Jeff S Posted February 20, 2014 Share #401 Posted February 20, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) A voice of reason. Thank you. Indeed. Note especially the parts where he balances criticism of the M8 with comments about 20x30 prints 'knocking his socks off even today." A lot more reasonable than just calling it junk. Somehow, though, I expect you continue be the voice of lesser reasoning. And since you brought up short memories regarding the M8, it would be good to recall the early woes of the M9, including cracked sensors, red edge, SD card issues, buffer issues, discreet mode lock-ups (still not fixed), color problems, and more. The M8.2 had far fewer issues by comparison. But in the end, all these cameras are capable of wonderful results. Jeff [since I'm happily and proudly on Bill's ignore list, this post is for the more reasonable among us.] Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 20, 2014 Posted February 20, 2014 Hi Jeff S, Take a look here CEO Alfred Schopf and future products. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
IkarusJohn Posted February 20, 2014 Share #402 Posted February 20, 2014 Indeed. Note especially the parts where he balances criticism of the M8 with comments about 20x30 prints 'knocking his socks off even today." A lot more reasonable than just calling it junk. Somehow, though, I expect you continue be the voice of lesser reasoning. And since you brought up short memories regarding the M8, it would be good to recall the early woes of the M9, including cracked sensors, red edge, SD card issues, buffer issues, discreet mode lock-ups (still not fixed), color problems, and more. The M8.2 had far fewer issues by comparison. But in the end, all these cameras are capable of wonderful results. Jeff [since I'm happily and proudly on Bill's ignore list, this post is for the more reasonable among us.] I'll thank it, then (and quote it) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 20, 2014 Share #403 Posted February 20, 2014 Well, I was one of the very first owners and amongst the first two or three to identify and solve the problem by getting a filter*, so I think I know what I am talking about. I got the strong impression Leica was taken utterly by surprise, and find it unbelievable that the tech department was not aware of this. So the only conclusion is that there was a breakdown in communication within Leica or it was deliberately ignored. In both cases that must have been the marketing department. Take your pick.The free filter thing came weeks later, because Leica had trouble finding a supplier for the number needed. You are forgetting, too, the beam-me-up-scotty banding ( first reported by me), high-ISO banding, and green blobs (which I never saw) which held up production for about two months and needed a recall. I haven't forgotten the "beam-me-up-scotty" banding but it has nothing to do with the IR sensitivity. Writing yourself into the early history of the M8 as if you were somehow important is pretty funny (and I thank you for an early morning laugh) – you were just an early punter like many of us were. I recall that Marc (fotograz) was the first to post here definitively about the IR and it was at that point that many of us ordered the (admittedly tricky to source) UV/IR filters. Congratulations if you ordered a few days earlier – maybe Leica or the LUF might issue you with a medal. I still disagree with your (rather typical) simplistic conclusion concerning the UV/IR 'cock-up'. There are many other explanations other than the "only conclusion" must be a "breakdown in communication" or that it "was deliberately ignored". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted February 20, 2014 Share #404 Posted February 20, 2014 Jeff is, you're not. Use of the ignore list requires a perverse sort of trust. Mine only has three occupants. Sent from another Galaxy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 20, 2014 Share #405 Posted February 20, 2014 ...I recall that Marc (fotograz) was the first to post here definitively about the IR... Or was it Bill Hollinger? Or Pascal Méheut? Not sure if Jaap was born then . Just kidding. It sure wasn't me as i did not want to wear red noses then. Took me four years to change my mind so all hope is not lost Bill . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 20, 2014 Share #406 Posted February 20, 2014 I was on FM mostly then. You’l probably still find my rainbow banding image (caused by start-up timing) on Sean’s site. It just happened that I got my camera a couple of weeks before the official release. Anyway, possibly Leica had other reasons to ignore the IR issue. Which would you suggest? It is all speculation, as nobody really in the know is telling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted February 20, 2014 Share #407 Posted February 20, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Or was it Bill Hollinger? Or Pascal Méheut? Not sure if Jaap was born then . Just kidding. It sure wasn't me as i did not want to wear red noses then. Took me four years to change my mind so all hope is not lost Bill . I thought it was Pascal. I have a feeling he reported it the day he first used the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 20, 2014 Share #408 Posted February 20, 2014 I would have thought everything that could be said about the M8 and its IR comtamination issues has been said already, and probably several times … For better or for worth, there is nothing I could add to my own take on this written 6 years ago: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/48112-interview-andreas-kaufmann-handelsblatt-com-5.html#post509803. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 20, 2014 Share #409 Posted February 20, 2014 I was not in the M8 camp, but it seems to be that we have a recurring problem here and it involves company hierarchal problems which are often endemic in German companies. I have lived in Germany working for German firms and later worked with German firms for many years. I have had some of my problems finally handled by emailing every person involved in the problem and taking it all the way to the top not stopping at any level (Dr. K included) so that each hierarchal level at Leica knows how one customer feels about a specific problem he is having which is not or has not been satisfactorily handled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 20, 2014 Share #410 Posted February 20, 2014 I thought it was Pascal. I have a feeling he reported it the day he first used the camera. It was Pascal who posted the IR issue first as I recall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 20, 2014 Share #411 Posted February 20, 2014 Anyway, possibly Leica had other reasons to ignore the IR issue. Which would you suggest? I think it was simply that the engineers and other developers didn't feel that the IR sensitivity was a significant problem and was in fact a reasonable compromise for gaining such sharpness from the sensor. I don't believe there were any cover-ups or miscommunications within Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 20, 2014 Share #412 Posted February 20, 2014 Ok - misjudgment then. Quite possible. And an underestimation of the power of the Internet too, perhaps? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted February 20, 2014 Share #413 Posted February 20, 2014 Or maybe Leica just didn't expect their customers to wear, or take photos of the sorts of people who wear, man made fabrics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted February 20, 2014 Share #414 Posted February 20, 2014 Ok - misjudgment then. Quite possible. And an underestimation of the power of the Internet too, perhaps? Yes, the latter for certain. They have embraced the internet more purposefully since then but they still didn't foresee the mini-m fiasco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted February 20, 2014 Share #415 Posted February 20, 2014 It was Pascal who posted the IR issue first as I recall. Indeed, that's how I remember it too. Anyway, all water under the bridge. I wish this thread could go back on track and continue the speculations on the new leica T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mwilliamsphotography Posted February 20, 2014 Share #416 Posted February 20, 2014 Indeed, that's how I remember it too. Anyway, all water under the bridge. I wish this thread could go back on track and continue the speculations on the new leica T. I do not know who was actually first, but I got the first M8 in the Eastern US and used it immediately … and immediately noticed the magenta blacks which I reported here on the LUF with-in a day of getting the camera … including examples. As a wedding shooter using Ms, man made fabrics are a fact of life with rented men's formal wear. I did not know the cause at first, just that is wasn't right. However, I recall the firestorm it ignited … and discovery of the reason. This discovery also initiated my debate with reviewers who had not reported the issue for whatever reason, or somehow didn't see it.` If I had any brains at the time (and less scruples), I would have shut up and bought every IR filter available : -) As it turned out, I shot a wedding that very weekend, and converted most of the M8 shots to B&W … revealing the camera as a great B&W tool. A silver lining to a dark cloud so to speak : -) - Marc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjh Posted February 20, 2014 Share #417 Posted February 20, 2014 Or maybe Leica just didn't expect their customers to wear, or take photos of the sorts of people who wear, man made fabrics The funny thing is that the article introducing the M8 in LFI 7/2006 used photographs by Simon Wheatley for illustration, and in nearly all of these were ‘magenta’ (but actually black) fabrics. The IR contamination should have been pretty obvious and in hindsight it is, but back then, Leica saw no problems with these pictures. It would have been so simple to cover it up by reducing the brightness and saturation of magenta, but nobody bothered. Only after the M8/IR fiasco I started to spot IR contamination in lots of pictures I had taken with a Nikon D70 or Pentax *istDS. Once you know what to look for, it jumps at you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derleicaman Posted February 20, 2014 Share #418 Posted February 20, 2014 I did not mean to re-ignite the firestorm over the M8 IR issue. Merely wanted to point out that I regret not noticing the problem, and that I didn't report it to Solms at the time. I have looked at the images taken at Photokina 2006 and now that I know what to look for, the problem is definitely there. Maybe I thought Tom Abrahammson and Stephen Gandy had a thing for dark magenta shirts. I guess I chalked it up to the crappy ambient lighting in the Messe halls. Skin tones were a bit too ruddy too indoors. I also see the problem with images taken at the Wetlzlarer Hof, where we held the LHSA annual meeting that year. Outdoor images don't exhibit the problem. Images taken on a trip to Vegas in August before Photokina did not show the problem either. I was not aware that the D70 had similar issues, as I had just gotten a used D70 about that time and never noticed anything like the issues with the M8. I used the D70 as my sole camera on a Caribbean cruise. Colors were beautiful and accurate, but again most of my images were taken outdoors on that trip. Back in those days, I was still firmly wedded to my film Leicas. I did not have Photoshop or any other image editing software, so I was not up to speed on these things. Different story today with LR5 and all the things I've learned on this forum and others. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted February 20, 2014 Share #419 Posted February 20, 2014 Indeed. Note especially the parts where he balances criticism of the M8 with comments about 20x30 prints 'knocking his socks off even today." A lot more reasonable than just calling it junk. Somehow, though, I expect you continue be the voice of lesser reasoning. And since you brought up short memories regarding the M8, it would be good to recall the early woes of the M9, including cracked sensors, red edge, SD card issues, buffer issues, discreet mode lock-ups (still not fixed), color problems, and more. The M8.2 had far fewer issues by comparison. But in the end, all these cameras are capable of wonderful results. Jeff [since I'm happily and proudly on Bill's ignore list, this post is for the more reasonable among us.] Since when did voicing an opinion on a camera become so unreasonable? It's not like he is challenging or blaspheming your faith and beliefs. Or is he? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted February 20, 2014 Author Share #420 Posted February 20, 2014 My poor thread seems to have deviated and deteriorated from the original topic well and truly Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.