Jump to content

A most desirable firmware WISH


usefeet

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Walt have to honest here and here it is your trying to use a Zeiss or CV lens than that is your problem not leica's and the only thing they are responsible for is there own brand of lenses and they have leica's name on it. The only reason leica would give the code away is too leica lens users that can't code a lens either because of a screw or mechnical mount issue. Period. The only other possible reason and i really mean possible is becuase they are backlogged on coding lenses for folks but that process is in place at all there facilities. So the true reality is this it was and is intended for leica lenses only. What YOU as a third party lens holder can do is basically steal that code and plug your Zeiss and CV lens for it. leica does not even recoginize the word Zeiss and CV this is the legal part of this or Zeiss and CV could sue the pants off of leica if leica even breathed that you can use your Zeiss and CV. You have to look at leicas responsibily to there Leica lens buyers period. Weather it is good for them to have Zeiss and CV lenses compatible is completely irelevant. This has everything to do with Patents, Copyrights and legal issues. You have to understand this part or your completely barking up the wrong tree. Legally and morally there only responsible for Leica. Everyone keeps saying to do this and that is sitting on zeiss and CV, they can't cater to this user but they can to leica only users.

 

This is the legal part now take this a step further and here it is. You, not picking on you but Zeiss and Cv lens holders will (let's be real honest here ) steal a copyrighted firmware code and use it to your benefit ( pirating software here folks) to use on a leica branded camera so your lenses will match there system. Am i not correct here. let's forget all the marketting stuff that it would be good for leica and all that been discussed to death not the point i am making at all but looking at this from the legal end of it. leica cannot think or embrass zeiss or CV in any capacity from a patent, copyright or legal standpoint.

 

Reason i have said this several times already this is a top management call. The have a obligation in a moral sense to there leica lens buyers but they know full well that Zeiss and CV lens users will basically steal the code. be it a good thing overall does not matter , it is somewhat giving it away that could possible hurt there own lens sales. frankly you can't blame them there in business to make money. So what we have done yes all of us end users is jacked them up against a wall and said give it up.

 

This is a tough call to make for Leica no matter where you sit in this. i would like to see it but it can backfire on them too and where to you risk shareholder value.

 

 

Seriously we can piss and moan all about this but there is a lot more going on internally than just saying release it. This is politics and legal decisions . I hope they do it but we will have to see what they do ultimately on it

 

 

Just playing the little devil in the back room but needs to be known

I'm sorry Guy, but honestly you are missing the point here. This has nothing to do with Zeiss and CV lenses, which I use, but rarely. Ninety percent of the time I am using the Leica 28/2 or the 35/2 lenses, both of which are coded. I did not buy this M-mount camera as one that must be exclusively used with Leica-brand lenses, nor did Leica represent it that way. Are they even representing it that way right now? People have been using other maker's lenses since the day the M3 hit the shelves.

 

Walt

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I did not buy this M-mount camera as one that must be exclusively used with Leica-brand lenses, nor did Leica represent it that way.

 

So I did!... And I expect to get out of the camera all the possibilities it can offer. If I get with my Nokton 35/1.2 pictures with less quality than with a LUX 35/1.4, this should be only caused by the quality of the Nokton, not because I cannot use all the possibilities offered by the M8 because I'm not using a Leica lens.

 

It's like if I have a Digilux 3 and Leica restricts me to use a Zuiko lens! Nonsense!

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

Walt do you honestly think Leica will say yea you can use Zeiss and CV in there marketing. It's not that it is great to be able to use the 3rd party lenses and even leica knows that but legally all they can think about or respond too is leica brand in any way shape or form

Link to post
Share on other sites

What YOU as a third party lens holder can do is basically steal that code and plug your Zeiss and CV lens for it..<snip> You, not picking on you but Zeiss and Cv lens holders will (let's be real honest here ) steal a copyrighted firmware code and use it to your benefit ( pirating software here folks) to use on a leica branded camera so your lenses will match there system.

 

Guy, I strongly disagree with you on this. What I (and others) on this thread have suggested/asked for is just the ability to identify the lens in use, not necessarily to use Leica's firmware correction. Leica can keep their firmware correction - we'll correct in post. Frankly, the firmware correction isn't all that good anyway, especially at the very wide end!!!! :D

 

Sandy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

Sandy what Leica will do is make the code for each of there leica lenses like the 21mm, 24, 28 and so on and the 3rd party will pick which match there lens to the codes in the firmware

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso
Guy, I strongly disagree with you on this. What I (and others) on this thread have suggested/asked for is just the ability to identify the lens in use, not necessarily to use Leica's firmware correction. Leica can keep their firmware correction - we'll correct in post. Frankly, the firmware correction isn't all that good anyway, especially at the very wide end!!!! :D

