Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jaapv

Where has the smoke of battle gone?

Recommended Posts

Oh, nothing to complain about.

Until yesterday, both of my M8s were in NJ getting repaired.

Now that I have one back, I am sure that I can find something wrong. The strange thing is is that I really missed it, warts and all.

Funny, I think that my D200 might be quieter than my M8s:eek:

-bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe I wasn't paying attention, but 'white balance' seems to be a designation that has come with digital photography..............

 

You're mistaken there, as anybody who has done his own colour printing, especially from negative, can testify. I used to have a RGB dichoitic colour head on my enlarger to correct colour balance of both the paper and the negative, a Philips colour-meter to measure the colour temperature of the negative -or slides too- and an accesory I still use, a Kodak Color Print Vewing Kit, filters in all six colours, each in three densities, ideal to determine the cast on a print.

Colour temperature, white balance and casts have been around since the introduction of colour photography, a century ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People just moved on to the D3 ... (run for cover)

The 1DSIII gets its share too, somebody complaining on FM that the numberplate of the ninth car in a series of ten whizzing past at 40 Mph was not quite in focus, for instance...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're mistaken there, as anybody who has done his own colour printing, especially from negative, can testify. I used to have a RGB dichoitic colour head on my enlarger to correct colour balance of both the paper and the negative, a Philips colour-meter to measure the colour temperature of the negative -or slides too- and an accesory I still use, a Kodak Color Print Vewing Kit, filters in all six colours, each in three densities, ideal to determine the cast on a print.

Colour temperature, white balance and casts have been around since the introduction of colour photography, a century ago.

 

Jaap - I was only referring to the terminology, not the concept or the process. I always heard, and used, the terminology 'gray balance' and 'neutral tones'...but I never did any color photo printing myself until digital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jaap - I was only referring to the terminology, not the concept or the process. I always heard, and used, the terminology 'gray balance' and 'neutral tones'...but I never did any color photo printing myself until digital.

 

Aye, that's the rub. Many "problems" like dust, white balance, focussing, etc. are as old as photography, but remained invisible to the casual user or those that had a lab take care of developing. Digital has put the lab work in the hands of the photographer, the computer being the darkroom, and many of us have to enter on a learning curve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aye, that's the rub. Many "problems" like dust, white balance, focussing, etc. are as old as photography, but remained invisible to the casual user or those that had a lab take care of developing. Digital has put the lab work in the hands of the photographer, the computer being the darkroom, and many of us have to enter on a learning curve.

 

That's exactly my feeling Jaap : digital has driven many of us to take attention (and to blame the camera, in case...

) to problems that we always saw, but we put in our mind in the range of issues that were "lab's questions" or "problems that are well reknown..." ... just some examples :

- White balance : LOT of times, with film, happened to me that standard print and enlargement, same lab, had different WB (or call it color cast... really WB is a term that has became common with digital, I seem)

- Dust (now "sensor cleaning") : has ALWAYS been a problem... and do we remember the risks of film scratching in rewinding ? Ok, we can appreciate that some manufacturers have developed auto sensor cleaning... Leica did not... but,, let's be honest: it's incredibly EASY to fix some dust spots on PC... nothing comparable to darkroom times...

- Banding : any decent photog has always known that shooting with a light source in front "can result in unexpected problems" : I remember well to have 2 almost identical film pics, with sun in front, in SLIGHTLY different positions... one decent, the other with some "sunny color band" or "diaphragm ghost" or "sunny dots..." .... not so different from the situation where I finally obtained my green band... 2 pics with a lamp some cms. differently positioned: band in one, no band in the other...

