Jump to content

M10- FW Requests/Bug Reports

digitalfx

By digitalfx
in Leica M10

 Share

Recommended Posts

willemr

willemr

Posted
Posted

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's worth a try but I'm not sure that is doable with just firmware.

Can't see why; Half-pressed shutter is Exposure lock, so there is a electronic signal going somewhere that can be picked up by the software (IF half-pressed AND wheel rotates -> adjust EC. ELSE do nothing (EC-wise that is)). But using the button on the front (for LV-zoom). Or even the 'ok' button on the back. All these functions should be remap-able by a firmware update.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 474
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

digitalfx
digitalfx

- Bring back the Aperture info into EXIF

chris_tribble
chris_tribble

For those who don't read French the following comment by Stefan Daniel might be interesting:   "Mr. Daniel goes on to say: '...Regarding the electronic shutter, it is not a patent issue, since it is

mjh
mjh

Giving a choice even when just one of the two options makes sense only gives rise to pointless debates as to which option is best: “If ‘compressed’ is clearly the best option, then why does Leica offe

Posted Images

  • 3 weeks later...
leetmode

leetmode

Posted
Posted

Dear Leica engineers and firmware developers,

 

Please allow us to turn off Long Exposure Noise Reduction!

 

Allow us, the camera users, to determine if it's necessary given the circumstances that we are shooting in. If it is necessary then we can simply create darkframes to correct any imperfections found in the images if we still decide we want LENR off. If we want it on then we can turn it on, but I believe the camera user should determine what settings are needed and not needed.

 

I like to create long exposures by stacking images that are exposed for 1 second or longer simulating images that are several minutes long. LENR ruins this process for me. I love this camera and do not wish to have a second body from a different manufacturer but I also do not want to give up my M10. Photography has only been a hobby of mine for the last 10 years but every other digital camera I have owned, except for the Leica Q (surprise, surprise), has allowed me to turn off LENR. I simply do not understand the reasoning as to why we cannot do this especially considering Leica's philosophy when it comes to giving the user a simplified yet more organic approach to photography while having full control of the camera. LENR is not simple and not being able to turn it off does not allow the user to have full control of the camera...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
robsomers

robsomers

Posted
Posted

My Leica M10 shows excessive color noise, especially when shooting a pink building.  There are a lot of purple spots mixed in with the pink.  Using Adobe Camera Raw, cranking up the noise reduction to almost the maximum gets rid of the noise.  I also saw excessive color noise in a concrete slab under a sculpture, in the shady area.  All these conditions were with 200 ISO, F/5.6 to F/8, so nothing unusual.  The M240 showed only very slight similar color noise in the pink building. 

 

It also appears that the camera's auto white balance is quite cool.  Using an 18% gray card and two other cameras for reference (Pentax 645Z and Fujifilm X-T2), the color balance is cooler by at least 200, close to 400 on average.  This is true for daylight and indoor scenes, so it is pretty consistently lower.  Using the gray card seemed to set correct white balance however, as confirmed using Adobe Camera Raw's white balance tool on the gray card in the pictures.

 

In terms of features, I wish the M10 had the JPG adjustability that the M240 has.  I like the extra levels of sharpness and contrast especially.  The color seems more accurate in the M10 JPGs, but the M240 has more pleasing pictures technically at the default settings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
ejamgochian

ejamgochian

Posted
Posted

Feature request: apologies if this is elsewhere in the forum, but I didn't see it in my search.

 

For manual (non-coded) lens selection mode, it would be nice to be able to turn off selections for lenses that one does not own, similiar to the way that Favorites Menu selections are made. I suspect that few of us own more than a handful of lenses, so being able to limit lens selection to ones "normal" would greatly speed the lens change process. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
TX400

TX400

Posted
Posted

M10 with 1.9.4.0 firmware:

 

I noticed on JPG files EXIF data the reported ICC profile length is not the same as the length of the data. Perhaps the team at Leica should investigate/fix or explain why they are reporting the incorrect length.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
adan

adan

Posted
Posted

Any chance that we can add the lens profile for 35 summilux pre-asph in the next firmware update, please?

 

Leica has never supported the pre-ASPH 35 Summilux on digital in any way, shape or form. No profile exists, no associated 6-bit code exists. Never in the 11 years since the M8 came out. It is a "non-person" in Leica's digital world.

