Jump to content

M240 sensor defect that Leica says is within tolerances


McMax

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was playing around in Lightroom in November 2017, mainly testing different extreme values with the haze control, and other stuff to experiment with my photography.

It would be interesting to know what this 'haze' control is designed to achieve and what it actually does technically. Without this its very difficult to know whether there is any 'problem' at all (I use Photoshop not Lightroom). FWIW when I get a new camera, the first thing I do is to shoot some images and process them to extremes in order to know where limits lie in what can be done with the files. All digital images exhibit 'flaws' if pushed too hard. It would be unrealistic to expect any manufacturer to even try to come up with guidelines as to what may be and what may not be viable if for no other reason that that there is an awful lot of different image processing software out there.

 

Personally I would simply avoid post processing steps which show any such 'problems' up. In the past an underexposed transparency was simply dark and could only be lightened by copying/printing in ways which did so - but doing so would yield poor copies/prints. Pushing things too far has never been an appropriate way to operate without very specific reasons for doing so (creative for example).

Edited by pgk
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

[...] All digital images exhibit 'flaws' if pushed too hard. It would be unrealistic to expect any manufacturer to even try to come up with guidelines as to what may be and what may not be viable [...]

 

+1. A camera maker cannot (and may not according to its insurers) acknowledge any sort of responsibility when it has obviously none and aside from legal warnings, it is not up to it to explain how its products are supposed to work out of tolerance or specification. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

That is the problem with Ligthroom, it takes you down a path of having amazing adjustments at your fingertips, then abandons you when it goes tits up. If it's possible to make a selection in Lightroom just draw around the offending aberration and press delete for 'Content Aware' to remove the seam in the picture. Lightroom has got better recently but I stopped using it two weeks after it's initial release.

Easier to just delete the step which put the seam there.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same issue with my M246...

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/281256-leica-m246-stitched-sensor-issue/

 

And this NOT because I "push beyond" like some of the gentlemen in here suggests.

I can see the line on some of my images without any tweaking at all.

 

My camera is now in Wetzlar for a open heart surgery.

 

 

Alex

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the same issue with my M246...

 

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/281256-leica-m246-stitched-sensor-issue/

 

And this NOT because I "push beyond" like some of the gentlemen in here suggests.

I can see the line on some of my images without any tweaking at all.

 

My camera is now in Wetzlar for a open heart surgery.

 

 

Alex

Please let us know what Leica did. I saw your image that you posted, and it looks like the problem I have (there are photos that the line shows in images that I took that were not i sanely tweaked also).

 

 

Skickat från min iPad med Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to know what this 'haze' control is designed to achieve and what it actually does technically. Without this its very difficult to know whether there is any 'problem' at all (I use Photoshop not Lightroom). FWIW when I get a new camera, the first thing I do is to shoot some images and process them to extremes in order to know where limits lie in what can be done with the files. All digital images exhibit 'flaws' if pushed too hard. It would be unrealistic to expect any manufacturer to even try to come up with guidelines as to what may be and what may not be viable if for no other reason that that there is an awful lot of different image processing software out there.

 

Personally I would simply avoid post processing steps which show any such 'problems' up. In the past an underexposed transparency was simply dark and could only be lightened by copying/printing in ways which did so - but doing so would yield poor copies/prints. Pushing things too far has never been an appropriate way to operate without very specific reasons for doing so (creative for example).

I think that the cause of the artifact in the dehazetool is that it raises the black point whilst increasing midtone contrast at the same time.  That is bound to emphasize density differences. If the two ADCs and further hardware of the readout are at the far end of the tolerance span, it will show up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Film can be pushed beyond its limits too. ;)

 

Oh, Sir, perhaps true but I disagree that it should! Below you will find a film photo made using an esteemed lens and camera, Canon 85mm lens f/1.8, Leica M4 made full-framed upon the distinguished, special and expensive Kodak brand film type 2475 film rated at their suggested 1600 ASA exposed under lighting by the renowned General Electric Company's single 40W bulb in a large rural kitchen and properly developed in Kodak's recommended HC-110 chemistry.  The outcome looks nothing at all like the image in the viewfinder! It looks nothing like what the eye would see! My child, my mate did not look like that! For all the money spent and the high expectations promoted by the vendors  have promised I call for a civil remedy of the gravest amount.

 

The picture, the tragedy is here.

Edited by pico
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I post this to see if anyone else have/had the same sensor issues with their M240 (M-P).

 

I was playing around in Lightroom in November 2017, mainly testing different extreme values with the haze control, and other stuff to experiment with my photography. To my astonishment I saw a vertical line running exactly in the middle of the uncropped image. I then tested a photo from April 2015 that was taken with another M240 M-P body I had at that time. And the same vertical line appeared. I then randomly tested several other photos, and the same line appears, in virtually all photos, from both M-P bodies! I have a total of more than 20000 photos with M-P:s that in some or another way are affected by this problem.

 

Attached here is an example of a jpg from M-P body 1, and one of M-P body 2, after tweakning the dng:s.

 

attachicon.gifScreen dump small part of image body 1.jpeg

 

attachicon.gifScreen dump small part of image body 2.jpeg

 

The dng:s and full JPG:s can be downloaded to view through the links provided here:

 

Link to DNG (M-P body 1): https://we.tl/FQQkFgKo7U

Link to JPG (M-P body 1): https://we.tl/4BpPecbwmR

 

Link to DNG (M-P body 2): https://we.tl/O2Kb9XKab7

Link to JPG (M-P body 2): https://we.tl/a3Vw2FUBYQ

 

These images do not represent my photography (www.m9x.se), but they show the problem very clearly.

 

So I went to my local Leica center in Stockholm who sent it to Leica in Germany. My lokal Leica dealer is fantastic by the way.

 

I instructed Leica to test the way I had done in Lightroom doing the following:

- adjust ”haze” to a the right

- lower the value of vibrance

- lower the value of saturation

- set exposure to show a standard good histogram curve

 

Leica concluded that the sensor ”function within tolerances”. They said:

 

 

Both I and my lokal Leica dealer where astonished and very surprised. Separately we wrote to Leica. My dealer wrote this to Leica:

 

 

 

 

To add to this, I told Leica that I would most likely post something on a forum to see if others have the same problem. To this Leica sent out a in-house alert message (that I mistakenly received a copy of) saying:

 

 

Have I found an inherent problem with the sensor construction on the M240?

 

To sum up:

  1. The vertical line appears in the exact same position in both bodys. This probably means it is an inherent problem in the construction of the sensor, or? My guess is that the sensor consists of two halves fused together, and that this fuse is not seamless (no, I do not know this, I am not a technician).
  2. The line appears in Lightroom (but also in C1Pro, Silver Efex Pro, ON1 Photo Raw). So it is not a matter of software. Although, in Lightroom (Leica´s preferred software) it appears much stronger than in C1P11.
  3. I have tested other cameras, and I cannot get a vertical line to appear in any images from them. I tested a GH4 heavily during the period my M-P was in Germany, as well as Ricoh GRii. And my old M9 did not have this problem, nor the even older Canon 5D.
  4. It is not a dead pixel problem.
  5. It is not banding.
  6. A camera that costs around 7000 Euro should not have this kind of sensor issue. A photographer/artist should be able to tweak a photo without a vertical line separating the image in two halves. 
  7. There are many other competing camera makers nowadays. A camera company in 2018 should not act this way to faithful consumers. My Leica garage includes/included: R4, M9, M-P, 18/3.4, 28/2.8 Asph, 35/2 vers 4, two 50/1.4 Asph, 50/1.4, two 75/2 APO, 90/2.8, Digital flash SD20, etc… 
  8. I am a devoted hobby photographer. I am not rich (not even close) and the expenses from Leica equipment means less of other things in my life. But I have spent 25000 Euro on Leica products through the years. I do not make any money on photography. I have used Leica for the love of their products. But maybe not som much anymore, to which I am very sad.

Any one out there that has had the same problem?

 

 

If it would be nice if the line wasn't there ......but you put that much effort in post..... take 10 more minutes and retouch out the line.

Unfortunately we have to work with in the technology of the moment.....We all wish that Leica was perfection......sadly nothing is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, Sir, I disagree! Below you will find a film photo made using an esteemed lens and camera, Canon 85mm lens f/1.8, Leica M4 made full-framed upon the distinguished, special and expensive Kodak brand film type 2475 film rated at their own suggested 1600 ASA and properly developed in their recommended HC-110 chemistry under lighting by the renowned General Electric Company's 40W bulb.  The outcome looks nothing at all like the image in the viewfinder! It looks nothing like what the eye would see! My child, my mate did not look like this! For all the money spent and the high expectations promoted by the vendors  have promised I call for a civil remedy of the gravest amount.

 

The picture, the tragedy is here.

Hah! you are no match for me when it comes to spoiling pictures by stupid darkroom work! :p

Powerful double portrait BTW.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hah! you are no match for me when it comes to spoiling pictures by stupid darkroom work! :p

 

I would take on your challenge with evidence but my most grievous darkroom error ended in a catastrophic fire that destroyed my work.  Lemmie tell ya that Vodka 1:1 with Dektol does not promote paper sensitivity and there is no rationale for smoking a cigar in the darkroom.

 

...wait... it was Russian vodka! I sense an international conspiracy here! And maybe the cigar was Cuban!

