Guest Walt Posted November 20, 2007 Share #201 Posted November 20, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Wow, your FedEx man as John the Baptist (I 'm not sure what that makes Tony). This transition to digital is really getting to you, maybe you better break out the TriX! I have a freezer full of Tri-X and an M2. I use them occassionally, but I would like this digital thing to work. But, you're right, something is getting to me. Walt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 20, 2007 Posted November 20, 2007 Hi Guest Walt, Take a look here Survey of Interest: Faster Adjustments for ISO, EV and WB. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 20, 2007 Share #202 Posted November 20, 2007 I had a dream last night, no doubt inspired by Sean's mysterious but apparently unambiguous defeat yesterday. My FedEx man, Steve, was at the door and handed me the new GR-D from Tony Rose, no box, just the camera, and he was holding it up in the air by the neckstrap. (What Steve usually delivers, in real life, is allegedly repaired Leica stuff.) And then I realized that the Ricoh looked exactly like a GR-D but was the size of the M8 and it had my 28/2.0 mounted on it. I asked him where he got the lens and he was confused and said it just came that way. I had a joyous feeling in the dream. Odd, how the unconscious puts disparate things together and solves problems. That's a wonderful dream, at least at first telling. But then I start wondering what terrible urges made the Ricoh GR-D want to grow so big, carry such an expensive lens, and speak a different language. Did you get to use it, and find out that it had also adopted Teutonic firmware? I hope that this is just a passing phase. scott Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 20, 2007 Share #203 Posted November 20, 2007 I have a freezer full of Tri-X and an M2. I use them occassionally, but I would like this digital thing to work. But, you're right, something is getting to me. Walt I haven't used film in years and have no plans on going back. In the end Leica is no better or worse then Canon or any other camera manufacturer in this sort of situation. Once the product is out there it's on to the next product in the cycle. You only fix or admit to stuff that could kill sales (like the early M8 problems or the Canon 1D III focus issues). I just had illusions the 'new' Leica was maybe different based on Seans positive early comments. I'll take what I've got - it could be a lot better - but it could be worse, I used a Canon 1Ds for the last 3 years. I'll not waste as much time participating in these discussions. This really was just an exercise in frustration. Time for an internet break. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walt Posted November 20, 2007 Share #204 Posted November 20, 2007 Hank- I think this appraisal of Leica is right--but I had the same illusions, though I'm not sure Sean is entirely responsible for that. And it may be that Leica at the beginning of the M8 development was a different company--a less arrogant one--than it is now that they have some money in the bank. Right now, they clearly have little interest in continuing support for the M8, or they'd do the simple things it needs. They are treating it as if the project is complete, and I guess that, too, surprised me. That recent firmware release with nothing but new lens codes was a big tip off, particularly because those new lenses are all focal lengths for full-frame cameras. So, yes, I agree--it's time to stop prowling around the forum wasting time trying to help Leica improve a camera they're not interested in improving. I have an idea that in short order the M8 is going to seem to the M9 what the M5 was to the M6. The M6 was the first time they got that concept right (and it was not because it was a more traditional looking form). If Leica were planning to sustain M8 sales for much longer, I think they'd still be putting more effort into it right now. I, for one, have mixed feelings about having helped Leica out of its financial difficulties with my little $24,000 contribution--I won't even mention my ongoing time on repair problems--only to have them drop this project so quickly. Some people like to assert their savvy cynicism about how corporations and business are supposed to work, but I'm a bit dismayed at the transformation of "Leica excellence" into a pure marketing concept. Walt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hankg Posted November 20, 2007 Share #205 Posted November 20, 2007 Hank- I think this appraisal of Leica is right--but I had the same illusions, though I'm not sure Sean is entirely responsible for that. I'm not blaming Sean for that. I actually appreciate all the effort he put into it. His advise to Leica has been on the money and in the best interest of photographers, which I would think would also therefore be in Leica's long term interest. I've been debating how best to back up the M8. I'd considered another M8 but I think it will be a DSLR of some sort. I could use the Macro, tilt -shift capabilities for paying work anyway. I don't want 2 M8's when Leica comes out with the next model RF just in case they really get it right on version 2. In that event the M8 could as you say become the next M5 which at the time was Leica's Edsel. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Walt Posted November 20, 2007 Share #206 Posted November 20, 2007 Hank-- Yeah, I figure I've got two Edsels. That wasn't a bad driving car I understand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted November 20, 2007 Share #207 Posted November 20, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) these changes make a lot of sense. I use an M8 since March 1st 2007 and have a second M8 body since November 14th 2007. Eric Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teehas53 Posted November 21, 2007 Share #208 Posted November 21, 2007 Current M8 owner. Big YES to Sean's suggestions. [slight off-topic / rant alert] These are all good suggestions of Sean's, and I've supported them from the start. It's also true they are only workarounds for poor initial design of the original camera UI. I can understand the reasons some folks feel differently, but not Leica's decision to ignore these requests outright. If a user didn't like these changes as options, he/she could simply not use them. Meanwhile, the professional capability of what is otherwise a unique and potentially very useful tool remain compromised. Some here sniff at Canon & Nikon's ad infinitum custom functions, but those menus do allow each user to tightly tailor settings that make the most sense to them. And because these companies set the de facto pro standards in camera design that's where the bar is set, like it or not. Denying these options somewhat capriciously is very short-sighted by Leica IMO. Leica has its stated reasons of course, but they make little sense from the customer's point of view. One would think some of the new management at Leica might ponder more deeply the road the company was on in the not-too-distant past as a result of previous "blinders on" decision making... T Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boilerdoc Posted November 21, 2007 Share #209 Posted November 21, 2007 Back on topic. Yes to Sean's requests. Owner of 2- M8s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marktomaras Posted November 22, 2007 Share #210 Posted November 22, 2007 fine idea, I would like to see Leica make such changes and more importantly listen to the customers who obviously care about the details. - Mark Tomaras just bought an M8 after 3 years of being leica free (M6 system was sold to buy 1Ds MKII system) And my god.... how did I stay away for so long!?!? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoMammabot Posted November 22, 2007 Share #211 Posted November 22, 2007 I would love to see these changes. Owner of an M8 since Feb 2007. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NonFiction Posted November 22, 2007 Share #212 Posted November 22, 2007 I'm just a prospective M8 user, but from the beginning I've found Sean's suggested fixes to be the right answer to important user interface problems that never should have made it past beta version. Watching the cooperation between Leica and folks around here has been impressive--enough so that it will be seriously disappointing if they aren't able to make this needed change come together for the M8. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted November 23, 2007 Share #213 Posted November 23, 2007 Sean, I've been using my M8 since May 2007. I would very much like to see the modifications you proposed. Regards Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted November 23, 2007 Share #214 Posted November 23, 2007 I'm closing the survey now. Leica has decided not to add this functionality to the M8. Cheers, Sean Copied in case this post has slipped too far down and some have missed it. Pete. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Posted November 30, 2007 Share #215 Posted November 30, 2007 This seems to have been a very well supported initiative and the thread has quietened down presumably having served its purpose. I sincerely hope that Leica listen and try to implement/effect these strongly advocated changes. If they didn't, the M8 still remains a fantastic camera. However... there are some tremendously ingenious forum members who have investigated and educated laypeople such as myself in the whys and wherefores for the camera. So then I was wondering - what if? In particular..... how feasible it would be to write independent firmware which would offer the user group some say about items for inclusion. Controversial yes, warranty negating too - but surely worth asking and discussing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted November 30, 2007 Share #216 Posted November 30, 2007 Not utterly surprising considering the way they handled the DMR. They promised upgraded firmware which was over a year late, cancelled the product and stuck the 1000 or so folks who plunked down $5800 + and R9 for the privilege. I am using my M8's successfully and frankly I will be flabbergasted if Leica comes through with what should be upgraded firmware to resolve these operational issues. However I can say with confidence that the M8's are my last purchase from leica. When you read through all of the threads on this forum and realize what hoops people have gone through just to have a servicable ($4800) camera it makes you realize what Leica has done to their reputation and the loyalty of its users JMHO Woody Spedden QUOTE=Walt;409128]Hank- I think this appraisal of Leica is right--but I had the same illusions, though I'm not sure Sean is entirely responsible for that. And it may be that Leica at the beginning of the M8 development was a different company--a less arrogant one--than it is now that they have some money in the bank. Right now, they clearly have little interest in continuing support for the M8, or they'd do the simple things it needs. They are treating it as if the project is complete, and I guess that, too, surprised me. That recent firmware release with nothing but new lens codes was a big tip off, particularly because those new lenses are all focal lengths for full-frame cameras. So, yes, I agree--it's time to stop prowling around the forum wasting time trying to help Leica improve a camera they're not interested in improving. I have an idea that in short order the M8 is going to seem to the M9 what the M5 was to the M6. The M6 was the first time they got that concept right (and it was not because it was a more traditional looking form). If Leica were planning to sustain M8 sales for much longer, I think they'd still be putting more effort into it right now. I, for one, have mixed feelings about having helped Leica out of its financial difficulties with my little $24,000 contribution--I won't even mention my ongoing time on repair problems--only to have them drop this project so quickly. Some people like to assert their savvy cynicism about how corporations and business are supposed to work, but I'm a bit dismayed at the transformation of "Leica excellence" into a pure marketing concept. Walt Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eekimel Posted December 1, 2007 Share #217 Posted December 1, 2007 Yes to all three. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Posted December 1, 2007 Share #218 Posted December 1, 2007 So if Leica has decided not to add the functionality for such a well supported improvement, it makes my suggestion of privateer firmware all the more relevant. If their financial status has been overturned by the M8, then reinvestment is essential in order to encourage customers to stay and new ones into the fold. Offering progressive improvements and listening to users is welcomed. Adobe Lightroom, Capture One V4 beta etc have been improved and become better products for all by employing the user as test bench and listening to feedback. Leica seem myopic in comparison. Another thought - did anyone ask if this could be an 'upgrade' for which owners could pay Leica. This initiates two tier product which would be controversial - but less so than going it alone. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted December 1, 2007 Share #219 Posted December 1, 2007 So if Leica has decided not to add the functionality for such a well supported improvement, it makes my suggestion of privateer firmware all the more relevant I don't think that reverse engineering the firmware (I can't imagine Leica releasing the source code into the public domain) and then successfully developing it is a trivial exercise. It ain't going to happen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted December 1, 2007 Share #220 Posted December 1, 2007 It is not only non-trivial, but also very risky. A single error could result in a brick. This kind of work is not likely to happen without help from the factory. Risking a PSP is one thing, at 200 Euro, but an M8 at nearly 5000 Euro? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.