- Backfocus : to be sincere, I NEVER did a focus test with my M4 or IIIf... and, mentally, if for instance I had a Summilux mounted on and focused at 2-3 meters, said to myself "well, better to use f2 or 2,8... who knows..." , but with digital is so easy to make a focus test with big cropping...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's exactly my feeling Jaap : digital has driven many of us to take attention (and to blame the camera, in case... ) to problems that we always saw, but we put in our mind in the range of issues that were "lab's questions" or "problems that are well reknown..." ... just some examples :

- White balance : LOT of times, with film, happened to me that standard print and enlargement, same lab, had different WB (or call it color cast... really WB is a term that has became common with digital, I seem)

- Dust (now "sensor cleaning") : has ALWAYS been a problem... and do we remember the risks of film scratching in rewinding ? Ok, we can appreciate that some manufacturers have developed auto sensor cleaning... Leica did not... but,, let's be honest: it's incredibly EASY to fix some dust spots on PC... nothing comparable to darkroom times...

- Banding : any decent photog has always known that shooting with a light source in front "can result in unexpected problems" : I remember well to have 2 almost identical film pics, with sun in front, in SLIGHTLY different positions... one decent, the other with some "sunny color band" or "diaphragm ghost" or "sunny dots..." .... not so different from the situation where I finally obtained my green band... 2 pics with a lamp some cms. differently positioned: band in one, no band in the other...

- Backfocus : to be sincere, I NEVER did a focus test with my M4 or IIIf... and, mentally, if for instance I had a Summilux mounted on and focused at 2-3 meters, said to myself "well, better to use f2 or 2,8... who knows..." , but with digital is so easy to make a focus test with big cropping...

 

Thank you for an interesting and factual reply.I think jaapv has to be congratulated on starting a good thread which has become very interesting and informative to people like myself who are new to Digital and are on a steep re-learning curve.

Brian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, we have finally arrived at discussing white balance in the 19th century, in order to "prove" that the M8 is the perfect camera.

 

All right, that does it for me.

 

Here's a short summary of the ongoing argument:

 

There never was a flaw in the M8, and there can't be because, as everyone knows, a Leica simply does not have flaws. And if that does not convince you there is one other argument that absolutely should: cameras of other brands have occasionally been known to have flaws, too. So there, that proves it, if there is in fact a Canikon somewhere, that is not flawlles, then the M8 must be. Absolutley compelling logic, isn't it?

 

What everybody should have realized by now is, that people who publicly report flaws of the M8 naturally fall into one of the following categories:

- probably never had an M8 in their hands, at least they have never used it

- are obsessed with equipment and MTF-charts and never take photographs, anyway

- do not understand a thing about photography in the first place

- must be on the payroll of Canikon

 

Now, I'm really lucky that I don't belong to any of these categories. Body no. four works just great! Actually, I find it very amusing and entertaining to watch the menu scrolling madly. And since, unfortunately, not every single of my photographs is really a masterpice, anyway, I find it very helpful when the camera deletes 10 out of 11 shots taken in continuous mode - saves me a lot chimping. And who needs white balance, anyway? Hasn't worked properly since the 19th century!

 

All this simply shows that the M8 has a lot of character - and that's why we all love the old girl so dearly, isn't it?

 

P.S.:

It sure was fun writing this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, Manfred, I understand that digital photography sprang spontaneously from the brow of some Cybergod without any roots in the past?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you should keep the smoke to the amsterdam coffee houses. Heyyyyy peeeace maaaan is that leather really greee...ahhh green?

 

Ohhh..rooooots? What about its seeds?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, we have finally arrived at discussing white balance in the 19th century, in order to "prove" that the M8 is the perfect camera.

 

All right, that does it for me.

 

Here's a short summary of the ongoing argument:

 

There never was a flaw in the M8, and there can't be because, as everyone knows, a Leica simply does not have flaws. And if that does not convince you there is one other argument that absolutely should: cameras of other brands have occasionally been known to have flaws, too. So there, that proves it, if there is in fact a Canikon somewhere, that is not flawlles, then the M8 must be. Absolutley compelling logic, isn't it?

