Leica stubborness will hurt sales

[waterlenz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

The coding is not some sort of mysterious alchimist algorithm. It just indicates the focal length of the lens. There is nothing «to replicate». Then, the menu lets you chose one of three options depending on the coding and the use of a filter. Why doesn't it let you chose the focal lenght as well? Why? Totally unacceptable. And stupid. There is a limit to proprietary measures.

 

WRONG! The coding is specific to each lens. There are currently 3 ways of shooting coded 21mm lenses, two Elmarits and the new Tri-Elmar at 21mm. See the code list: Leica M8 Lens Codes. Each 21mm lens presumably has distinctive vignetting, and cyan correction needs.

Tom

[waterlenz]

[quote name=hammam

 

The cyan drift in wide-angle images is a much worse scenario. It's not a slight loss of quality' date=' almost invisible to the naked aye. You just can't use third party lenses at all. If Leica allowed it with an intelligent coding system, Leica lenses wouldn't lose their status as the best. .[/quote]

 

 

I do not think you understand the nature of the corrections. There must be separate mathematical functions for each lens, see my three 21 mm lens example previously posted in this thread. Each lens is built from a different lens formula and thus the fall-off will be different. Guy has shown that the extreme wide-angles are very sensitive to differences in cut filter. They simply can't put in a generic system as you suggest. It is NOT BS!!

Tom

[Advertisement]

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

[jrc]

One thing that could be done -- perhaps by the guy doing the machining on the WATE filter/shade combo -- is to mill half-washers to fit around the base of a Leica lens mounting ring, with holes cut for the six bit coding, and alignment markers -- in other words a metal (or possibly plastic) stencil. Include in the Ziplock bag two sharpies, siler/white and black, and a sheet with the lens code. This would make easy and quick to self-administer the lens codes to any lenses that have the Leica mount; and when the sharpie wears off, it woud be simply to re-apply. Sell the kit for $50, and make several thousand bucks from it.

 

JC

[waterlenz]

On older lenses, the mount is part of the lens body and there is the danger that the hard chrome surface get's damaged outside the coding recess area. Can you imagine you send in your old lens and get it back with the chrome damaged? They simply cannot replace such older parts if they get damaged.

 

And at the end of the day, the filter only needs correction from the coding only below 35mm.

 

Just my 2c....

 

ATB

 

KH

 

Interesting point, which also applies to non-Leica lenses. Liability of damage. But not much of an issue for Sharpies ;->!

Tom

[hammam]

Let's make this clear once and for all: we are not talking better quality, less quality or max quality here. We're talking normal quality. Abnormal images with wide angle lenses which show cyan vignetting are no quality at all. I want my M8 to just work normally without having to spend a fortune when I didn't expect I'd have to, and when Leica never warned me about it. Is it really too much to ask?

 

Guy, you speak the voice of reason, however, as far as I'm concerned, Leica haven't succeeded in making a «working M8» yet. Not for me, that is. Maybe for you and for people who own Leica wide angles or WATE, but not for me. I can't use my C/V 21 and 28, and I can't code them, and Leica won't code them and, yes, I get cyan vignetting, especially with the 21, and I don't like it. And I don't know what to do, and I feel like I'm starving and I'm looking at a nice platter ot chicken and fries, but I'm forbidden to eat it.

 

We were asked to be patient with the first defects, banding and blobbing. Then we were asked to be patient with the delays in returning the defective cameras after they were fixed. Then we were asked to be patient with the shipping of the filters. Now, we're asked to be patient with the cyan vignetting correction for everybody. For everybody. That's a lot of patience.

[waterlenz]

I guess the real loss of Leica will be at the moment that there will be a real alternative by Zeiss of Minilta or even an RD-2 with over 10mp and a better light receptivity at the edges. It will be very strange to see Leica opening their system just because of the introduction of an open system alternative, but it is not clear who will buy the M8 with the filter and with the possiblity to use properly only Leica lenses at such a stage.

 

Leica's strategy is really not clear to me. After all, most of us have mostly Leica lenses, it is not that we are trying to trick anyone. I coded 2 lenses already (and bought all the filters I need. probably, when Leica will send me the filters I will have an extra 2, so all the free lenses did not end up saving me much). I simnply prefer not to send my other lenses that are codable to Leica. I have better thing to do with my time than sending for service a perfectly working iterms).

 

These other companies should they introduce a digital rangefinder with interchangeable lenses will most likely have to have a lens-specific optimization program too. They may have to chip their lenses like Nikon or do something else. They may not be able to use the Leica coding system as is now implemented.

Tom

[innerimager]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Haven't read all the replies, forgive me if I repeat anyone. I suspect it has to do with the standard practice of a company promoting it's other products preferentially. Whatever Leica loses in M8 profit will more than be made up in selling new lenses to M8 buyers. The margin for lenses is much greater than for the M8. And as to those 2nd wave buyers, most of those M users have more old Leica lenses than Zeiss etc. anyway, and why not "encourage" them to buy the newer, most often better, and of course coded versions. We want Leica to survive and more so thrive, yes? Well, that won't be on margins for digital cameras in the volume they can sell Range Finders. It's all in the lenses. It's a lot like the inkjet printer market. The money is in the ink, we don't have to buy the brand name ink, but the parent company sure tries to get us too!. best......Peter

[waterlenz]

Please allow me to borrow this words from Stephen Gandy ... I think that history will record the M8 as another "Orphan Leica". The IR issue will no longer exist in the next iteration, and the bogus 6-bit coding will also not exist in the next iteration ... it is all too late to re-engineer a handicapped camera but they certainly could change their idea with the next one ... who thought of the idea at the first begining anyway? now they should know the forum's collective wisdom beats everything.

 

We shall see, thus far all digital sensors have IR sensitivity that has to be dealt with. Mostly by filters in front of the image plane. Is this where a lot of the CA comes from that needs to be fixed in PP? (light spreads into wavelengths like from a prism due to filter glass thickness - shoot a good tele obliquely through a good (flat glass) window as an example)

Tom

[waterlenz]

Well, for now this "next iteration"has not even progressed to the stage of vaporware, nor btw a Zeiss, Epson RD2 or Voigtlander RDF. I happen to feel I get more out of an actual camera in my hands, and the results, for me, justify this.

 

 

!!!! A bird in the hand....

Tom

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Very true Tom each coding is specific to the Leica lens it goes to and tells the firmware which lens is on the body and what specific parameters it should do. now just coding a Zeiss 21 as a leica may or may not work like a specific coded leica 21mm elmarit. It is a crap shoot really, we can guess that it will be okay and try it but you need to test the Zeiss and CV to see if they match up closely enough to work with. What we are asking for is a generic code in the menu option to say pick a 24mm there is not guarntee a Zeiss 25mm will replicate a leica 24mm exactly. Think about this do you really want leica to spend the time to go figure out 200 lenses than add that long list to a menu option. Hell if i had to do that the M8 would be history. What real benefit is that to leica , none . The best you can ask for is a generic 24mm lens and hope to hell it works okay with your lens . Now what really should be done by Zeiss and CV is contact leica buy the license to code there lenses and figure out there parameters than ask leica to include that in the firmwarehidden from the user, so it automatically works just like a leica 24mm coded lens would work with there specific parameters. now thatis what really should be done is these 3rd party lens companies to basically take the ball in there court and code there lenses and let them work with the M8 and pay a license fee to leica. if i was Leica i would say great because it actually helps them sell more M8's. okay that was the perfect world i just described but Zeiss and Cosina don't see it thatway becuase they have done nothing to do that. Is that really leica's problem than , think about that . leica may do it for there users but certainly not for Zeis or Cosina and not get a dime from it . Obviously they would rather you buy a leica lens,I mean this is just basic logic. if leica does this menu option i will tell you right now it will be because we asked for it and it won't make them one nickel from Zeiss and Cosina.

[waterlenz]

It WILL do the job, I'm pretty sure.

