Any news for DMR firmware update?

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Conrad

then why did leica put out a V1.2 of fimware? certainly not for the users/customers, but I think because leica themselves realized gaps that should be fixed. With all respect .... because a particular user doesn't use a function or a setting that should not be intereperted as "it's working".

 

ie, two examples..

 

if you had a lens that was supposed to have a workng apeture to 1.4 but was stuck and would not open beyond 2.8, BUT you always shot at 2.8 and above anyway would you say that lens worked properly ?

 

if you had a camera that did not operate in shutter priority mode but you never used that mode would you consider the camera fully functioning?

 

 

the DMR is similar, there are features and fuctions that are not opereting up the potential of the hardware, some of them are: profiles (fixed in V1.2), auto white balance, high iso noise, jpeg quaility.

 

And while i can get outstanding results from the DMR i want these features to work with outstanding results also. Leica put these functions in the DMR so i think they should make them work to the best of the hardwares limitiations, not the firmware's limititation.

 

Today the DMR is limited by the firmware - and this is leica's responsibility. I am a customer who bought a leica product, i was expecting "the full leica experience" - i got it with each lens i own, i got it with the R9, i got it with other R cameras, i didn't get it with the DMR.

 

Sorry, Richard I suspect the limiting factor here is not the DMR. I feel in no way limited by firmware version 1.1 and I make full use of the capabilities of this equipment. I should add here that the majority of people who installed version 1.2 appear to have experienced no problems. Unfortunately, I am one of those who did. Leica is working on version 1.3, one thing I know about Leica is if they say they are working on something, they indeed are and if they say they will deliver something, I know they indeed will. This may be your pet peeve but honestly I am experiencing no such issues.

 

Cheers,

[Advertisement]

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

[bono0272]

I am not an electronic expert but it seems the DMR firmware 1.1 and 1.2 results differently from people to people. The Leica Hong Kong recommends DMR users on using 1.1 as the technicians there find themselves more favourite on 1.1. But some DMR users may find 1.2 performs better. IMHO I think the biggest argument on the firmware will be the auto white balance performance, even Leica Hong Kong agrees that.

[rsolomon]

conrad,

i disagree ..and that is okay .....

 

just curious :

do you consider the autowhite balance of the DMR to be accurate ?

 

do you shoot jpeg and are happy with the results ?

 

where did you receive your information on V1.2 ? - this is not what i heard from leica NJ. Infact i was told that leica purposely makes V1.1 available on the website so users can back out 1.2. (this was done after a number users requested it per Leica NJ).

[mgcd]

conrad,

i disagree ..and that is okay .....

 

just curious :

do you consider the autowhite balance of the DMR to be accurate ?

 

do you shoot jpeg and are happy with the results ?

 

where did you receive your information on V1.2 ? - this is not what i heard from leica NJ. Infact i was told that leica purposely makes V1.1 available on the website so users can back out 1.2. (this was done after a number users requested it per Leica NJ).

 

I am one of those who requested it. The information comes from the German language forum.

 

I am a trained commercial photographer, that means I like to have complete control on everything I do. That also means, I shoot RAW. The DMR is a RAW machine, that is what it was optimised for. This is where you get the best quality file. Nothing will change that. As I stated before, it may not be right for you.

 

Cheers,

[hdg]

As I told I have no problem with V1.2. It works well. But was there a real and absolutely necessary improvement compared to V1.1? I don`t know.

So the only question should be:

 

> What is essential to improve the performance of the DMR?

> What improvement do you need or do you think to need with regard to it`s actual ability?

 

Indeed, it is not the way of correctitude of a serious company as Leica should be. But what is the reason of this situation? I don`t know.

 

Regards Hans, very happy with R9+DMR+V1.2, but looking for the R10, too ( as the better is the enemy of the best)

[rsolomon]

yes, shooting raw and controlling the light, the DMR is excellent - no doubt. This is most likely how a commerical phothraper works? i don't think anyone had ever said anything different about the DMR's excellent performance in those conditions.

 

and therefore as a result the auto-white-balance is a non issue for you - i can understand. But because you dont rely on auto-white-balance or jpegs should not be interperted by you as they work just fine and without issue.

 

 

Also: i agree the DMR , as it turns out, was desinged for shooting RAW, leica never should have put jpeg support in the DMR if they are not willing to support it in leica fashion.

This would have sent a clear message to buyers.

 

p.s.: i am a not a commerical photograper and use the DMR outside a studio, without controlled lighting perhaps that is the difference and certainly you are right the DMR is not for me - i am not having a leica experience with it.

