scott kirkpatrick Posted January 15, 2016 Share #81 Posted January 15, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/254834-vignette-problem/ There is barrel distortion in the 24-90 at focal lengths from 24 to about 50. It's only obvious in the 24-35 mm range. To correct this, Leica writes a set of coefficients into the DNG file, which must be applied when the raw file is rendered. Capture One does this for you, but there is a dialog box that says it is being done, and allows an override if it is not needed. I think Adobe Camera Raw also does it automatically, but don't know where to look to see it. I do not know if Apple's default handling of the DNG file takes this into account, but that sounds like what you are concerned about. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 15, 2016 Posted January 15, 2016 Hi scott kirkpatrick, Take a look here problem highlights leica sl. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted January 15, 2016 Share #82 Posted January 15, 2016 Dear Mr Gallegra, the problem with the white balance is known to us and we as soon as possible fixed by a firmware update. Once the firmware update is available, it is provided in your "Members Area" to download. This does not seem a "wrong WB problem", because the bride shot has perfect white balance. This seems rather caused by a problem somewhere during RAW development and/or JPEG compression performed in-camera, causing abnormal color channels clipping. This may be due to some adjustments being applied after gamma compression. The fact Camera Raw outputs a good JPEG is the proof that this is a firmware bug, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antikythera Posted January 19, 2016 Share #83 Posted January 19, 2016 these are another sample I took today. first one is from DNG (convert to jpg by LR with no-pp) second one is from SL's original JPG. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! look the second one, sky is over-cyaned and man's face ( on advertise ) strangely turns yellow. I took this in sunset time, sun light was coming from left. here's crop from pic.2 (sorry for odd sample btw) I suspect this strange color-shift happen when the man's skin covered by amber light (like sunset). when converting DNG to JPG in SL , SL add cyan or yellow color on mid-tone, and dark-tone automatically, but at this point, high-light is gone and only shadow part is colored. so the result is something like this. Leica should not to add strong contrast when converting DNG to JPG. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! look the second one, sky is over-cyaned and man's face ( on advertise ) strangely turns yellow. I took this in sunset time, sun light was coming from left. here's crop from pic.2 (sorry for odd sample btw) I suspect this strange color-shift happen when the man's skin covered by amber light (like sunset). when converting DNG to JPG in SL , SL add cyan or yellow color on mid-tone, and dark-tone automatically, but at this point, high-light is gone and only shadow part is colored. so the result is something like this. Leica should not to add strong contrast when converting DNG to JPG. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255403-problem-highlights-leica-sl/?do=findComment&comment=2972170'>More sharing options...
chrismuc Posted January 20, 2016 Share #84 Posted January 20, 2016 obviously an in-camera jpg engine miscalibration issue Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurijgallegra Posted January 27, 2016 Author Share #85 Posted January 27, 2016 the problem is that in the video you see them and you can not fix. I recommend everyone to send an email to Leica Camera-to urge the development of the next firmware. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
talt03 Posted February 19, 2016 Share #86 Posted February 19, 2016 I just got the same problem of what appears like overblown yellow cast on my subject's face. It was in a restaurant with mixed lighting. Frustrating since we still don't have the firmware fix mentioned. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted February 19, 2016 Share #87 Posted February 19, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica`s color people are color blind. I had 2 M8 and got cyan sky. M9 to a lesser degree. Word was they wanted to copy Kodachrome. Profiling the camera with Adobe Profile editor helps considerably Forget auto WB. You can set it with WiBal card or proper K value , 5500, or just Sun if nothing else. AWB is a crutch to be avoided at all costs. I do use it in mixed undefined light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted February 20, 2016 Share #88 Posted February 20, 2016 I recommend everyone to send an email to Leica Camera-to urge the development of the next firmware. Good luck. It took 2 years to have a decent fix for the M240 lockup. If this problem is critical to you, just buy another camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