 

Again, the coding is not some kind of magical alchemist algorithm. It just tells the camera the focal length used (thus the FOV), and 21 will be interpreted as 21, be it C/V, Zeiss or Leica 21. That's all there is to it. I don't believe there is such things like optical specs of such and such lens and what not transmitted. The camera couldn't care less if the info comes from the mount of the lens or from the menu. All is needed is a few focal lengths from, say 15 to 35. Okay, let's say we are picky and want the full exif, then from 15 to 135 will do. That's it. Heck they could even use some kind 6-bit code in the menu, and publish a table. You know: for 28, enter 2, 4 and 5. Then you enter the info into the camera's memory. Just like Nikon's F6. Bingo.

 

No, it is more complicated, see my posts above. The corrections are very lens specific.

Tom

[waterlenz]

You know what ... my dearest friends, the best solution is a complete overhaul of the M system.

 

An electronic rangefinder and full electronic linkage between the lens and camera.

 

There are some secondhand Contaxes on the market.

Tom

[hammam]

I do not think you understand the nature of the corrections. There must be separate mathematical functions for each lens, see my three 21 mm lens example previously posted in this thread. Each lens is built from a different lens formula and thus the fall-off will be different. Guy has shown that the extreme wide-angles are very sensitive to differences in cut filter. They simply can't put in a generic system as you suggest. It is NOT BS!!

Tom

 

But, Tom, all this follows on from Leica's own fault, not mine! It is their problem! It is THEIR responsibility to correct this problem with no damage to me, the buyer. Not the other way around. The only solution they're offering today to correct their own mistakes is to trash my third party lenses and buy their lenses. They can do better than that, and they have to work harder. Sorry. As much as I like the M system, and as much as I love the M8, I am not blissfully smiling up at good old uncle Leica and taking it all in stride because, you know, they're Leica. I am their customer. I want my money's worth. I don't want to have to spend a dime on something that shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

Come on! Am I dreaming here or what?

[waterlenz]

What am i supposed to do with my Summicron 40/2, Summaron 35/2.8, Minolta 28/2.8 and the like in all that?

Buying new Leica lenses?

I did it already thanks but am i supposed to trash my dear old lenses including Leica's?

Or should i use a 'sharpie' after having spent little fortunes in 30 years for Leica?

And all this to compete against Cosina?

What a shame my friends.

A closed Leica is no more a Leica.

 

Canon does not care about your FD or earlier lenses either! We must move on. At least you can fit and use these lenses on your M8. There are newer lenses that outperform these. While I am a bit disapointed about not being able to use my Dual-Range, it is not the end of the world either!!

Tom

[Bill Sievers]

Dear Leica

 

I have a 90mm cron, a Noct, a 50mm cron, a 50mm elmar, a 50 mm summitar, a 35mm cron, a 35mm lux, a 28mm cron and a 21mm Elmarit. All are uncoded. I have a bunch of other non leica M comaptible lenses as well, but first things first. Why cant you fix the firmware to work with these lenses by menu selection? Why do I have to ship them off and WATE (pun intended). While you are at it, please let me know when I can expect the filters I ordered three months ago.

 

Sincerely yours,

 

A Happy M8 user

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Oliver sorry but you are dreaming and your fogetting what the coding was orginally intended to do and that was to optimize vignetting for a given lens period if you wanted this feature you have to buy a leica coded lenses , get it coded or do it yourself. Nothing has changed from that standard that was before the M8 came out. The IR issue is a completely seperate issue, yes it does have cause and effect but the coding now magicagly does two things instead of one. the only thing you need to add is the filters and you get two for free and that was leica's sorry we made a mistake gift. Forget all the other stuff becuase it does not relate like old firmware and such . Here it is we have 1.102 and what does Leica say for the best results we recommend using leica filters yada yada yada . Does that mean we have too. No it does not but we want too

[Iron Flatline]

Haven't read the other replies...

 

Are you a business person? You're commenting on a business strategy, so I'm interested in qualifying your comments.

 

I must disagree on one of your points: why would the lens coding keep customers away? Those who have old lenses are already committed, and those who are new will want to buy new ones. Keep in mind Leica does not benefit from the second-hand market.

