Leica stubborness will hurt sales

[Riley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Since there seems to be no confidence that Zeiss and others will code their lenses

and it seems that Leica are not going to do this for them

 

why not look at more permanent a marker for self coded lenses

there are etching products for metals, that seem quick and easy to apply

 

all that is required is a template, probably metal, suitable for etching

and some etching products like the links shown

 

i see no difficulty in some enterprising person offering kits of this

there is no patent infringement, and it probably saves Leica an 'at cost' job anyway

 

Permanently Mark Tools - Etch-O-Matic Marking Kits.

[LJL]

Rob,

I agree that this may be the path for some/many. This still does not address the issue for lenses that have mounts that work on the M-camera, but may have a cut-out in the critical area where the coding must be etched or applied. This is true for almost all CV mounts. And for many Zeiss mounts, the issue is the placement of a screw within the area where the code goes. This can be overcome to some degree by covering that screw area with the appropriate coded color. The etching may or may not work there.

 

LJ

[Advertisement]

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

[sean_reid]

I agree. I think only a permanently coded lens would be used a pro. The menu selection method is as reliable as the sharpie approach IMHO based on my use of the Nikon D2 series that offer an analogous approach. If one is anal-rententive it might not be an issue.

Tom

 

Hi Tom,

 

This pro would be happy to use a menu system for any lenses I have that are not coded. Remembering to set the correct code is like remembering to set the chosen ISO, shutter speed, aperture, focus, etc. This is a manual camera in many respects and it really is not a "point and shoot" kind of device. As photographers, we have (and should have) the wonderful freedom to screw up all sorts of settings if we allow ourselves to. A menu lens selection can be ignored by those with no interest in it. Coded Leica lenses will always be the most convenient option, esp. for fast work.

 

A man might forget to put his hat on before going out in the rain but that's no reason to eliminate hats or to require that they be automatically placed on the head as one moves towards the door.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[hankg]

I have to say I smile at the commercial naievity here. What possible incentive do Leica have to assist in supporting competitor lenses, only to see a proportion of their own lens business walk out the door in the process? They stand to lose far more in lens sales than they will ever get back in extra M8 sales, especially with (as yet unknown) plans for new lenses down the road.

 

That is a simplistic (and might I say naive ) view of the world. Cosina's entry into the Leica RF market did more for Leica then all the Leica special edition lizard skined, gold plated cameras combined. A healthy market with multiple vendors will always beat a closed one vendor environment. Ask Bill Gates or Michael Dell. And it must be said that at no time has Leica anounced its intention of making the M a closed system or that the purpose of 6-bit coding was to make 3rd party lenses unusable or to inhibit the choices of it's customers. That has only been suggested by some here.

 

In today's fast moving world the sort of business model that produced those wonderful mechanical marvels of yore from Linhof, Rollei and Leica will put you out of business. Modern businesses leverage and cooperate as well as compete with competitors in a much faster paced environment where products can not be developed 100% in house, where product cycles are shorter and where internet empowered customers who have been spoiled by choice are in the drivers seat. If Zeiss and CV were to exit the RF market it would be a great loss to Leica and it's plans to reinvigorate the M platform. Time to think outside the box as I am sure the current Leica management are doing.

[sean_reid]

Accessing a menu is no less so.

Tom

 

I disagree and I'm a professional who uses the M8 for very fast-paced work.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[jaapv]

This whole thing should be seen in perspective. I agree with Mark, there is no reason for Leica to accomodate competitors, rather the opposite. That leaves a problem with older, uncodable Leica/Leitz lenses. From 50 mm upwards there are no benifits from coding to be reaped, at least in pictorial quality, and at 35 mm the difference, if any, is so marginal that it can be seen as irrelevant. Which leaves - I should have to look it up, but I would guess two 21mm lenses and one 28. Few enough imo....So what is all the excitement about?

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

A compromise might be for someone to machine the separate lens mounts for the Zeiss lenses, there are only three possible, and sell them, or have folks send them to the machinist as is being done with the LTM adapters. The end user would then fill in the holes.

