Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Shootist

Firmware 1.108 NOT Available

Recommended Posts

Incredible! Members of this forum incessantly clamor for Leica to improve/fix the M8, and then when a minor change is made, they pillory the company for its efforts.

 

Larry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
Guy, thanks, good to know. Very high probability then that the firmware itself (or maybe the loader) can tell the difference between new and old bodies. So even if you load the 1.1.08 on an old body, the code that runs is exactly the same as would run if you were using the '07 firmware.

 

But I'd still be a WHOLE lot happier if I knew what the change to the body actually is. Note to Leica: In the age of the internet, secrecy is generally counterproductive.

 

Sandy

 

It could be but not sure just some updated circuits, maybe different vendor and they just want to zap the new camera's correctly. They did not explain it any further than what you folks know. I honestly have a feeling they ran out of parts and new ones where made. They have under estimated the amount of M8's hitting the streets, there numbers are very large

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Attila von Gyimes has returned my call.

 

Here are his explanations:

 

1.- A new motherboard with new components will be present in the new bodies. This components need new drivers which will be included in firmware 1.108.

 

2.- Before the end of November, a new firmware (1.20) will be available. This firmware will correct the mad wheel, venetian blind store effect, etc.

 

3.- Leica refuse to give me a M8 ver.2 because "there's no version 2".

 

4.- Concerning to my old (faulty) M8 the decision to sell it as new comes from Leica Camera AG. Attila will send a new warranty card to "La Maison du Leica".

 

I let you make your own conclusions. Mine are already done.

 

Tonight I will see with my friends (sollicitors) at the diner party if I take legal action.

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's friday, the trolls are getting hungry.

 

Is it possible that participants in this forum can air their concerns without being called trolls, for goodness sake.

It is the most infantile type of name-calling. Be polite or make a point worth making - it seems to me that Manuel has every right to feel that something is amiss in how he's been treated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could be but not sure just some updated circuits, maybe different vendor and they just want to zap the new camera's correctly

 

Could also be good old fashioned cost cutting - e.g., it's never made much sense to have 14-bit A/D's in a camera with the M8's compression scheme - they may be dropping down to 12-bit A/D's. It's something that I certainly would have given serious consideration to if I were running Leica's engineering division.....might make "old" M8's more valuable than new ones(!!)

 

Sandy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If so- I doubt it, as exchange of components does not constitue a different camera- the only recourse he might have is against the shop he bought the camera from. Leica made no assertion the would not exchange parts for equivalent ones in the process of manufacturing, they said there was to be no version 2- to the shopowner, not to Manuel.. And there is not, as it is the same camera with the same specifications..Even minor changes to the fittings would not count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my anatomy thread, I pointed out there were unused chip positions on the circuit board and it's possible these might now be used in place of existing ones with alternative chips. Candidates are, for example, the SD card interface, USB interface, real time clock, I2C interface, LCD Driver, Power Management. It's not at all unusual to design boards which can take more than one chip type. Call it insurance.

 

To repeat (since nobody seemed to read my post), the UPD file has the capability to deliver different firmware according to the engineering change level of each hardware component in use. We'll probably see a larger UPD file to handle both hardware versions.

 

The fact they feel the need to change component suppliers because of cost/availability/reliability issues is not a reason for anyone to talk to their solicitor unless it's to recommend the camera.

 

 

 

[Perhaps I should be complaining to Leica that they forgot to install some chips in these empty positions instead.

]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It could be but not sure just some updated circuits, maybe different vendor and they just want to zap the new camera's correctly. They did not explain it any further than what you folks know. I honestly have a feeling they ran out of parts and new ones where made. They have under estimated the amount of M8's hitting the streets, there numbers are very large

 

Guy, I think you are right about parts running out. I doubt that in their wildest dreams, Leica expected to sell more than 10,000 units, and it seems they now have three serial number series running, which will permit them to label 30,000 units. Still small potatoes by DSLR standards, but annoying if you have to buy stuff in minimum quantities like 10,000 units. And if there was a benefit to existing cameras they would have made it downloadable, rather than just shipping cameras with this firmware for a month or two and waiting for us to discover it.

 

It's a bit sad that they tried to do the "right thing" by being open and now one of us is howling that that they (actually that their distribution channel) has lied to him, and others are piling on. I hope they realize that this is the normal behavior of boys in grades 4-6 and don't change their determination to play straight with the customers.

 

scott

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm ... this is not good. Having 2 branches of the firmware causes more headaches:

  1. updates from now onwards will cost more because all changes to the software will need to ported to both sides
  2. both sides need to be tested
  3. it will also take longer longer for updates to get rolled out

This is unfortunate for Leica and for the owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to reassure myself, I am going use mine extensively tomorrow.