 

Sandy

 

What point would that serve if the corrections are not in there. The whole point for Zeiss and CV users is that correction in the firmware that closely matches there lens. Not doing this stuff in post , no offense on Cornerfix

 

I honestly see no value there if there is not a correction in place for my Zeiss 21mm that i can code to a leica 21mm with my IR filters in place . i hope I understand you question correctly but no one in reality wants to do this in post processing with cornerfix. i mean no disrespect you realize that it is a great tool for when you need it for lenses but ultimately i think people want no hassle and it is just there for them clean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Guy, I strongly disagree with you on this. What I (and others) on this thread have suggested/asked for is just the ability to identify the lens in use, not necessarily to use Leica's firmware correction. Leica can keep their firmware correction - we'll correct in post. Frankly, the firmware correction isn't all that good anyway, especially at the very wide end!!!! :D

 

Sandy

 

Sandy, I don't expect a lens menu for the Nokton 35/1.2 but if an image taken with a 35mm lens and the M8 need correction, the M8 firmware should apply this correction (for exemple, via a lens selection menu if the lens cannot be detected).

 

M-mount is standard used by other manufacturers. If Leica wanted to avoid using these OEM lenses, they should have made a completely new lens line for the M8. It's like in your Mac or PC you cannot use other memory/scanner/monitor/printer/HD/keyboard/whatever than Appel or Microsoft brand!

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, this coding issue reminds me a very actual history: European Commission vs Microsoft Corp.

 

The Court of First Instance, the EU's second-highest court, will decide on the European Commission's 2004 order that found the company broke competition law and imposed a record fine of 497 million euros ($613 million).

 

In addition, the EU ordered Microsft Corp. to sell a copy of Windows without its media player software and told it to share communications code and information with rivals to help them develop server software that worked smoothly with Microsoft's ubiquitous Windows desktop operating system.

 

EU regulators later fined Microsoft another 280.5 million euros ($357 million) for failing to supply the "complete and accurate" interoperability required. Microsoft has said it will also appeal that decision.

 

Hmmm... maybe sewing Leica will make things to change...

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guy,

 

You and I have discussed this quite a bit by phone (usually agreeing on most points) but I'm afraid, my friend, that I don't agree with your piracy argument. Let me suggest a different way of thinking about this. Here's the crux:

 

The 6-bit code primarily allows one to correct for a problem with the M8, not a problem with any maker's lens.

 

I want to emphasize this again:

 

The 6-bit code primarily allows one to correct for a problem with the M8, not a problem with any maker's lens.

 

The IR-problem lies squarely with the camera itself. One can use a wide range of lenses with a Leica M7 and get exceptional results. This has been true with M cameras since 1954. It was true for LTM Leica cameras even before. None of those lenses, used with film Leica cameras, need to correct for deficiencies in the cameras themselves. Never. None of the Leica film cameras ever required coded lenses. Coding was meant to provide optional benefits with the M8 but it has, essentially, has become a requirement for wide angle work.

 

I think that emphasizing what brands of lenses an M8 photographer owns is a mistaken emphasis. The IR problem lies with the camera and M8 owners all paid Leica good money for that camera.

 

The 6-bit code primarily allows one to correct for a problem with the M8, not a problem with any specific lens.

 

The lens code is designed to help the *M8*, not the lens.

 

Mechanical vignetting can be a lens design compromise and no one should expect Leica to compensate for that problem in other manufacturers lenses. Cyan drift, in the end, is an M8 specific problem and Leica should be expected to do everything they can to mitigate that problem for M8 owners. Not Zeiss lens owners, per se, nor CV lens owners, per se but *Leica M8* owners.

 

Using the 6-bit coding scheme in a competing digital camera would be piracy. Using it to help get results for a Leica M8 that one bought and paid for is not piracy.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, this coding issue reminds me a very actual history: European Commission vs Microsoft Corp.

 

The Court of First Instance, the EU's second-highest court, will decide on the European Commission's 2004 order that found the company broke competition law and imposed a record fine of 497 million euros ($613 million).

 

In addition, the EU ordered Microsft Corp. to sell a copy of Windows without its media player software and told it to share communications code and information with rivals to help them develop server software that worked smoothly with Microsoft's ubiquitous Windows desktop operating system.

 

EU regulators later fined Microsoft another 280.5 million euros ($357 million) for failing to supply the "complete and accurate" interoperability required. Microsoft has said it will also appeal that decision.

 

Hmmm... maybe sewing Leica will make things to change...

.

 

I strongly disagree with any suggestions of a lawsuit but I do agree with your general point about the value of an open system.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, that action by the EU was completely ludicrous. Nothing would please me more than to have them ban the sale of Windows in Europe; they could then sit back and watch Europe decline into a series of third world economies.