enigma.wu Posted February 20, 2016 Share #89 Posted February 20, 2016 I have the same highlight issue with my SL, and I believe it is not caused by auto WB because it can be largely fixed by changing the JPG settings: - Contrast (Medium low) - Saturation (Medium low) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jurijgallegra Posted March 10, 2016 Author Share #90 Posted March 10, 2016 You have to write to Leica and ask when it comes out the update. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 10, 2016 Share #91 Posted March 10, 2016 I just got the same problem of what appears like overblown yellow cast on my subject's face. It was in a restaurant with mixed lighting. Frustrating since we still don't have the firmware fix mentioned. Sorry, a restaurant with mixed lighting - a recipe for WB failure on any camera. No firmware fix will cure depending on automation when it cannot function. The best fix is to take a greycard WB setting (thoughtfully provided by Leica) off the tablecloth in front of the subject, and warm the temperature 100-200 degrees in raw conversion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 10, 2016 Share #92 Posted March 10, 2016 If this problem is critical to you, just buy another camera. Or shoot raw... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
talt03 Posted March 10, 2016 Share #93 Posted March 10, 2016 Sorry, a restaurant with mixed lighting - a recipe for WB failure on any camera. No firmware fix will cure depending on automation when it cannot function. The best fix is to take a greycard WB setting (thoughtfully provided by Leica) off the tablecloth in front of the subject, and warm the temperature 100-200 degrees in raw conversion. I can agree on this if the result using another camera were different. I had the SL and the T at that time which showed 2 different results, 2 Leica cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 10, 2016 Share #94 Posted March 10, 2016 No you cannot compare. In mixed lighting a shift of a few degrees will produce a different AWB, even in consecutive shots on the same camera. With fluorescents it is worse. The only remedy is a fixed grey card setting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 10, 2016 Share #95 Posted March 10, 2016 Forget auto WB. You can set it with WiBal card or proper K value , 5500, or just Sun if nothing else. AWB is a crutch to be avoided at all costs. I do use it in mixed undefined light. If I set my various cameras to the same colour temperature setting, all give different results. A grey card provides a reference but only if the illumination is viable for this. Mixed illuminants require a judgement based on the photographers visual determination of what is acceptable/required. This is subjective, and especially so if there are numerous differing illuminants utilised in an image, some of which are not full spectra and which will as a consequence produce colour casts which may be undesirable. AWB is irrelevant if shooting RAW anyway (except in exacting circumstances in which case exposure bracketing may be required or use of colour/exposure meters - relatively unusual requirements though). When I get a new camera the first thing that I do is shoot it to determine its 'boundaries' especially in terms of its tolerance to over-exposure and my software's ability to create casts/banding (Photoshop). Without this experimentation/knowledge its possible to get all sorts of spurious results especially if relying on automation (which in my view is what an out of camera JPEG file is, in effect anyway). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted March 10, 2016 Share #96 Posted March 10, 2016 Or shoot raw... Problem here is that video format is only MJPG. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted March 10, 2016 Share #97 Posted March 10, 2016 No you cannot compare. In mixed lighting a shift of a few degrees will produce a different AWB, even in consecutive shots on the same camera. Yes, you can compare. This is not an AWB problem, and other cameras don't have this issue even if the AWB is way off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 10, 2016 Share #98 Posted March 10, 2016 Well, the problem will be considerably mitigated if you set a proper starting point by using a grey-card WB setting. Mixed light is no way to judge OOC colours, or even colour rendering in general. Not that it absolves Leica from getting the JPG parameters right. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
talt03 Posted March 10, 2016 Share #99 Posted March 10, 2016 If you went through this thread from the start, we are just repeating the same arguments. This is a repeatable issue and Leica has been informed and working on it. #71 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted March 10, 2016 Share #100 Posted March 10, 2016 If you went through this thread from the start, we are just repeating the same arguments. This is a repeatable issue and Leica has been informed and working on it. #71 Perhaps it is repeatable, but using weird mixes of different illuminants is hardly the best way to demonstrate a problem is it? It has so many variables as to render it a pointless exercise. If someone does a proper test (grey card and colour checker) then fine, but results from mixed lighting are inevitably subjective and mask any genuine concerns - same goes for extreme high contrast situations, unless an exposure series is made to illustrate a highlight colour shift. Too many complaints lack objectivity in how they are presented and this is essential if they are to be presented viably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.