Firmware 1.102

[finkaudio]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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.

 

What can I say? So you are a happy Bunny :-) and I need to use the Leica filter. But that's OK for me :-)

 

 

Maybe variations in the 486 filter was the reason for Leica to go somewhere else. However, I'm happy to have a solution and that's all I need. I remember that Guy also said he had to set the 15mm to 18mm in order to get it right on the CV15... but I'm not 100%sure.

 

Best regards

 

Karl-Heinz

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest guy_mancuso]

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

 

 

Great Karl exactly my experience also. have not tested the 21mm yet either. Maybe someone can do that.

[scho]

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

I just used a Sharpie to place a black mark on the lens mount corresponding to the WATE code position. If you have done this and your camera doesn't automatically bring up the 16, 18, 21 choices then it is likely that your lens is not properly coded. I had do do it twice do get it right.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

With the B+W on the WATE i had to cheat and set it on 16mm and use the 18mm to shoot to fully correct at 18mm. 16mm with the B+W still leaves the cyan cast and the leica is perfect on the CV 15mm and WATE so like I mentioned earlier for these extreme wides use the leica filter. the 21mm needs more testing but from 24mm up the B+W are good. Now the CV 15mm you want to code it for the WATE so the lens option comes up and you can select 16mm

[Guest tummydoc]

Great Karl exactly my experience also. have not tested the 21mm yet either. Maybe someone can do that.

 

I did, on the previous page. Not with Leica filter (I don't think they have the E55 yet?) just with 486 and Heliopan. Both so close as to be a draw, both very slight residual cyan under strong incandescent lamp, both noticably red (corners) under fluorescent. The Leica filter will probably take out the last bit of cyan under incandescent, but then I would expect even more red corners under fluorescent. It appears the amount of cyan is dependent on the amount of IR present, and the in-camera correction may be fixed for lighting with maximum IR (incandescent).

[misha]

I just used a Sharpie to place a black mark on the lens mount corresponding to the WATE code position. If you have done this and your camera doesn't automatically bring up the 16, 18, 21 choices then it is likely that your lens is not properly coded. I had do do it twice do get it right.

 

got it, thanks.

i am very new to all this tinkering and somewhat hesitant to do such manipulations on my own.

 

cheers

m

[Shootist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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....

 

 

Ok there are around 5000 M8's in the hands of users, maybe more like 8000. This is not a feature of your particular model/version. My M8 is serial # 3100977, under 1000, and does not do this and there are only a handful of users on this forum that have reported this fault. Your camera is faulty. You should not have to hit the shutter release after turning the switch to on to turn the camera fully on.

No need for Leica to respond.

[scott kirkpatrick]

It appears the amount of cyan is dependent on the amount of IR present, and the in-camera correction may be fixed for lighting with maximum IR (incandescent).

 

It isn't the amount of IR present that makes it hard to get a one-size fits all correction. It's the quality of the visible light, starting with its color temperature.

 

At each radius in the image, the correction program can only make a single adjustment to the relative intensity of the red channel. But the effect of passing thru an IR-cut filter at an angle is to cut off all light below a frequency which is angle-dependent. In the 15-16mm range, which has an angle of view of 90 degrees on the M8, the cutoff moves 100 nm into the visible reds at the extreme edge of the frame. In an arctic daylight snow scene this may cut off a few percent of the red channel intensity, but in a tropical sunset or a warm candle-lit available light shot it might affect 20 per cent (I'm pulling these numbers out of the air to get the basic idea across), just because of the different qualities of the light. (Technically, the difference is the frequency spectrum of the light present illuminating the scene.)

 

So the corrections won't be perfect, but should work for typical 5000-6500K lighting. And it's certainly worth testing to see when we should worry about this.

 

scott

[robsteve]

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

 

You also have to have the cv 15mm in a 90mm adapter so that the proper frame lines are activated to bring up the WATE code. If your adapter is brass, it may be too tarnished to bring up the brass as white.

 

Here is my adapter coded as a WATE. It brings up the menu to select the focal length.

 

[misha]

You also have to have the cv 15mm in a 90mm adapter so that the proper frame lines are activated to bring up the WATE code. If your adapter is brass, it may be too tarnished to bring up the brass as white.

 

Here is my adapter coded as a WATE. It brings up the menu to select the focal length.

 

 

the adaptor came together with cv15 from photovillage and looks similar to yours.

did you apply all the dots yourself? most of my 15mm images become b/w anyways, so i am not sure if the risk of doing something silly on my own is worth benefits of coding.

any nyc users reading this? it would nice to compare

misha

[robsteve]

the adaptor came together with cv15 from photovillage and looks similar to yours.

did you apply all the dots yourself? most of my 15mm images become b/w anyways, so i am not sure if the risk of doing something silly on my own is worth benefits of coding.

any nyc users reading this? it would nice to compare

misha

 

It has to be a Leica 9cm adapter in order to not have a cutout in it where the coding needs to go. You may just have a generic 5omm adapter, which will not bring up the 90mm framlines, plus has the cutout preventing coding.