 

What everybody should have realized by now is, that people who publicly report flaws of the M8 naturally fall into one of the following categories:

- probably never had an M8 in their hands, at least they have never used it

- are obsessed with equipment and MTF-charts and never take photographs, anyway

- do not understand a thing about photography in the first place

- must be on the payroll of Canikon

 

Now, I'm really lucky that I don't belong to any of these categories. Body no. four works just great! Actually, I find it very amusing and entertaining to watch the menu scrolling madly. And since, unfortunately, not every single of my photographs is really a masterpice, anyway, I find it very helpful when the camera deletes 10 out of 11 shots taken in continuous mode - saves me a lot chimping. And who needs white balance, anyway? Hasn't worked properly since the 19th century!

 

All this simply shows that the M8 has a lot of character - and that's why we all love the old girl so dearly, isn't it?

 

P.S.:

It sure was fun writing this...

 

I am not sure to understand well your point, Manfred... but you can be sure that is far from my mind the will to assess M8 as a flawless camera... btw I am not entitled at all to draw such a conclusion... it's my first and only digital camera: the fact that (I understood it only in the last 7 months) digital IS a different world, a different way of affording problems, a different mood on all the picture taking process, is my only conclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest stnami

Luigi it is all same same but different................. so don't get your knickers in a knot over the digitalfilmphoto world...................... Hey Rob I heard that the locals are getting banned from using dacka, as for dentists.well there is always that gas........................ sad not laughing:cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
{snipped} I find it very helpful when the camera deletes 10 out of 11 shots taken in continuous mode - saves me a lot chimping. And who needs white balance, anyway? Hasn't worked properly since the 19th century!

{snipped}

 

Um, your body number four is defective or your cards are, which is hardly the camera's fault. I use continuous all the time, and the camera does not delete any shots.

 

I'm trying to be supportive here. Frankly, if I had a camera that ate shots in C mode, I'd get rid of it, and I don't care how good the glass is or what the name is on the front.

 

As for Average White Balance and the M8--how many times can you say "it's broken" and still be mis-understood? It's broken now, and I believe Leica will make it better than it is with a fw upgrade.

 

I don't care, though, because AWB is stupid anyway (on all cameras) and the presets on the M8 are fine (as is custom WB).

 

As for WB and accuracy, well, all I can say is Jaap is right: WB does have to managed in the context of printing and what you want.

 

BTW--if you don't understand that, you're probably best to just drop your files at a lab and pay them to do the colour correction for you.

 

PS--nice rant, but off-point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sounds disgusting

 

As Dilbert's boss said when Dilbert asked him if he knew what "irony" meant: "I send my shirts out."

 

I suspect that doesn't translate too well into Dutch. I'll have to ask my daughter in law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, Russ, I'm one of those crazy foreigners who knows what "walzin' Mathilda" means...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have 2 somewhat none functioning M8's. Chrome one only turns on, NOW, with a push of the shutter button and the black has a very bad, IMHO, rangefinder.

Black has been back to NJ once already with no real solution to the problem and the chrome won't leave my hands until the black one is completely fixed. It's going to DAG next to see what he can do with it and hopefully give me a letter that I can send, or TAKE WITH ME, when I send/drop the camera off ONE MORE TIME to NJ (That is IF DAG can't fix the problems).

Why even bother posting about it.

The only thing I know for sure is that for many years to come Leica USA or Solms will be fixing my M8's FREE of CHARGE, Dam the warranty on this BUGGY camera.

With all that above you will not take my M8's away form me.

 

Unlurk...

 

I've been thru three Olympus E-330s since October. The first one went in for repair of a bad sensor, and they changed out the rear LCD.

 

It went back in and they changed the sensor. The new sensor had terrible banding.

 

So, they sent me a new one. Except it wasn't new, it was refurb. It worked, except for the scratched LCD, dead pixel in the secondary live view sensor and a big greasy thumbprint that came with the camera on the optical vf window. They asked me to send it in again, but that email went straight to my junk mail folder and I didn't see it for three weeks.

 

I haven't gotten the replacement for the replacement yet. :-(

 

 

-Dana

 

"This sort of thing has cropped up before you know, and it has always been attributable to human error." - HAL9000

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...