Leica T performs digital lens correction , a claim by dpreview.com

[Carbon111]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still think it was a big misunderstanding on DPR's part. It's not like Leica was "hiding" the corrections...especially when a single click of a mouse would expose their "malicious lies". LOL!

 

I did notice this in the DPR discussion thread. Can't speak to its veracity or import though:

 

"By JJ Viau with Leica

Well, it is as DP review writes: of course we use all modern possibilities to optimize image quality in our camera systems. Our goal is to create excellent images with compact lenses. To reach this goal we are optimizing our lenses optically and will also use software correction as a further possibility. Being Leica though, we won´t solely rely on software to counterbalance poorly corrected lenses.

We are sorry for any misunderstanding/ translation loss.

Herzlichen Grüßen aus Wetzlar"

[Advertisement]

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

[theboch]

I still think it was a big misunderstanding on DPR's part. It's not like Leica was "hiding" the corrections...especially when a single click of a mouse would expose their "malicious lies". LOL! I did notice this in the DPR discussion thread. Can't speak to its veracity or import though: "By JJ Viau with Leica Well' date=' it is as DP review writes: of course we use all modern possibilities to optimize image quality in our camera systems. Our goal is to create excellent images with compact lenses. To reach this goal we are optimizing our lenses optically and will also use software correction as a further possibility. Being Leica though, we won´t solely rely on software to counterbalance poorly corrected lenses. We are sorry for any misunderstanding/ translation loss. Herzlichen Grüßen aus Wetzlar"[/quote']

 

This statement of the "leica official" is fake in my opinion. The german greetings at the end are wrongly spelled, like a non-native speaker would write it...

[lct]

Sounds credible to me. The Fuji 23/1.4 has less optical distortion but it is significantly bulkier than the Leica 23/2 for example. It is also faster though.

[Carbon111]

This statement of the "leica official" is fake in my opinion. The german greetings at the end are wrongly spelled, like a non-native speaker would write it...

 

Fair enough. The first part of my statement stands though.

I think that its reasonable to assume there's no *real* subterfuge going on. By all accounts it will be a nice camera. The quality of the photos I've seen from it thus far have been very nice.

 

I still haven't found a single place (other than DPR) where the lenses are claimed to be *only* optically corrected. Even my most expensive M lenses cant claim that distinction...at least not when used with the M9 and M240.

[pop]

This statement of the "leica official" is fake in my opinion. The german greetings at the end are wrongly spelled, like a non-native speaker would write it...

 

Yes. J.J.Viau appears not to be a native German speaker. So he can not speak for Leica Camera AG?

[earleygallery]

The 'interview' with Peter Karbe regarding the X Vario lens is interesting to read with this benefit of hindsight.

 

Peter Karbe: A Look through the Vario-Elmar Lens

 

He mentions imaging quality as his key factor in designing a lens, and refers to M lens standards. This is rather at odds with the views here that optical performance is not their raison d'être.

 

Also, tellingly, he never refers to software corrections of distortion etc. It's rather like they'd rather not have to mention it if possible.

[mjh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes. J.J.Viau appears not to be a native German speaker.

Really? With a quintessentially German name such as Jean-Jacques Viau? Quelle surprise!

[mjh]

Also, tellingly, he never refers to software corrections of distortion etc. It's rather like they'd rather not have to mention it if possible.

He certainly did mention it when I talked to him about the X Vario lens. Although quite naturally he is more interested in talking about the optical corrections he is responsible for. His expertise is in optics, not computer science.

[pico]

Really? With a quintessentially German name such as Jean-Jacques Viau? Quelle surprise!

 

Are you suggesting he is Quebec French?

 

He is, nonetheless, a Leica employee non?

[earleygallery]

He certainly did mention it when I talked to him about the X Vario lens. Although quite naturally he is more interested in talking about the optical corrections he is responsible for. His expertise is in optics, not computer science.

 

But I've been told by others (in this thread) that the software corrections are as much a part of the overall Leica lens designs as the physical elements - confused

[mjh]

He is, nonetheless, a Leica employee non?

He most certainly is.

[IkarusJohn]

This is rather at odds with the views here that optical performance is not their raison d'être.

 

It's not all or nothing, though James.

 

It's one thing to say, as I think you do, that the level of optimisation in camera is such that it has a negative impact on the image (I really don't know if this is correct, but it is your opinion), and saying that optical performance is not Leica's raison d'être.

 

Surely, it can be Leica's primary focus and include a level of in camera optimisation? My observation is that if you use lens profiles in LightRoom, every Leica M lens I have has some distortion and other adjustment. I don't think anyone at any time has said that the M lenses are optically perfect.

 

Why then would it matter that the T lens has (perhaps) greater correction than an M lens? M lenses still have to be used with film (which is more forgiving, but does not allow for in camera correction), whereas the T lens can only be used with the T camera - this leaves us with your point - are the corrections such that they degrade from the image file?