Tom

 

On an individual basis, that's exactly what some are doing.

 

Sean

[Riley]

Rob,

I agree that this may be the path for some/many. This still does not address the issue for lenses that have mounts that work on the M-camera, but may have a cut-out in the critical area where the coding must be etched or applied. This is true for almost all CV mounts. And for many Zeiss mounts, the issue is the placement of a screw within the area where the code goes. This can be overcome to some degree by covering that screw area with the appropriate coded color. The etching may or may not work there.

 

LJ

 

in a word

putty

apply paint to suit

 

geez guys, whatever became of creativity

use your heads, there has probably been 48 hours of bitching that would have self coded 100 lenses.

[sean_reid]

 

Lens coding is kruft, a gimmick in software that should be passed on to post-processing... now /that/ is an interesting legal meeting What? It's a camera!

 

rgds,

Dave

 

Hi Dave,

 

Try to picture prepping a set of 1000 files for a client (not uncommon for a wedding shoot) and then, for each exposure, either:

 

A) Recalling the exact lens and aperture used for that picture

 

Fiddling with each exposure until the cyan-drift correction "looks right"

 

Try it once and I'll bet that you'll never do it again. I'm speaking from extensive direct experience. I think Guy can help explain this aspect as well.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[rami G]

The RD1 has a thicker IR filter in front of the image plane and has a higher crop factor than the M8. Nonetheless, the M8's IQ appears to be much better. See Sean's reports.

 

I know, I own and use both . That wasn't what I was arguing against I said if R-D2 would ever exist and have newer sony sensor (D200) and remain open system there will be some point in buying it if one has many Leica and non-Leica lenses. even more so if Zeiss comes out with an open system body..

[sean_reid]

I assume you're saying that it works, at least to an acceptable level. If that is the case, it's all the more reason for Leica not to make the manual lens selection function available. Imagine the howls of protest here if it works on one firmware release, and then, because of changes Leica make to the support for their own lenses, it doesn't work so well any more with other vendors' lenses.

 

Zeiss have new 18 and 21mm lenses coming and, for all we know, Peter Karbe and his team may be working currently on the Leica equivalents, in keeping with a line of smaller aperture, lower cost lenses started with the 28/2.8 and complemented by the existing 50/2 and 90/4. Not nice then to release a new lens or two only to find that your market has been snaffled by Zeiss with your (Leica's) implicit blessing.

 

It seems pointless to have the patent protection of the lens coding and then open the floodgates to all-comers by providing a manual bypass.

 

Instead, Zeiss and CV should be working to develop plug-ins which can remove the cyan in post processing when their lenses are used. If it can be done in camera firmware, it can certainly be done in post processing. Time for them to bring something to the party...

 

I imagine you already know that I disagree with most of what you've said above. But to answer your first question, yes, the new firmware is working out quite well for several of the CV lenses I've tested with it so far. As for the rest of your points, responding to them would involve repeating many things I've posted, published in articles, etc. Since you've already read my arguments, there's no need to repeat them here. The bottom line is that I would like to see the M8 be as accessible as possible to serious photographers, not just those who are wealthy. I would also like to see digital rangefinder photographers retain the freedom and flexibility of choosing lenses that draw in a variety of ways. It's not my job to be supporting any manufacturers' commercial interests, I'm instead looking out for a broad range of serious photographers with the full knowledge that, historically, many of the best Leica M photographers in the world have A) Used a variety of RF lenses (by choice) and Not necessarily been wealthy. So for me, its about photography and photographers. Business can take care of business just as some were asked to give Caesar that which was Caesar's. What Leica chooses to do is up to Leica but I will continue to advocate for the things that I think can be important to photographers. Leica knows where I stand, even if they may not always love it.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

just reading all your posts.... you mention you ordered your M8 in november and were delivered in feb 07.

 

So when you got delivered you knew exactly what the M8 was the PRO and CONS.

 

You knew the IR situation and the Coded/Filter solution.

 

SO PLEASE STOP CRYING HERE during posts and posts and endless posting that ALWAYS say the SAME THING !!!!!!!!!!!

 

You had enough time and information to decide whether you wanted an M8 or NOT.

 

You decided to have it and now you complain that you have to code your lenses and use filters !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

PLEASE SELL YOUR M8 and GIVE US A BREAK !!!!!!

 

LEICA HAS NOT STOLEN YOU A SINGLE DOLLAR !!!!! you have decided to go ahead with purshase.

 

So my question is:

 

Knowing that you knew all the M8 defects and knowing you did not agree with their solution before delivery and knowing you still bought the camera....

 

ARE YOU MASOCHIST or JUST STUPID ???????????????????

 

I'm not a moderator Eric but I think this post is somewhat rude and not consistent with the rules of the forum. Might there be a more respectful way for you to express your feelings on this?

 

Edit: I've now seen your subsequent post about this and was glad to read it,

[hankg]

I would also like to see digital rangefinder photographers retain the freedom and flexibility of choosing lenses that draw in a variety of ways. It's not my job to be supporting any manufacturers' commercial interests, I'm instead looking out for a broad range of serious photographers with the full knowledge that, historically, many of the best Leica M photographers in the world have A) Used a variety of RF lenses (by choice) and Not necessarily been wealthy. So for me, its about photography and photographers.

 

Well said.

 

To that I would add that the old product-centric inward looking model of business is dead. Successful businesses today are focused on the customer. I think the new management at Leica understands that so I am optimistic that they will eventually find a way to keep the system attractive to the broadest possible number of photographers.

[sean_reid]

Thank you, Guy, I appreciate. Yes, I'd love to try something now. The problem is the coding of my two favorite lenses, the C/V 21/4 and the C/V 28/1.9. I have B+W filters on both, and they do a good job at limiting IR infection. But I get the dreaded cyan drift, because I can't code them. And somebody has even pointed that you just can't code the C/V M mount (adaptor). Even if the specs wouldn't be exactly the same as the Leica lenses, I figured I could get at least some result at removing a good deal of the cyan corners.

 

Olivier,

 

Look up John Millich on this forum and PM him with your concern. He may have some interesting ideas for you. For your 21 and 28 CV lenses, start looking for two Leitz 9 cm adapters (no notches).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

What you said is true. But, Canon has long done this decades ago when they switched over to EOS. All EOS lenses focusing are driven by on-len motors --- i.e. AF-S.

 

Many Sigma lenses, which are sold to mount on Nikon & Canon these days also come with HSM (AF-S).

 

The successful and adaptable 3rd-party lens-maker will move fast if they want to earn money and when they see a profitable market. If Zeiss sees $$$ to be earned, they will code their lenses unless Leica patented it. I see possible 3 reasons why Zeiss is not doing it:

1. Zeiss is just as slow in meeting market needs
   
2. lens-coding was patented by Leica
   
3. Zeiss made a calculated decision not to pursue the M8 market: it's too small to be worth it

A couple of the above reasons could by well be shared by other 3rd-party lens maker like CV.

 

Once again, with feeling, Zeiss and CV are not currently in a position to be able to include Leica's coding in their lenses. They cannot do that right now.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

But you're only half right ... so forget about ZM and CV, just count how many Leica's own lenses were left without support.

 

Many people have overlooked that as well. You make an important reminder.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

 

The tests are not completed or published by others yet, but the cyan drift problem appears to be made much more "liveable" with simple in-camera corrections that mimic those for Leica's existing focal lengths.