Edited by pico
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If it would be nice if the line wasn't there ......but you put that much effort in post..... take 10 more minutes and retouch out the line.

Unfortunately we have to work with in the technology of the moment.....We all wish that Leica was perfection......sadly nothing is.

 

I agree about 10 min comment. In fact it takes less than a minute in LR.

 

However there should be no excuse for proper exposure. I think digital has spoiled (or raised unrealistic expectations) regarding correct exposure. Folks (including me) who have shot transparencies know about the importance of correct exposure. The correctly exposed (and processed) pic is in https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/281409-super-duper-blue-blood-moon/?p=3453302

 

Here is my example of "the line". Yes, it is there if you push but not at all an issue for my photography. In fact I can very well salvage this picture. See below:

 

 

Picture as shot (4 stops underexposure at ISO200)

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!

 

Pushed 4 stops in post (ISO 3200 equivalent, base ISO200), Line and banding visible in the sky clearly. (Moon has local highlight processing that's why it has not become brighter after push).

 

 

Crop to show the line.

 

 

Less than a minute processing in LR. Mainly "dehazing" the sky after 4 stops push and cloning the line. All in LR classic taking less than 1 minute.

Still not the same as correct exposure, HDR etc. etc. but very much a salvaged picture.

Edited by jmahto
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I would take on your challenge with evidence but my most grievous darkroom error ended in a catastrophic fire that destroyed my work.  Lemmie tell ya that Vodka 1:1 with Dektol does not promote paper sensitivity and there is no rationale for smoking a cigar in the darkroom.

 

...wait... it was Russian vodka! I sense an international conspiracy here! And maybe the cigar was Cuban!

OK You win.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree about 10 min comment. In fact it takes less than a minute in LR.

 

However there should be no excuse for proper exposure. I think digital has spoiled (or raised unrealistic expectations) regarding correct exposure. Folks (including me) who have shot transparencies know about the importance of correct exposure. The correctly exposed (and processed) pic is in https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/281409-super-duper-blue-blood-moon/?p=3453302

 

Here is my example of "the line". Yes, it is there if you push but not at all an issue for my photography. In fact I can very well salvage this picture. See below:

 

 

Picture as shot (4 stops underexposure at ISO200)

attachicon.gifsensor-20180131super_blue_blood_moon_eclipse-1001771.jpg

 

Pushed 4 stops in post (ISO 3200 equivalent, base ISO200), Line and banding visible in the sky clearly. (Moon has local highlight processing that's why it has not become brighter after push).

attachicon.gifsensor-20180131super_blue_blood_moon_eclipse-1001771-2.jpg

 

 

Crop to show the line.

attachicon.gifsensor-20180131super_blue_blood_moon_eclipse-1001771-3.jpg

 

 

Less than a minute processing in LR. Mainly "dehazing" the sky after 4 stops push and cloning the line. All in LR classic taking less than 1 minute.

Still not the same as correct exposure, HDR etc. etc. but very much a salvaged picture.

attachicon.gifsensor-20180131super_blue_blood_moon_eclipse-1001771-4.jpg

 

 

I think that's a hot pixel issue?

 

I always thought Leica's sensor is a stitch  sensor.... lower production cost... at least it's just a 2 half stitch, not like Phase One/Leaf Dalsa 8 piece stitch that I used to really love.... until I start pushing clarity and shadow....

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a hot pixel issue?

 

I always thought Leica's sensor is a stitch sensor.... lower production cost... at least it's just a 2 half stitch, not like Phase One/Leaf Dalsa 8 piece stitch that I used to really love.... until I start pushing clarity and shadow....

I don't know the cause. It certainly is not in the middle.
Link to post
Share on other sites

No, it is not a stitch sensor, but it is read out in two halves by separate pipelines and ADCs to double the readout speed.

The defect you show is a pixel line. The sensor can most likely be remapped. If not, Leica will replace the sensor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it is fairly normal for sensors to exhibit this.

 

Here is a bank frame of my older Phase One P65+ doing the same when the exposure is pushed as far as it can.

 

Pushing 4 stops is excessive in real use is excessive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the steps suggested by McMax, I cannot replicate the issue in any of the different pictures I did try on. What I get is an horrible image, but not a slightest sign of a line in the middle. Pictures taken with a M240.

That is odd. Following the steps, I can see the line in many of my photos (the ones that are well exposured and those not so well taken). Perhaps only some bodies/examples of M-P are this sensitive to extreme pushing?

 

 

Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk Pro

Link to post
Share on other sites

Following the steps suggested by McMax, I cannot replicate the issue in any of the different pictures I did try on. What I get is an horrible image, but not a slightest sign of a line in the middle. Pictures taken with a M240.

Be careful.

 

You’ll get a reputation for taking bad pictures and processing them to be worse. :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...