[Guest tummydoc]

It isn't the amount of IR present that makes it hard to get a one-size fits all correction. It's the quality of the visible light, starting with its color temperature.

 

At each radius in the image, the correction program can only make a single adjustment to the relative intensity of the red channel. But the effect of passing thru an IR-cut filter at an angle is to cut off all light below a frequency which is angle-dependent. In the 15-16mm range, which has an angle of view of 90 degrees on the M8, the cutoff moves 100 nm into the visible reds at the extreme edge of the frame. In an arctic daylight snow scene this may cut off a few percent of the red channel intensity, but in a tropical sunset or a warm candle-lit available light shot it might affect 20 per cent (I'm pulling these numbers out of the air to get the basic idea across), just because of the different qualities of the light. (Technically, the difference is the frequency spectrum of the light present illuminating the scene.)

 

So the corrections won't be perfect, but should work for typical 5000-6500K lighting. And it's certainly worth testing to see when we should worry about this.

 

scott

 

Allright, whatever the cause, it's a fixed correction not a variable correction, although the cyan does vary. When we should worry is whenever the light quality differs from the one the correction is based on. FWIW to me it's not much more (and maybe less) of a hassle to correct the cyan in postprocessing than to let the camera do it and then go back and correct all the shots where the firmware corrected more or less than required. 5000-6500K is only "typical" lighting for people who shoot typically in 5000-6500K light. A lot of situations many of us shoot in are <5000K. Fortunately I'm an amateur, without deadlines or clients to please, and more of a collector than a shooter, so it isn't a huge issue. If I was a pro I might be tempted to go out and get all my lenses coded and reduce the number of shots I need to re-correct by as many as possible. I'm just a bit disconcerted that the firmware doesn't look at the WB and vary the cyan correction (if that would be helpful).

[robsteve]

It isn't the amount of IR present that makes it hard to get a one-size fits all correction. It's the quality of the visible light, starting with its color temperature.

 

So the corrections won't be perfect, but should work for typical 5000-6500K lighting. And it's certainly worth testing to see when we should worry about this.

 

scott

 

Who said Leica wasn't taking the colour temperature into account when making the correction? I remember that they mentioned complex computer modeling and tests to create the the firmware for the UV/IR cyan correction.

[chetccox]

Then I guess it is as useful as the auto white balance ? Great!

[grdglass]

Hmm..I'm not getting red corners with my B+W 486 using the CV 15, coded as 16mm WATE.

 

 

Carl,

 

Now that your CV 15 is coded as 16mm WATE, which view finder are you using - 15mm or 21mm?

 

Helene

[ericperlberg]

Ok there are around 5000 M8's in the hands of users, ...(snip) You should not have to hit the shutter release after turning the switch to on to turn the camera fully on.

No need for Leica to respond.

 

Well just to add to the confusion, when I updated earlier today (and reading the forums at the same time), I turned the camera off and on as instructed in the firmware update and nothing happened. I touched the release and the camera came to life. Hmmm I thought, what was that then? Soon after I was reading about it in this thread. Not good I thought. Then I picked up my camera and turned it on and it came to life without touching the shutter release. Have tried it several times since and it has worked as before the upgrade (I was still at firmware 9.0), ie no need to touch the shutter release.

[Philinflash]

4. Save the unzipped file m8-1_xx.upd at the top level of the card’s folder structure. xx stands for the version.

 

[/color]

 

I would add a sub-step to your #4 above as follows. "Be sure to delete the downloaded zip file ("file m8-1_xx.zip") from the directory of the SD card after it has been unzipped. Failure to do so may cause the in-camera installation process to fail because it 'sees' two different files with similar names."

 

The installation process is not prepared to work around this or to even alert the user to the problem. It just leaves you in limbo.

 

Philip Kozloff

[wlaidlaw]

Ok there are around 5000 M8's in the hands of users, maybe more like 8000. This is not a feature of your particular model/version. My M8 is serial # 3100977, under 1000, and does not do this and there are only a handful of users on this forum that have reported this fault. Your camera is faulty. You should not have to hit the shutter release after turning the switch to on to turn the camera fully on.

No need for Leica to respond.

 

Ed,

 

I think someone has posted that serial numbers seem to be all over the place. Mine was new at the end of January, and came with firmware 1.09 pre-installed but only has a serial number of 31000302. Maybe mine was one that was sent back and re-manufactured. The box was sealed when I got it, so it had obviously come straight from Leica and given the scramble for M8's at that time, was not going to have sat around unsold for a couple of months. Mine turns on straight away and always has apart from the two days when I had 1.091 installed.

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[scott kirkpatrick]

Who said Leica wasn't taking the colour temperature into account when making the correction? I remember that they mentioned complex computer modeling and tests to create the the firmware for the UV/IR cyan correction.

 

Good point. maybe they try to correct the correction for whatever the AWB is telling them. But since they have declared the AWB broken and not to be sorted out until a future release of the firmware, I think that would be a risky approach, not one you would expect Leica to try. The test for this is to see if red corners or at least visibly different vignetting corrections are seen on the occasional orange frames that come up when the AWB inference is mistaken.

 

scott

[okram]

Green band is still here