LJ

 

Hi LJ,

 

Some are now. I just published some this morning and will be regularly expanding the test base (lens/filter combinations).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Hi Dave,

 

Try to picture prepping a set of 1000 files for a client (not uncommon for a wedding shoot) and then, for each exposure, either:

 

A) Recalling the exact lens and aperture used for that picture

 

Fiddling with each exposure until the cyan-drift correction "looks right"

 

Try it once and I'll bet that you'll never do it again. I'm speaking from extensive direct experience. I think Guy can help explain this aspect as well.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

 

Hell I can barely remember what i had for lucnh 3 hours later .The absolute last thing i want to do with 600 images is remember what i did or fool around with the file more than WB. I want everything done in camera to make my life more efficent. Reason i have said all along find a way to code your lenses and let leica's firmware fix it automatically or select it for you in a menu option. Software solution is nice for one or a couple images, but hundreds even 20 i don't want to play that game including pano tools , great to save yourself but not a real solution. I bought all Leica lenses and either they are coded or had them coded. Now not saying folks should do that but i am saying if you have a Zeiss or CV find a mill shop fast, be done with the hassle and get out and shoot . Leica will not bother private folks from engaging in coding there lenses at a mill shop. Just think of it like this you buya Zeiss 21mm and saved 1500 on the Leica than cetainly what is a few dollars to code the darn thing. if i owned more CV and Zeiss like Sean and others , i would be sitting in a mill shop right now coding my lenses in a heart beat. I kid you not , I am the king of alternative solutions. Seriously for me if i could not code a lens than i would sell it because I can't depend on others to get me working. As much as i would like to see the menu option i simply can't wait and Sean won't either he went and had all his lenses coded and is figuring out right now filter solutions just like I am or have. Now i am trying to find Leica 49mm filters for all the users of the WATE and the adapter John made. Frankly the biggest concern right now is filters for the WATE and the Leica 21mm 55mm thread. We need them today, now if i was to be in a bitching mood there is were my frustration would be. We have known about the coding for months and all of us should be here just waiting on the filters and the coding is a thing of the past with it already done. There is no secret here leica told us , and Sean and I repeatedly said the same thing . Find a way to code your lenses. Yes I know Leica has been slow on the coding and folks have been more than patient with that but Zeiss and CV owners this should have been done already if you bought way back when

 

Sorry for the typos been working on taxes and going blind here

[sean_reid]

Wow....what a thread.....meant in a good way. Was not going to jump into this fray, but could not resist supporting and quesitoning some comments and Ideas.

 

In my humble perspective, Leica appears to be doing quite a bit to help rectify a somewhat tripping start with the M8. That being said, and recognizing that they can and will run their company as they deem appropriate, there are some issues that are still a bit hard to digest. There is now some pretty clear evidence that the in-camera processing algorithms being used do a vey nice job on images taken with coded and filtered lenses. There are somewhat separate issues between the coding for correction of specific lens behaviors, and this was in place before the "discovery" of the IR contamination problems. The red/cyan drift issue, as pointed out by many that is now a problem BECAUSE folks are using the scarce filters available, seems to be something that Leica really needs to address with more help and concern. They have advertised from the start about the ability to use nearly all M-mount lenses. That is still true. However, the filter/drift issue is something new that has developed sort of after the fact, and after a fair number of camera sales.

 

With due respect to Mark Norton, who always has quite cogent comments, Leica has already been reapiing a pretty decent harvest from purchasers of the M8, and could continue along that line for quite some time. Yes, they also want to sell a lot of lenses, and they appear to be doing that....along with a lot of newly needed filters! It does not seem as though they would be giving away anything by living up to their market-speak of allowing the M8 to utilize the large range of existing M-mount lenses. Will they have to work "automatically" like newer coded lenses do? Well, if they can be coded, that will be nice (oh....another revenue stream for coding.....), but the least that could be done for customers is to provide a user accessible menu driven lens table that will help correct the cyan problems newly introduced by recommended filtering, especially in wider angled lenses.