 

Time will tell, but it will be interesting to see just how many innovative products appear as a result of this action. I'm no fan of Microsoft but the existence of a dominant computing standard had done wonders to move computing into people's lives.

 

I worked for IBM when the US Justice Department was after them for anti-trust violations and fortunately, Reagan had the good sense to kick them into touch.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I honestly see no value there if there is not a correction in place for my Zeiss 21mm that i can code to a leica 21mm with my IR filters in place . i hope I understand you question correctly but no one in reality wants to do this in post processing with cornerfix.

 

Guy, agreed - the best possible solution for all this would be if everything just got corrected in firmware. However, practically, correcting in post is going to be a reality for many people that use a non-Leica lens, for two reasons. Firstly, there are focal lengths that Leica doesn't do at all, e.g, the CV12. But secondly, the correction for a Leica 21 mm is not necessarily the same as for a Zeiss 21 mm, or in fact a different model of Lecia 21mm. The M8's vignetting (or whatever you want to call it) is most heavily influenced by the exit angle of the lens, and that varies not just with focal length, but also with lens design. Very often, lenses of the same focal length will have a similar exit angle, but that isn't always the case. Especially, zoom style lenes, e.g., the WATE will have different exit angles to fixed focal length lenses, etc.

 

So I would not expect that, even if Leica allows manual selection of Leica lenses, all these issues will go away. Life will be easier, and in many cases the corrections will be close enough, but not always.

 

Sandy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Walt do you honestly think Leica will say yea you can use Zeiss and CV in there marketing. It's not that it is great to be able to use the 3rd party lenses and even leica knows that but legally all they can think about or respond too is leica brand in any way shape or form

Guy-

 

Leica doesn't have to say anything about others' lenses. This is an M-mount camera. I think that the issue of "third party" lenses is, in any case, moot, because Leica has definitely claimed that the M8 would be compatible with almost all the M-mount Leica lenses back to 1954 and, indeed, this was one of the prime raison d'etres for the camera. Leica did not say that it would cost $250 (coding plus filter) to make these lenses work. The additional cost does not bother me, but I can see that it would bother a lot of people, particularly those with a lot of old lenses that they want to use.

 

So, if you and Leica are really thinking legal issues on this, you two might think "class action." Assuming 15,000 bodies, that's about US$70 million, which is enough to get a court's attention. Leica delivered a camera with an unknown problem (IR); they claimed it usable with their old lenses; it is not usable with those old lenses without further profits to Leica; there is a readily available remedy (the lens table) available to Leica at very little direct cost to Leica. At 15,000 bodies and two lenses per body, that's an additional US$7.5 million in sales for Leica (coding and filters) by not providing this remedy. I'm not an attorney, but I think a court might look favorably on this construction of the situation. As a matter of fact, I undestand that Steven Lee is from California, so he probably already knows of California's very favorable class action laws and of the value in filing such a suit in the state of California.

 

Just a thought on one possible alternative to the readily available remedy. I wouldn't participate in a lawsuit, but some people might.

 

Walt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy-

 

Leica doesn't have to say anything about others' lenses. This is an M-mount camera. I think that the issue "third party" lenses is, in any case, moot, because Leica has definitely claimed that the M8 would be compatible with almost all the M-mount Leica lenses back to 1954 and, indeed, this was one of the prime raison d'etres for the camera. Leica did not say that it would cost $250 (coding plus filter) to make these lenses work. The additional cost does not bother me, but I can see that it would bother a lot of people, particularly those with a lot of old lenses that they want to use.

 

So, if you and Leica are really thinking legal issues on this, you two might think "class action." Assuming 15,000 bodies, that's about US$70 million, which is enough to get a court's attention. Leica delivered a camera with an unknown problem (IR); they claimed it usable with their old lenses; it is not usable with those old lenses without further profits to Leica; there is a readily available remedy (the lens table) available to Leica at very little direct cost to Leica. At 15,000 bodies and two lenses per body, that's an additional US$7.5 million in sales for Leica (coding and filters) by not providing this remedy. I'm not an attorney, but I think a court might look favorably on this construction of the situation. As a matter of fact, I undestand that Steven Lee is from California, so he probably already knows of California's very favorable class action laws and of the value in filing such a suit in the state of California.

 

Just a thought on one possible alternative to the readily available remedy. I wouldn't participate in a lawsuit, but some people might.

 

Walt

 

Hi Walt,

 

I'm really against discussion of a lawsuit because someone reading might actually want to do that. As a photographer who relies heavily on Leica's equipment for my work, I want to see them survive and prosper and a lawsuit is no way for that to happen.