 

One issue I'm not at all sure of (I just jumped to the DPReview Summary - not that interested in the rest) is what impact the corrections have on the raw file. I had assumed that the corrections were applied to the JPEG file, and if you prefer raw (as most here do, and I suspect if you're concerned about corrections, raw would also be of interest) you can undo those corrections.

 

On that basis, is there really an issue? The raw file should capture all data which hits the sensor. Lens specific corrections are applied to all Leica digital image files in camera, but they can be removed. What's the problem? If you don't like what the camera has done, then undo the corrections and play with the file as you wish.

 

Cheers

John

[earleygallery]

I don't get it too Peter. James you've surprised me, I wonder just what is it about the T that has got you so exercised? I sense that you've become increasingly disenchanted with the 'luxury brand' aspect of Leica's identity lately, and I can understand that, but I didn't expect quite so much negativity from you.

 

Hi Steve,

 

Sorry I missed your post before. I don't have a problem with the T as such, I think some parts of the design are very good such as the minimal controls and reliance on the touch screen, but equally some are rather poor like the awkward clip on EVF.

 

Leica WILL sell this camera to their intended market, I don't doubt that.

 

You're right though that I am disenchanted with the apparent strategy of the current Leica management to go all out for the luxury market. I don't identify with it. I don't see cameras and luxury as being compatible - I understand luxury hotels, or luxury cars even, but not cameras.

 

There's a difference between luxury and being the best. I don't ever recall hearing of a luxury paint brush, or chisel say. Other tools of trade. That said, buyers of the Leica T will be partly buying it as a piece of jewellery, so perhaps I'm mistaken.

 

I could imagine using a Leica T with the prime lens and an optical finder as a kind of digital M2 - as an alternative to an M-E or M, but, I just don't see why I'd want to pay such a premium for it over the other similar alternatives out there, especially when it appears that the optics are nothing particularly special and it lacks some pretty ordinary features like sensor cleaning and IS.

 

I'm frustrated and disappointed, but not surprised, at Leica for releasing another underwhelming product.

[earleygallery]

 

One issue I'm not at all sure of (I just jumped to the DPReview Summary - not that interested in the rest) is what impact the corrections have on the raw file. I had assumed that the corrections were applied to the JPEG file, and if you prefer raw (as most here do, and I suspect if you're concerned about corrections, raw would also be of interest) you can undo those corrections.

Cheers

John

 

Hi John,

 

The Leica supplied software applies the corrections automatically to RAW and Jpeg files. That's the point of the DPReview piece. They had to use another RAW converter to get at the uncorrected images.

 

I was always under the impression that the best optical quality was what Leica stood for. I'm not the one saying that's not the case here, others are.

[jonoslack]

 

I'm frustrated and disappointed, but not surprised, at Leica for releasing another underwhelming product.

 

Hi James

Perhaps you should just spend a fortnight with the camera. There are lots of boxes it doesn't tick, but it's a fresh experience to use, and the results are refreshing too. The lenses seem okay to me as well.

Sometimes things are more than the sum of their parts ( and I'm not talking about polishing aluminium)

[jonoslack]

Hi John,

 

The Leica supplied software applies the corrections automatically to RAW and Jpeg files. That's the point of the DPReview piece. They had to use another RAW converter to get at the uncorrected images. .

 

Not quite

The corrections are in the DNG instructions, they are not applied to the file, but included in it. There is no problem in not applying them

[earleygallery]

Hi James

Perhaps you should just spend a fortnight with the camera. There are lots of boxes it doesn't tick, but it's a fresh experience to use, and the results are refreshing too. The lenses seem okay to me as well.

Sometimes things are more than the sum of their parts ( and I'm not talking about polishing aluminium)

 

I'm sure I'd really like it, set up as I mentioned (not with the EVF, I hate them!). I like good designs, I picked up an old Apple isight camera today - not seen one before, but it's clear where the influence for Ives M came from

[IkarusJohn]

Not quite

The corrections are in the DNG instructions, they are not applied to the file, but included in it. There is no problem in not applying them

 

Thanks, Jono - that's what I thought. The uncorrected files on DPReview don't look like rubbish to me, but it's hard to tell. I'd need to review my own files, when I have some.

 

Cheers

John

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[earleygallery]

Not quite

The corrections are in the DNG instructions, they are not applied to the file, but included in it. There is no problem in not applying them

 

Jono, I'm only going on what I've read on DPReview;

 

Because the profiled corrections are mandatory in ACR, we decided to look at the underlying data using a raw converter which won't apply them by default. For this we chose RawTherapee (4.0.12): a nice GUI around built around the DCRaw converter. The results are pretty interesting: Leica is clearly applying in-camera software corrections to the image projected by the lens onto the sensor.

[jaapv]

I don't ever recall hearing of a luxury paint brush

 

Hmmm… 255 $ ?

 

 

06897-1120 - Da Vinci Pure Badger Softener Bright - BLICK art materials