[waterlenz]

Very true Tom each coding is specific to the Leica lens it goes to and tells the firmware which lens is on the body and what specific parameters it should do. now just coding a Zeiss 21 as a leica may or may not work like a specific coded leica 21mm elmarit. It is a crap shoot really, we can guess that it will be okay and try it but you need to test the Zeiss and CV to see if they match up closely enough to work with. What we are asking for is a generic code in the menu option to say pick a 24mm there is not guarntee a Zeiss 25mm will replicate a leica 24mm exactly. Think about this do you really want leica to spend the time to go figure out 200 lenses than add that long list to a menu option. Hell if i had to do that the M8 would be history. What real benefit is that to leica , none . The best you can ask for is a generic 24mm lens and hope to hell it works okay with your lens . Now what really should be done by Zeiss and CV is contact leica buy the license to code there lenses and figure out there parameters than ask leica to include that in the firmwarehidden from the user, so it automatically works just like a leica 24mm coded lens would work with there specific parameters. now thatis what really should be done is these 3rd party lens companies to basically take the ball in there court and code there lenses and let them work with the M8 and pay a license fee to leica. if i was Leica i would say great because it actually helps them sell more M8's. okay that was the perfect world i just described but Zeiss and Cosina don't see it thatway becuase they have done nothing to do that. Is that really leica's problem than , think about that . leica may do it for there users but certainly not for Zeis or Cosina and not get a dime from it . Obviously they would rather you buy a leica lens,I mean this is just basic logic. if leica does this menu option i will tell you right now it will be because we asked for it and it won't make them one nickel from Zeiss and Cosina.

 

 

What would be needed would be a table of parameters for each specific lens that would somehow have to be entered into your camera's FW. Not easy to do, especially given the keys available on the body. It would most likely have to be done via your computer and then fed into the camera via a card much like a FW update. One would need a table of data for each lens they wanted to use. The cyan shift appears to be non linear, therefore there is likely to be more than just the slope and Y-intercept that describes a linear function. I.e., more than two parameters just for cyan correction per lens. Who is going to provide the data? Leica should not be held responsible for other brand lenses. I think that PP via PS is a more likely scenario. The compromise will be that it will be done on the compressed file and not on the actual raw data, which Leica might be doing (it makes more sense to me).

 

In a more perfect world Leica and the other manufacturers could collaborate on a universal coding system. Does not look like that will happen. For one, the current system is limited to 64 codes. Not sure what these other folks will do when or IF they intro their M-mount rangefinder digi-cams.

 

They are also in competition. Canon has not made it easy for non-Canon lens to be used with automation on the EOS cameras for example. How does the new ZI film rangefinder camera help Leica other than by increasing awareness and interest in rangefinders.

Tom

[waterlenz]

But, Tom, all this follows on from Leica's own fault, not mine! It is their problem! It is THEIR responsibility to correct this problem with no damage to me, the buyer. Not the other way around. The only solution they're offering today to correct their own mistakes is to trash my third party lenses and buy their lenses. They can do better than that, and they have to work harder. Sorry. As much as I like the M system, and as much as I love the M8, I am not blissfully smiling up at good old uncle Leica and taking it all in stride because, you know, they're Leica. I am their customer. I want my money's worth. I don't want to have to spend a dime on something that shouldn't be there in the first place.

 

Come on! Am I dreaming here or what?

 

 

Maybe you should sell your M8, if you do not like the IR issue. I have over 7000 M8 shots without cut filters, though in winter, it has not been a problem for me. You have alternatives - film, an Epson (oops, has IR sensitivity), Canon, Nikon (watch out for IR sensitivity here too),.....

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[telyt]

Tom Kline and Guy Mancuso have it right, the algorithms are lens-specific not focal-length specific. Let's keep in mind that the Epson RD1 also has magnta problems from IR light and that no solution has been offered for that camera. I'm not surprised that M8 users are more particular about image quality, but it's a very rare manufacturer of ANY product who will make accomodations for using other-brand products with its product.

 

In the meantime it seems that a self-calibration scheme with the corrections applied in processing the image would be a workable solution. I'll bet there are people who frequent this forum who have the skills to work out the details.