 

Might we find a different way to discuss this and stay clear of lawsuit suggestions or intimations?

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sean,

I couldn't agree with you more strongly.

With respect Walt, your legal analysis is flawed in any event.

Those who've acquired lenses over the years would be unable to establish , on any view of the facts, any representation about an M8 that could have been said to have induced their purchase.

Those who bought early into a new technology, know in the current environment that there is a risk. THe obligation of Leica has, in my humble view, been well met by both its constant communications with its customers, including via this forum, and its production of workable solutions.

The truly inspiring, for those of us of limited skills, examples of what can be achieved with this remarkable camera contained in the recently "moved" threads are testament to the success which Leica has achieved.

All of us who use and love the equipment (with all its minor flaws) which Leica provides to us should be working as so many on this forum do, to help Leica prosper and produce more new and innovative products.

As someone who has been a litigator for over 30 years, I can say with feeling that litigation rarely if ever produces that outcome!

regards

David

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course, that action by the EU was completely ludicrous. Nothing would please me more than to have them ban the sale of Windows in Europe; they could then sit back and watch Europe decline into a series of third world economies.

 

Time will tell, but it will be interesting to see just how many innovative products appear as a result of this action. I'm no fan of Microsoft but the existence of a dominant computing standard had done wonders to move computing into people's lives.

 

I worked for IBM when the US Justice Department was after them for anti-trust violations and fortunately, Reagan had the good sense to kick them into touch.

 

Simply pathetic.

 

I simply add an old Spanish saying "the fish dies by the mouth". We all now know the real marknorton

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sean and David,

 

I don't like lawsuits either, and I would accede to an attorney on the specific legal issues. But it is Leica's spokesperson on an international forum, Guy, who brought up legal matters and suggested that my purpose with the lens menu was to steal Leica's intellectual property in order to use lenses that produce no profit for Leica. That is what I was responding to.

 

In any case, I doubt I'm going to put a bug in anyones head that hasn't already got a bug in it, particularly a legal bug. I'm a guy whose neck was (rather badly) injured in a rear-end accident while stopped at a red light and didn't sue anyone. I got letters from my own insurance company for two years demanding their share of the alleged proceeds.

 

Walt

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest guy_mancuso

Running off to the doctor but i meant the Zeiss and CV companies of the world could sue leica . Not us , sorry if that was completely misunderstood.

 

BTW i was really not talking about a IR issue which is the end result of needing the coding but the setting of lens to the firmware to make it match correctly so the end result does take care of a IR issue which is seperate but related. Hell that confused me , hope you got it

 

damn just give it up and this will be over. ROTFLMAO

Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote name='Walt;357790

][snipped]

On one of their biggest bungles' date=' the IR problem, Leica should do whatever they can to remedy it. That means a lens selection menu. I don't give a hoot about their marketing strategies on this score, they have a responsibility to correct a problem they created, if unwittingly. If photographers--not lens collectors--think a menu sounds like too much trouble, they're using too many lenses. And they have the option to not use the menu.

 

Leica's real tradition, the tradition that gives the brand name commercial value, is about good, functional, daily-use, photographer's cameras. Here's hoping that Leica's future will not be about the mystique and nostalgia.

 

Walt[/quote']

The "lens selection menu" will fix nothing, only mask "The IR Issue". That's not marketing strategy either: I too have no hoot, horn nor holler for the mystique and clique surrounding the brand. But their products have served me well, and continue this service.

 

A "responsibility to correct the problem", that's your reasoning for the ad-hoc "lens selection menu"? From Sean's "I can't tell you, but you may be pleased to almost know" posts, the menu may likely show up... but it will not address "The IR Issue", except as the means to kludge some color correction to mask its effects.

 

It's exactly "mystique and nostalgia" that has folks believing the M8 /could/ be a great camera when they've found so many faults; thus, already the future of Leica, presently ;)

 

rgds,

Dave

Link to post
Share on other sites

The "lens selection menu" will fix nothing, only mask "The IR Issue".... but it will not address "The IR Issue", except as the means to kludge some color correction to mask its effects.

 

That is exactly what it is supposed to do and it does it well enough to make IR a non issue when using the filters and profiles. It is an average correction even for the lenses it was intended for. Changes in light, aperture and perhaps exposure have an effect that the profiles can't adjust for. But they work well enough to eliminate the problem in real world photography both for supported lenses and some unsupported lenses as well.

 

The IR sensitivity and the required use of filters is not a selling feature -it's not a benefit that gives the camera a leg up on the competition. It's an unintended fault and minimizing the impact of a product fault on perspective and current owners seems a no-brainer. Leica has striven to make the M8 live up to the standard of the film M's -this would get the digital camera closer to parity with the film cameras on M mount lens compatibility.

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...