Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rwfreund

M8 Firmware 1.107 Features and positive experiences thread - PLEASE USE

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Seems the flash aspect is working much better with this firmware. The time between preflash and main flash (using TTL/GNC setting) seems to be shorter, using the SF24. Exposure seems better and more consistent with SF24 flash.

 

Has me wondering if this firmware is supporting a new flash to be released in the near future?

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Start up is spiffier -- A+

2) AWB is much improved, but still a long way from perfect -- B-

3) ISO. I compared identical before and after shots. 2500 noise is no different and still not very usable IMO. 1250 noise may be a tiny bit improved, but very marginal. If this was actually a change in the software, D-

3a) Related to ISO, my 1.107 1250 shot actually looked a bit less detailed than my 1.09 1250 shot -- but this could have been focus on my part. I only mention it so others can look for it. (I suspect focus error on my part, so tester gets a C-

)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
do you have to format an sd card to upgrade ?

 

No. If you have images on the card, you can just put the .upd file at the root level and the camera will handle if from there. After the update is complete, the camera deletes the .upd file and you can keep on shooting.

 

Henning

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1...

2) AWB is much improved, but still a long way from perfect -- B-

...

 

As far as I can tell, there is little if any improvement in awb consistency.

Since I have only one body, I cannot say if I really see that much awb improvement at all, except (very subjective) that in general the results MAY be cooler.

-bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Straight out of camera still seems off in terms of color. I set it at WB=DayLight.

ISO=640

JPG Fine

50mm Summicron-M

Aperture= f2

UV/IR cut filter

 

Noise Reduction is, indeed, better.

 

Untouched

 

 

Adjusted in LR: colors, sharpened. And yes, my monitor is calibrated.

 

Shot B&W, adjusted in LR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not see any documentations about what's New in the updated firmware. Anyone saw that doc lying around elsewhere?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The AWB is definitely better; I shot AWB with white objects in the frame under flourescent (type unknown), daylight (first time we've had sun in about 50 days here in Austin) and incandescent today to test this; I tried ISOs 160, 640, and 1250.

 

AWB nailed the whites under flourescent and daylight, and got close twice out of three shots at 650 and 1250 under tungsten, leaving a warm cast on the third shot. Not perfect, but not completely wonky anymore at least.

 

At 1250, noise does seem better controlled to me, especially in JPG. The difference is not striking, but it is noticeable. I haven't tried 2500.

 

The "menu dancing" is better but not perfect - I don't get the epileptic jumping menus anymore, but I still do get "skipped clicks" (i.e. turn the wheel once and nothing happens; turn it again and get the effect of having turned it twice).

 

I have not yet gotten the annoying "arrow failure" on image review (press the arrow, get a flash of the correct picture, then the wrong picture).

 

Overall, many annoyances reduced but not yet quite eliminated.

 

I was happy before, and it is encouraging that the camera continues to get (slowly) better for no additional charge. But there is still the sense of some instability and annoyance, which will undoubtedly be further reduced by the next update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As far as I can tell, there is little if any improvement in awb consistency.

Since I have only one body, I cannot say if I really see that much awb improvement at all, except (very subjective) that in general the results MAY be cooler.

-bob

 

I should have clarified -- I am using older, un-coded lenses without IR cut filters and have the lens recognition turned off. And for whatever reason, I am definitely getting better color out of the gate than i did with 1.09.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jack - same experience. I'm shooting two M8's side by side, one with 1.102 the other with 1.107. 1.107's better. Subtle, but at 100% and on paper, it's better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Straight out of camera still seems off in terms of color. I set it at WB=DayLight.

ISO=640

JPG Fine

50mm Summicron-M

Aperture= f2

UV/IR cut filter

 

Arthur, you're shooting inside so while the primary light source may indeed be daylight, it's tinted by relections off your walls. You should have tried white-balancing off the shirt in camera or alternatively AWB. Also, the fact that you've played around in Lightoom confuses things. Much better to show the images as they come out of the camera.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

I have yet to load it up. Looking forward to trying it out but seems like some stuff was done pretty well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I posted this in another thread:

 

Well, looking at AWB and testing this morning using DNG, DNG+JPG FINE, and JPG FINE, I don't see the AWB completely fixed but it is better. Shooting in a mixed environment with mostly daylight plus a tungsten light I get a blueish cast on all three modes and the correct color if I set to the camera to daylight. What I am finding is that mixed tungsten and daylight produces a blueish cast, mixed florescent and daylight looks close but still slightly blueish cast, mostly tungsten is very close, mostly florescent is very close, and all daylight looks very good. Also in repeat shots I don't see the shift I was seeing before. How does this compare to what others are finding?

 

Just a minor clarification: To test mixed/unmixed lighting I took the same shot with daylight through the windows and a lamp turned on and then with the lamp turned off. Same test with florescent lighting. My conclusion is that it is greatly improved but not yet fixed.

__________________

 

Additionally, I am finding the SF-24D Flash works much better. Before, if I tried to take a close up shot it was way overexposed and I had to constantly stop down 2 stops to keep from overexposing the image. My testing yesterday at close or far seemed to produce a flash that was spot on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would seem that Leica has focused on image quality in this release, and tried to fix the button issue. Nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They also corrected the spelling mistake that used to read "lens dependant." Yeah!

 

As people have said, this is a minor update. But, I do see that AWB is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When people ask me the same question about my software (not that it has bugs, you understand), I tell them there was a "code timing problem".

 

"I see", they'll say and go away happy and content but not much the wiser, thinking I have wrestled with some awsome technical challenge.

 

What I really mean of course is that their CD was cut before I'd fixed all the bugs...

 

Thats a great one that I will have to use. I usually say that it is a Microsoft bug or that it isn't a bug at all but was designed that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have tried out today the new Software update, still the same problem with AWB, 2 shots inside Mcdonald with a lot of daylight, same object 3 seconds between each shot. 1 has the warmtone, other one is cold kind of blue.

 

Normal I used mostly daylight, but again this behavier still sucks. nothing is done in this upgrade to solved that, and the problem is knowing by Leica from the beginning right?

 

Theo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if you will go in McDonald's you deserve all you get - crapy light , crapy organisation:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if you will go in McDonald's you deserve all you get - crapy light , crapy organisation:)

 

Now, with crappy light and crappy organisation, they make still millions of dollars, can be not that bad right.

 

Theo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
theo, maybe you should post this to the bugs thread, cause it doesnt sound like a improvement

 

Maybe leica read quicker the positive treads then the problems comments.

 

Theo

Share this post


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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy