lct Posted October 16, 2007 Share #21 Posted October 16, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) A minor issue for you François but not for me obviously. So unless i'm alone to shoot containers and other technical things like that i feel the need to ask why my favourite brand don't want to use at least a removable AA filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 16, 2007 Posted October 16, 2007 Hi lct, Take a look here New type of artifact. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
hankg Posted October 16, 2007 Share #22 Posted October 16, 2007 There is no free lunch. People pay to get the AA filter removed from their 5D's to get sharper, higher resolving files and live with the occasional resulting moire. It's a trade off and Leica made the right choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 16, 2007 Share #23 Posted October 16, 2007 Yes i know that sharpness mania is a modern obsessional syndrom but why not a removable AA filter? Is it too difficult? Too expensive? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted October 16, 2007 Share #24 Posted October 16, 2007 LCT: There have been cameras with optional and/or removable physical AA filters. At least a couple of the Kodak SLRs over the years, as well as some MF backs. But where in the short image path of M lenses would you like Leica to place their filter? Behind the shutter? I'd hate to have to poke around in the shutter window with a pair of tweezers trying to remove an AA filter (or worse, fit it back into place). The odds of scratching the sensor or jimmying the shutter blades (we're talking a metal implement here, not a soft cloth or swab) are too terrible to contemplate. Leica DID put a user-optional firmware "AA filter" into the DMR, that could be applied, or not applied, in either JPEG or RAW mode. Unfortunately, they made it only semi-optional in the M8 (it is always ON in JPEG mode and OFF in DNG mode, without any user choice allowed). I don't know if that could be changed back to the DMR approach at this point - it seems like it would just require (yet another) firmware rewrite. As to the original artifact - yes, these maze-like patterns are caused by an error in how the camera or the raw processor reassembles the pixels to create a full-color RGB image. However, although fine details at the resolution limit of the sensor can cause them, I have seen them in circumstances where there were NO details, just a smooth tonality. Usually bright reds, like the sunset sun Brad R. mentioned above, or in out-of-focus illuminated car tailights at dusk. In one case (tailights) it happened with the version of ACR that was 'beta' for the M8 (last Nov.), and when I reprocessed the image with the next upgrade of ACR the mazes disappeared. Obviously Adobe had fixed something in the M8 algorithm between editions. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 16, 2007 Share #25 Posted October 16, 2007 ...where in the short image path of M lenses would you like Leica to place their filter? Behind the shutter? I'd hate to have to poke around in the shutter window with a pair of tweezers trying to remove an AA filter (or worse, fit it back into place). The odds of scratching the sensor or jimmying the shutter blades (we're talking a metal implement here, not a soft cloth or swab) are too terrible to contemplate... OK Andy thanks for your clear explanations as usual but why could not we open the back like we do/did with film? Too big? Too complicated? And what about the R10? ...Leica DID put a user-optional firmware "AA filter" into the DMR, that could be applied, or not applied, in either JPEG or RAW mode. Unfortunately, they made it only semi-optional in the M8 (it is always ON in JPEG mode and OFF in DNG mode, without any user choice allowed)... Is this DMR firmware more efficient than Phase One's and others? If so there would be no problem anymore of course... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted October 16, 2007 Share #26 Posted October 16, 2007 OK Andy thanks for your clear explanations as usual but why could not we open the back like we do/did with film? Too big? Too complicated? And what about the R10? If they offered the choice it would probably have to be done at the factory or by Leica service as it would probably require a recalibration of focus. Making the back accessible would add to the complexity and cost of an already expensive camera and create more areas for something to go wrong. How many would be willing to pay extra for this option? 1 out of 1000 buyers? Maize / basketweave artifacts can happen even with AA filters and even in smooth areas with any digicam depending on your raw processor settings. I've seen it with MF backs, Canon 1Ds and the M8. Trying to preserve all the detail and resolution of the capture gets you close to the edge of provoking these sort of artifacts. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted October 16, 2007 Share #27 Posted October 16, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hank, i did not refer to the M8, what is done is done i guess. I'm interested in the near future instead i.e. M9 and R 10. In a sense, i can agree with you as i remember my using a 22 mg back without AA filter the results of which were really ugly but i cannot agree where you give the feeling that all digicams are more or less the same. No to me there are two categories of digicams as far as moiré so far: with an without AA filter and the former have *much* less moiré problems in my modest experience at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted October 16, 2007 Share #28 Posted October 16, 2007 Hank, i did not refer to the M8, what is done is done i guess. I'm interested in the near future instead i.e. M9 and R 10. In a sense, i can agree with you as i remember my using a 22 mg back without AA filter the results of which were really ugly but i cannot agree where you give the feeling that all digicams are more or less the same. No to me there are two categories of digicams as far as moiré so far: with an without AA filter and the former have *much* less moiré problems in my modest experience at least. I was not referring to the M8 but of the added complexity and expense of including the option of a user accessible AA filter that could be put in and removed in a future M. The vast majority of photographers would be incensed at adding expense and complexity to have this feature. Every feature and function you want to add to a device has a price in cost, complexity and reliability. There seems to be general agreement among M8 owners that the lack of AA filter is a very good thing. Why should Leica fix something that's not broken? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert4321 Posted October 16, 2007 Share #29 Posted October 16, 2007 in the DxO website, there is a demo on this problem for their v5 RAW converter. This is the problem they called it maze pattern which happens to other brands cameras. Their converter seems to solve this problem. Go to their site and ck it out. DxO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.