 

Mostly because of its very different, thick, screwless mounting flange, which made it impossible to retrofit easily with a coded mount. And some versions jam on digital bodies due to the raised protective black plate/rim around the rear element.

 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/images/35mm-f14/D3S_8189-1200.jpg

 

However - the profile for the 35 SUMMICRON pre-ASPH (v.4, the only pre-ASPH 35 Leica supports) works very well for it, since they use very similar 7-element double-gauss designs.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
peer_kugler

peer_kugler

Posted
Posted

Adjustable M10 Frameline Brightness via Firmware

 

I photograph mostly at night. The Framelines are almost always to bright, making framing very difficult. With the old optical system like the M9, MP, M6, this was never an issue. It would be great, if the brightness of the Framelines could be adjusted via the menu.

 

Anyone else having this issue?

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
a.noctilux

a.noctilux

Posted
Posted (edited)

Adjustable M10 Frameline Brightness via Firmware

 

I photograph mostly at night. The Framelines are almost always to bright, making framing very difficult. With the old optical system like the M9, MP, M6, this was never an issue. It would be great, if the brightness of the Framelines could be adjusted via the menu.

 

Anyone else having this issue?

 

I don't know which firmware/software version in your M10.

 

It's already there.

In mine, I can set in MENU - EVF BRIGHTNESS to low - medium low -medium ...so on and Auto.

When set to "low" in darkness, it's just good for me.

 

Even better, when set on "Auto", when needed I just hide the cell in front with one finger or something else, the frames and LED dim down.

Edited by a.noctilux
Link to post
Share on other sites
a.noctilux

a.noctilux

Posted
Posted

Yes, I am referring to the OVF.

 

Just try what I describe, then see by yourself.

It works on OVF.

 

Maybe the "Menu description as EVF" is not "complete" and the set brightness function cover the LED in OVF as well as framelines.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Reciprocity

Reciprocity

Posted
Posted (edited)

I wish I still had the option for the red frame lines that I had on the M240, I used them a lot in low light. I find that the brightness of the white frame lines on the M10 fluctuates a fair bit compared to the 240 as well, often far too bright for low light. 

Edited by Reciprocity
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
JohnBrawley

JohnBrawley

Posted
Posted

I really wish that I could see the image in playback with ONLY blinkies for under / over exposure.

 

Right now you have to also see blinkine with all the other status information that makes it hard to just judge composition.

 

Please can we have just blinkies and nothing else in playback as an option ?

 

JB 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
TX400

TX400

Posted
Posted (edited)

Also posted in another thread. I did some inspection of the EXIF data the camera creates:

 

I have been poking around a lot in the jpegs the M10 produces using ExifTool. I'm working on a project where I'm trying to get preview data out of the files as quickly as possible. My conclusion below is that something seems wrong with the EXIF data on the JPG files the m10 makes. This is with firmware 1.9.4.0.

 

Just about any operation on a JPG throws out an ICC profile length warning, apparently when the declared profile length doesn't match the actual length of the profile:

Warning: Bad length ICC_Profile (length 3144)

 

This is how I got the files out:

exiftool -a -b -W %d%f_%t%-c-from-JPG.%s -preview:all myfile.JPG

exiftool -a -b -W %d%f_%t%-c-from-DNG.%s -preview:all myfile.DNG

 

The preview image extracted from the JPG is unreadable by chrome, safari, and preview.app, but oddly Firefox reads and displays and image. These are a nice size at 1440x940 and 133kb, and it'd be great to use them since the Maestro processor has already done the work to resize them.

 

The thumbnails are 160px wide. They seem have black bars at the top and bottom. You can see them as iPhone iOS reads an SD card and otherwise on macOS. Extracting these works. Since I'm seeing this on the apple platforms and with ExifTool I think those bars may be part of the data. This may be part of the EXIF spec for some visual compatibility reasons because I see people complaining about this 

 

The DNG is another story. It appears to be healthier. From the DNG, a similar thumbnail image is present with the black bars. There are two preview images embedded in the DNG file.  First is a ~1.6MB jpeg at 100/24MP size. Presumably this is the chimping image we actually see when we zoom in while using the back of the camera. The second is the 1440x940 small preview image from the jpeg, but this time it's intact and readable by usual programs.

 

It seems like something is wrong with the JPG files the camera creates, like the EXIF data is improperly copied or something.

Edited by TX400
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...