the new firmware, and got out my coded 24/2.8 asph with a B&W 486, focus at infinity, lens detection ON + UV/IR and shot an incandescent lamp from fairly close through several layers of Kleenex (no Pringles lid available at the moment). Green corners persisted in the view on the lcd. Guy's evidence is pretty clear that daylight and perhaps strobe shots are nicely corrected (although he is using Leica filters, and I don't have one for the 24). The right correction to make does depend on the distribution of colors present, so this is a potential limit to what the firmware can give us.

 

scott

 

I just tried a similar experiment. Shot the white wall in my office with 21mm ASPH (coded) first with only the fluorescent overheads, then with only the incandescent table lamps. With the incandescents there was a very tiny bit (almost none) of residual cyan in the corners (was using a 486 because Leica E55's haven't arrived), but with the fluorescents there was pronounced red in the corners. I tried it with manual WB as well as auto WB just to make sure that the firmware wasn't factoring in the WB to determine the amount of IR in the light source. It would appear the firmware correction is a fixed one, set at some arbitrary level, a one-size-fits-most setting if you will. Perhaps the Leica filter will have more possibility to be totally corrected in more situations, but definitely not in all lighting. It's something expectable from reverse-engineering a solution to a problem. I don't feel so bad now that many of my dearest lenses don't have codes. I believe I will refrain from paying for coding for any of my lenses (the 21 is a loaner) and compile a list of Panotools settings by trial-and-error. If with firmware and coding I have to use Panotools to get rid of 1% of the cyan (or an overcompensation of red), I may as well use it for 100% of the correction and skip the time and expense of coding.

 

BTW, I also took shots with a Heliopan Digital Filter on the 21 ASPH (borrowed off my 90 Apo-ASPH) and I'm seeing very little if any difference from the 486.