 

The tests are not completed or published by others yet, but the cyan drift problem appears to be made much more "liveable" with simple in-camera corrections that mimic those for Leica's existing focal lengths. There may be additional issues that would tremendously benefit from other algorithm use, such as vignetting, but folks using anything other than code-specific Leica lenses will just have the option/choice of gambling on the shot. Let's face it, when we placed an uncoded CV, Zeiss or other lens on a M-mount film camera, we were not expecting that lens to have the look and behavior of a specific Leica lens. However, we were also not seeing or expecting color contamination issues due to use of a recommeded filter either.

 

From my perspective, the Leica M8 is a great camera that is capable of capturing some great images. Many, many folks continue to prove that daily. If one wants to use the camera for color work, they really need to use filters, and should seriously consider finding some way to mimic the coding that Leica is employing now. Will it be perfect? Will a 21/2.8 coding from Leica work well on a Zeiss lens? For the lens specific corrections related to vignetting and such, it may not be perfect, but it will help. For the cyan contamination, newly introduced long after Leica has sold and continues to sell lots of M8 bodies and now filters, the Leica in-camera corrections for UV/IR filter use are probably very close to what most will need for more color correct capture. If one needs the best that is offered, then please use the Leica lenses with coding and Leica filters. That seems reasonable. If one wants to use the camera for outstanding shots with other lenses, non-coded, non-Leica, they should be able to, AT LEAST with respect to correcting the cyan problem newly introduced by using recommended filters. This does not seem like Leica is giving anything up in this process at all. Most of us bought the M8, and many others may buy the M8 thinking that they can easily utilize their existing collection of M-mount lenses. Fantastic. Still true. However, in order to shoot acceptable color, one needs to use filters AND one should have those in-camera color corrections for using those filters made readily available to them.

 

If Leica does not provide something along these lines, I do think that folks will not continue buying the M8 and lots of lenses. Personally, if I were not able to code some of my lenses to utilize the in-camera corrections, I probably would abandon using the M8, except with one or two coded lense and the free filters. I have not put my M8 into full pro production mode yet, and may not get a second or third body for those tasks, until I see a clearer path toward how some of these "after the initial fact" problems are being handled. If I must use only Leica coded lenses and Leica filters, I am a lot less likely to continue supporting Leica, as that is contrary to what they originally promised and continue to market for the M8. I want to be able to use the lenses of my choosing, and will gamble with all of the other issues about correction and "look" and everything else, BUT NOT with respect to how colors need to be easily corrected in-camera because I need to use filters also.

 

And with respect to the comments about doing the adjustments in post....personally, that is the wrong way to think about this. The more that can be done to the captured bits BEFORE they are written to a file for later adjustment and use, especially with respect to this cyan contamination issue, the better. While many, if not most of us shoot RAW/DNG files, not everybody does, and that may still be a huge part of Leica's exisiting and future sales base. I ran into several guys this weekend that were thinking about the M8, but are not interested in sending off their lenses for coding, nor do they want to buy new coded lenses. They are not pros. They are casual users, yet their buying decisions are based on how easy the camera is to use and how usable their existing equipment is. They probably are not too concerned with vignetting, but they are appalled about color and especially cyan contaminations from using filters. They were even quite unhappy about having to use filters to start, but understand that trade-off. They are not liking the other trade-off of not being able to get good color capture without new and expesnive processes or gear. They shoot JPEGs. They want to be able to print what they shoot easily, not having to use two, three or more special computer tools to make corrections to the images. These are the kinds of folks that account for a lot of Leica sales. That has been true for all camera companies. The pros may drive feature demand, but they usaully do not drive lots sales, exceept for recommending to others. If a more casual user is confronted with a very complicated and increasingly more expensive set of options only, they will not buy into the M8. Leica wanted to make it great and keep it relatively simple....a menu for selecting a limited number of focal lengths to apply in-camera color corrections for uncoded lenses, Leica or non-Leica, for use with recommeded filters can only help Leica at this point.

 

Just my thinking on this.

 

LJ

 

Great post by the way. You're thinking on this issue is quite similar to my own, in many respects.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Have to agree it killed my eyes reading it though. ROTFLMAO

back to the freaking taxes