 

let me know if you would like to purchase a second one ...mint condition

[hankg]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have never shot anything but RAW with any camera I have owned (not counting compact digicams). However there are Pro's some of them very successful and talented who do shoot jpeg. It's not the way I would work, but they prefer it for what ever reason and get stunning results. There was a time when I scoffed at the idea of jpeg shooting in a pro camera. But having seen the work of some that prefer to work that way I now consider it a matter of preference and individual workflow/application and see why manufacturers devote resources to making sure it works and works well.

 

Leica included a jpeg mode in the camera and that mode should work to the level you would expect from an R camera. It is not true that all pro's shoot raw and jpeg is just for amatuers who do not know any better. Raw gives you more lattitude in post but some choose to give that flexibility up for a streamlined workflow. I guess they are confident enough in their own abilities that they can do without the safety net RAW provides, its like shooting slides.

[robsteve]

Leica included a jpeg mode in the camera and that mode should work to the level you would expect from an R camera. It is not true that all pro's shoot raw and jpeg is just for amatuers who do not know any better. Raw gives you more lattitude in post but some choose to give that flexibility up for a streamlined workflow. I guess they are confident enough in their own abilities that they can do without the safety net RAW provides, its like shooting slides.

 

 

Hank:

 

I don't think it is the jpeg mode that is the problem, but the AWB. The DMR requires a manual white balance off a grey card for best results. This means that when shooting jpeg, you need to have the camera take a white balance off the card and shoot with that setting unless the light changes.

 

The main flaw in the 1.3 firmware was the clipping indicators came on at about 235 instead of 245 and the display was too yellow. With version 1.1, what you saw on the screen was a pretty accurate representation of the colours/exposure in the scene. The 1.1 clipping indicators were also about perfect. With just a few spectral highlights clipping, you had good exposure when shooting in 16bit and RAW. With ver 1.2 clipping indicators, you tend towards underexposure.

 

What 1.2 teased the users with was faster card writes and the use of larger cards. I will tend to load 1.2 when I want to shoot fast, but I find it hard to get an accurate idea of what I am getting when just using the LCD preview to judge.

 

Robert

[mgcd]

It is not true that all pro's shoot raw and jpeg is just for amatuers who do not know any better.

 

I don't think anyone actually said that by the way...

 

Cheers,

[mgcd]

yes, shooting raw and controlling the light, the DMR is excellent - no doubt. This is most likely how a commerical phothraper works? i don't think anyone had ever said anything different about the DMR's excellent performance in those conditions.

 

and therefore as a result the auto-white-balance is a non issue for you - i can understand. But because you dont rely on auto-white-balance or jpegs should not be interperted by you as they work just fine and without issue.

 

 

Also: i agree the DMR , as it turns out, was desinged for shooting RAW, leica never should have put jpeg support in the DMR if they are not willing to support it in leica fashion.

This would have sent a clear message to buyers.

 

p.s.: i am a not a commerical photograper and use the DMR outside a studio, without controlled lighting perhaps that is the difference and certainly you are right the DMR is not for me - i am not having a leica experience with it.

 

let me know if you would like to purchase a second one ...mint condition

 

Richard - Due to the nature of my job most of my work is done under uncontrolled lighting conditions... I'll let you know if I need a second DMR.

 

Cheers,

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}p.s.: i am a not a commerical photograper and use the DMR outside a studio, without controlled lighting perhaps that is the difference and certainly you are right the DMR is not for me - i am not having a leica experience with it.

{snipped}

 

If I can respectfully suggest, just shoot a custom White Balance and then the JPEGs are fine.

 

Only fine; there are always subjects that are tricky if you let the camera do the processing--any camera. Lots of amateur subjects, for example flowers, sunsets, etc.. aren't particularly well served by letting the camera--any camera--pick a white and black point, contrast, and, really, default brightness levels, etc...

 

All of which a good raw conversion into PS would let you do properly.

 

Of course, if "good enough" is what you want, then the DMR probably isn't for you. There are plenty of average digicams out there (I mean this in a non-confrontational way but it's sounding the opposite--sorry) that will mess up in more acceptible ways than the DMR will.

 

But if you're willing to work the WB, and correct your shots, and occasionally shoot RAW, then the DMR can't be beat, IMO. And I use it for stuff like weddings, not just studio work.

[hdg]

o.k.

 

I am a so called semi-professional and as you may know I like to make pictures of landscapes. I have had the R9 and lot of nice lenses. So I bought the DMR and this was the right decission (from my pont of view).

I have got the DMR in July 2005 with V1.0. My first shots ..... But some days later I could upgrate to V1.1 (and later to V1.2) and that it was.

At this moment I would buy a secound DMR, no doubt! But I am looking for the R10 and not for V1.3!

May be there is a WB-problem but I make dng-pictures and if there is a certain WB-problem I can correct it in any way.

