Jeff S Posted July 1, 2018 Share #81 Posted July 1, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I turned power saving OFF. The camera was still on even the screen went off. Thanks for confirming you have upgraded from older version to 2.4.5.0, I was wondering of that, too. Are you sure the installation wasn’t proceeding? Some have reported 10 minutes or so to complete. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 1, 2018 Posted July 1, 2018 Hi Jeff S, Take a look here Leica M10 FW-Update 2.4.5.0 brings an improved Auto ISO option and more!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rqliang Posted July 1, 2018 Share #82 Posted July 1, 2018 No, the installation - FW file uncompressing, was stopped once the screen went black. I waited 15 minutes for the first attempt, still nothing, pressed on the center button in the 4 way navigation area, then screen was lit and showing battery is still 100%. After that, went to Camera Info menu and it still ask me if i want to upgrade as nothing happened. Are you sure the installation wasn’t proceeding? Some have reported 10 minutes or so to complete.Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ckuwajima Posted July 1, 2018 Share #83 Posted July 1, 2018 It is a bummer! I would try using another SD, formatted in camera, with a fresh download in a different computer, with another fully charged battery. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rqliang Posted July 1, 2018 Share #84 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) I guess my problem is the downloaded file, it must be corrupted. I will give it another go anyway. Just wish Leica could publish a checksum value for each FW downloadable file, so we can verify the downloaded file before start upgrading. This would prevent lots of upgrading problem. It is a bummer! I would try using another SD, formatted in camera, with a fresh download in a different computer, with another fully charged battery. Edited July 1, 2018 by rqliang Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted July 1, 2018 Share #85 Posted July 1, 2018 Well that's sad to read, considering that Leica Customer Service has said that this WOULD be added to a future firmware update. So either they lied, or did not know what they were talking about. Not very nice or professional, regardless of reason. Considering that you can get 6-axis motion tracking devices in normal sizes of 3 x 3 x 0.9 mm, and even smaller, it shouldn't have been a problem fitting this inside the M10. Remember, that is a 6-axis motion tracking device that includes a 3-axis accelerometer, gyroscope, and an onboard digital motion sensor. It also operates at only 1.8 volts and consumes only 6.1mW of power. These specs are taken from a motion tracking device that was released in 2012, which by 2017 was probably optimized and reduced in size even more. EDIT: Was able to find a 1 x 1 x 0.9 mm accelerometer, the mCube MC3571. It is basically smaller than a grain of sand. mCube-MC3571-1x1-Accelerometer-Press.jpeg Sounds more like a "slash costs at all costs" measure than a space or energy savings effort to me. Some of us actually use our M's on tripods for various work. And removing such a useful feature, that existed in the M240 and all it's iterations, is simply silly and cheap. I agree. My only complaint about the M10 is the lack of electronic level for tripod and WA use. It is, in my opinion, a significant, unfortunate, and unnecessary omission. In all other respects I'm very happy with the M10, especially now that long exposure has been increased to 4 minutes (although why it can't be longer with an option to switch off LENR is beyond me). 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roverover Posted July 1, 2018 Share #86 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) Wouw. Excellent update. And now LV framerate is 60fps. no lag, much details. Perfect! I am curious what your comment about the Live View frame-rate is in regards too? I don't see any reference to it changing in any information i can find regarding this FW update. Thanks. Edited July 1, 2018 by roverover Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
david strachan Posted July 1, 2018 Share #87 Posted July 1, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) I wonder what a long time image without LENR would be like to process. Maybe Leica has a secret sauce...hence no LENR. I've pushed my M8 to 500 seconds...but the image "fell apart" with black spots thoughout, impossible to fix. ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 1, 2018 Share #88 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) Some good updates, especially adding the aperture back to to the EXIF, essential even if an estimate, and the Load Profile. Good to see also that Leica have just added options to existing menu items and NOT added new ones, still keeping it as simple as they can, well done. Edited July 1, 2018 by Guest Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M11 for me Posted July 1, 2018 Share #89 Posted July 1, 2018 Well, with the aperture in the Exifs I have my reserves as I see the result now. I shot a test series yesterday to see those aperture values: I must say that the result is very questionable. Indeed I looked very much forward to this feature. But as I understand it now the guessing is a real guessing. Still its maybe better than nothing but I must say that I am a bit disappointed about the lack of accuracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gobert Posted July 1, 2018 Share #90 Posted July 1, 2018 That was exactly the reason why they left it out in the M10. The actual figures cannot be transmitted due the absence of electronic contacts betweem lens and body. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted July 1, 2018 Share #91 Posted July 1, 2018 The „guessing“ of the f-stop has never been accurate in all cases. There are dozens of threads with users complaing about this - I think many more than complaining about the missing f-stop in the M10s EXIF. Perhaps this was the reason for leaving the unreliable information out. It was evident that the complaints would start again when they introduced it again. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted July 1, 2018 Share #92 Posted July 1, 2018 It should be possible to turn the aperture estimating on or off. In the summertime I must very often use an ND filter when using my Noctilux wide open. But the EXIF shows f/2.8 instead of f/1.0. A 3 stop ND filter results in 3 stops smaller aperture estimate. The camera shows the correct light transmission, but the actual depth of field is quite different from what the EXIF suggests. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark II Posted July 1, 2018 Share #93 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) The „guessing“ of the f-stop has never been accurate in all cases.It is an estimate, not a guess - and it is the best that can be done without substantial re-design work for both the M mount and lenses. Personally I find it useful as an aid to understanding what I might have done for an image to have come out the way it did. The inability to compensate for filter factors is annoying but inevitable, but then I usually know what I had fitted when I took a given picture... I am glad that this was added back in. Edited July 1, 2018 by Mark II 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rqliang Posted July 1, 2018 Share #94 Posted July 1, 2018 An update to my upgrade problem: Downloaded FW file again, and everything went well eventually. Second time downloaded file has different MD5 checksum value against the first downloaded one. 2.4.5.0 FW file MD5 checksum value should be c82d1fb9ca3e12f617af7b7be8b3d4fb, hopefully this will help others to ensure the downloaded file is not being corrupted. My case also confirmed that you can upgrade from early version directly. I guess my problem is the downloaded file, it must be corrupted. I will give it another go anyway. Just wish Leica could publish a checksum value for each FW downloadable file, so we can verify the downloaded file before start upgrading. This would prevent lots of upgrading problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPP1 Posted July 1, 2018 Share #95 Posted July 1, 2018 My Summicron 50mm V4 (coded by Leica) is now automatically detected by the camera. Never been able to do that with previous firmware version allthough it worked flawlessly on M9, T and TL2. To my knowledge, other users have been complaining about difficulties with different legacy lenses. Would be interesting to hear from them. And, thanks to Leica for this valuable upgrade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted July 1, 2018 Share #96 Posted July 1, 2018 (edited) Not necessary for tripod mounting as you can slide bubble level into hot shoe when mounting camera and locking level. Was always useful 'in the hand' with earlier Ms.I have used a multidirectional bubble level mounted on the hot shoe in the past and I am using one again with the M10. I cannot mount both the Visoflex/ external OVF and level in the same hot shoe can I? . I have to sit the level loose on the top plate of the camera. It is a pain when working in very low light having to get a torch out to read the bubble position on the camera on the tripod. Having been spoilt with the workflow of both composition and levelling handheld or tripod through the Visoflex, especially with WA lenses, removal of the electronic level is a retrograde step. Edited July 1, 2018 by MarkP 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted July 1, 2018 Share #97 Posted July 1, 2018 It is an estimate, not a guess. An estimate is just a guess with a fancy diploma and a higher hourly fee. It should be possible to turn the aperture estimating on or off. Or, one can simply ignore it. If it really worries you, tape a little piece of gray translucent plastic over the external sensor when using an ND filter, to "equalize" the scene brightness for both sensors. ________________ Leica just can't win - if they leave out the aperture estimate, people whine because it isn't there. If they include it, people whine because it often isn't accurate (using ND filters, using a lens with a different metering angle than the fixed sensor (wide angles or telephotos), shooting a scene with variable brightness (a dark door in a white wall, or a white door in a dark wall). 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 1, 2018 Share #98 Posted July 1, 2018 An estimate is just a guess with a fancy diploma and a higher hourly fee. Or, one can simply ignore it. If it really worries you, tape a little piece of gray translucent plastic over the external sensor when using an ND filter, to "equalize" the scene brightness for both sensors. ________________ Leica just can't win - if they leave out the aperture estimate, people whine because it isn't there. If they include it, people whine because it often isn't accurate (using ND filters, using a lens with a different metering angle than the fixed sensor (wide angles or telephotos), shooting a scene with variable brightness (a dark door in a white wall, or a white door in a dark wall). 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! 2 Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/286070-leica-m10-fw-update-2450-brings-an-improved-auto-iso-option-and-more/?do=findComment&comment=3547368'>More sharing options...
happymac Posted July 1, 2018 Share #99 Posted July 1, 2018 Leica just can't win - if they leave out the aperture estimate, people whine because it isn't there. If they include it, people whine because it often isn't accurate (using ND filters, using a lens with a different metering angle than the fixed sensor (wide angles or telephotos), shooting a scene with variable brightness (a dark door in a white wall, or a white door in a dark wall). People who desired the feature – as I did – are happy now, because there was no way to obtain the data from the camera. People who claim about the inaccurate estimation have the option just to ignore the aperture information... 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
evikne Posted July 1, 2018 Share #100 Posted July 1, 2018 A kind of “aperture estimate compensation” in the menu would have been very nice, but also a bit cumbersome I’m afraid. All in all I am very happy now, as it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now