 

I have every confidence it will be just fine, even if the weather is not. I know the model is just perfect, for my purpose!

 

Take a lead guys. It's the W/E.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately, this is likely to lead to a situation where some ill-informed people will only accept a new-hardware camera, even though they have no idea what the changes are and what, if any (probably none), the implications for their picture taking are.

 

You can just see the threads now: "What serial number did the new cameras start at?" and "How do I tell if my camera is "new" or "old"? That's easy, send it to Mark, he'll take it apart for you, tell you, and send the bits back.

 

Some Mercedes-Benz cars come with a plate carrying the name of the person who built the engine. I was told by Porsche that they will not do this, to avoid getting into situations where a customer will only take delivery of a car if the engine was built by a particular person after "his" engines were found to be higher performing and published so on the internet. I see their point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's never made much sense to have 14-bit A/D's in a camera with the M8's compression scheme

Of course it did make sense – and still does. There’s no reason in changing the A/D converter’s resolution, and no reason to suppose that any changes of components made make a difference to the user.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

C'mon guys, they're just chips. Behind these wonderful lenses is a ... computer ...!

 

Two people have trouble at this time. One is Leica who (all this bullshit notwithstanding) has to deal with additional logic in their operating system code.

 

The other poor guy is Guy who has to post to this stupid thread instead of going out and using his new 24mm lens. 'Course, maybe it hasn't arrived yet and, even worse, he has nothing better to do than reassure a bunch of idiots who haven't looked inside their computers.

 

What we're lucky about is that Leica is doing quality control on all the little components that change every time the mail arrives. The suppliers of electronic components change the product almost every day.

 

Chill out. Take some pix.

 

Thanks Leica for taking the trouble to let me know that I don't have to be worried about a firmware update that I don't need. Nice going.

 

Are there threads like this one on the C---n and N---n sites?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
And even after getting written guarantee from Leica that it wasn't going to happen!

 

Gee, Manuel, Leica's honesty is right up there in line with that of the Bush administration!

 

--HC

 

Come on where is your problem ? May be they had to change a chip or something else, whats up ? You dont know if the new chip may be become problems in future and your M8 still works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the first firmware (last November), my M8 didn't have the skipping wheel. Firmware created the problem, firmware will fix it.

 

There is no version 2 M8. Parts change all the time, and different parts certainly can require minor firmware tweeks. Leica saved me a pointless firmware download. Thank you, Leica.

 

The selling of a used item as new depends. To many users (myself included), a camera whose box is opened and shutter clicked a few dozen times is still a new camera. To some collectors (or users with collector sensibilities) that's a used camera. A camera that was opened DOA and returned to Leica certainly seems still new to me.

 

Why would this camera end up back at the same store except by design? If Leica had sent the camera back as new stock, it would already have a new warranty card.

 

I used to work at a camera store---the only time this happened was when we decided to take a broken camera back from a customer and have it fixed ourselves (that is good service). Leica received a dead camera from a store, fixed it, and returned it. The store is now deciding whether the camera is new or used, has considered the situation, and has chosen new (camera stores make these decisions every day).

 

If they do get a new warranty card, it will be by convincing Leica the camera was effectively DOA and the warranty card was filled out in error. I've seen this done, but it isn't easy, and requires personal relationships and trust---Leica must trust and value the store quite highly to do this.

 

In any case, if you want guaranteed pristine Leica, you must purchase sealed boxes only. Otherwise, you have no idea if the item was merely inspected, or used for an afternoon (or for a few weeks on the store owner's vacation).

 

Until later,

 

--clyde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Of course it did make sense – and still does. There’s no reason in changing the A/D converter’s resolution, and no reason to suppose that any changes of components made make a difference to the user.

 

Michael, actually, no it doesn't make sense from a cost/performance standpoint - the only thing a 14 bit converter buys you versus a 12-bit one is three extra levels of resolution at the deep black end of the luminance scale. Your own graph shows that!!!! And my point is exactly that it wouldn't make any practical difference to the user. Realistically, I very much doubt that Leica would make such a change - buyers (especially those on this board

), would flip out. But real difference - no.

 

Sandy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are there threads like this one on the C---n and N---n sites?

 

Ohh yes - try searching for "D80 Amp noise" on Nikonians - as just one example.....the whole "what serial numbers have this problem" thing to the nth degree

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that they announced this to current owners so that people didn't start worrying when a friend's new M8 body showed a different firmware version than his own. (I'd say "his or her own" but women don't tend to fret about this sort of thing.)

 

Changing a component source does not make for a new camera. The firmware isn't relevant to existing M8s, that's why it isn't being offered for download. But if they hadn't announced it, someone somewhere would have cried foul.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...