 

Regards Hans, who is very happy with his DMR (and is looking for the R10)

[rsolomon]

i think i see your point and it appears contradictory to me ..so here's a yes/no question

 

 

 

Do You beleive FW V1.1 works perfectly well with the DMR and allows full expolitation of the DMR hardware, therefore FW V1.2 was not needed ?

 

 

If you answer V1.2 was not needed : i would say Leica itself reconized an upgrade was needed from V1.1 and thats why V1.2 was produced.

 

If you answer V1.2 was needed : i would say that Leica basically re-called V1.2 so it was never "offically recommended" and leica NJ recommends V1.1 be run.

 

 

jumping to my conclusion: Leica itself realizes there is room for improvement on both the 1.1 and the 1,2 firmware...

 

 

you may be interperting this as i am not happy with the end results i receive from the DMR - please don't . I am saying i spent a lot of $$ on the DMR and beleive in this hardware, camera, and lenses -- BUT this combination can be even better, even more user friendly, require less post processing, write faster to SD cards, handle flash better, handle reviewing pictures better, allow for not having to poweroff the unit once in a while to re-set.

 

....why wouldn't i want those things ?

[cmb_]

I use v1.1 and am very happy with the results. However, I would like to see a v1.3 which would include:

– improved AWB

– improved write speeds

– ability to use larger capacity cards (although I rather like 2GB cards and will likely not use anything larger)

– less noise at higher ISO (if that can be accomplished with firmware)

– menu/scrollwheel continuous in BOTH directions The only menu option I use routinely is Format and it is buried near the bottom of the list. If the scrollwheel turned counterclockwise from the top of the menu that would be nice. Also, when you reach the bottom of the menu it would be nice if it were continuous back to the top.

 

Other than that, just an R10.

[Guest rubidium]

The notion that firmware updates have different relevance/priority to different people, as we clearly are seeing here in this discussion, is really not surprising. Nor should it be the main driver of the debate in my opinion. This happens all of the time with BIOS updates to computer motherboards. If a particular feature is not important to you, then you will naturally have little interest in a firmware change that introduces or improves upon that feature. Others, to whom the feature is important, will desire that improvement. The option to upgrade is just that - an option. But for the option to exist, the upgrade must be available.

 

Over the years, we all bought our Leica's for different reasons, applications, operating conditions, etc. (pro/amateur, RAW/JPG, flash/natural lighting, high-ISO/low-ISO, lens quality ... the list of trades goes on and on ...). But if you try to look for one or more common threads, rather than trades, that generally inspire Leica purchases, I think you begin focusing on terms like "quality", "performance", "support". Thus, what really matters, in my opinion, is the implicit confidence-inspiring message that Leica owners of all ilks should be expecting: something like "We didn't just throw what you paid for over the fence, but rather we stand behind our product and want to deliver the highest levels of quality, performance and support that can be realistically achieved with the original design." In the days before digital, this inspiration of confidence took such forms as not blemishing screw heads when you sent a camera or lens to Solms for cleaning/adjustment/repair 20 years after you bought it. In the first decade of the 21st century should we not expect this notion to convey to lines of code on an EPROM?

 

Jim

[bono0272]

May be it is too long for the DMR users waiting for the firmware update, but we cannot see it up till this moment.

 

Should Leica formally say something on this, after hearing so much opinions on the DMR issues? Keeping silent is not the right way to deal with loyal customers. Again, if there will be no more update, just tell us. Why keeping itself silent?

[rsolomon]

i just read a post on the M8 forum.... can you beleive some people want an "ease of use" firmware update (sound familar) . i mean really ! they can produce great images with the M8 - just as we can with the DMR - they should be satisfied with that - you know, live with the "limitations". Some of the users feel they could get more features and functions.

 

This sounds like what some of the DMR users have been saying - oh well , btw i have one more for the list ;;;;;; how about shoot both raw + jpeg. i know you professional studio types dont require that but it should would make my shooting more flexible, i would even be able use the epson p5000 to view my shots in the field -

 

 

 

it'll will be interesting to see what happenes there.... will leica go stealth and say nothing to them ? surely there will be an M9 to address the issues !!

 

on the other hand im sure there will be an M9 in the future

[rsolomon]

anybody hear anything on this topic ?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[EH21]

Dave Elwell at Leica NJ says that, "They are still testing". However when I discussed the improvements I thought should be in there he said to put in all in an e-mail and send it to him, which implies that they may be further off from just testing.

[dhsimmonds]

I wonder how often we check the Leica AG web site to ascertain if the new firmware is posted for download? If I am away for any length of time it is usually one of the first things that I do when I return home! Yeh I know, sad isn't it!