Jamie Roberts Posted March 6, 2009 Share #21 Posted March 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) {snipped}Then this type of post. For goodness sake. Hey Mani-- Just to mention that it *is* true when you talk about high ISO results and pushing any camera beyond it's comfort zone, you can get some very weird results in post. So I agree in this case the comment here on proper exposure seems a bit obtuse, but I've seen many a "the M8 has crummy ISO 640 results" or "is this sensor damaged?" when the poster has underexposed 3 stops or more or has made a 3 minute exposure at high ISO All kinds of things go loopy in those conditions. Having said that, the OP needs a service call, as I mentioned previously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 6, 2009 Posted March 6, 2009 Hi Jamie Roberts, Take a look here M8 green streaky lines at ISO 640 - Diagnosis?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
footnoteblog Posted March 6, 2009 Share #22 Posted March 6, 2009 Honestly - is this sort of response intentionally obtuse? The OP has very clearly stated the specific and very precise conditions under which he gets these lines and banding, with exhaustive examples on his website to show the expected result together with the faulty response. He really couldn't be more careful in documenting the problem - which is obviously (and worryingly) a dying sensor. I'm genuinely hoping that something can be done about it - as someone who's getting impatient to get my hands on my M8 after it's (initial?) sojourn in Solms. Then this type of post. For goodness sake. Right, I asked if underexposing is the problem; i.e., is it user error? I'm sorry if you think there's any sarcasm in my post, there's not. All I see is a severely underexposed frame that's been over processed, and you get unexpected results, just like film (well, it's more predictable in film). So, don't underexpose is the solution, right? Honestly, am I missing something? You can interpret it that way, and leave a non sequitur, but I fail to see the point in that other than irony. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 6, 2009 Share #23 Posted March 6, 2009 Right, I asked if underexposing is the problem; i.e., is it user error? I'm sorry if you think there's any sarcasm in my post, there's not. All I see is a severely underexposed frame that's been over processed, and you get unexpected results, just like film (well, it's more predictable in film). So, don't underexpose is the solution, right? Honestly, am I missing something? You can interpret it that way, and leave a non sequitur, but I fail to see the point in that other than irony. You'd be right except that the camera only creates these artifacts intermittently, and at low ISOs anyway, you can easily push an M8 RAW file 3 stops without green streak artifacts like this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
footnoteblog Posted March 6, 2009 Share #24 Posted March 6, 2009 OK, understood. I generally toss out anything underexposed 2-3 stops or more in low light with a long shutter. There's usually never enough information to retrieve, and the results are usually poor in the first place. Maybe if you really want to keep them, convert to B&W? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 6, 2009 Share #25 Posted March 6, 2009 OK, understood. I generally toss out anything underexposed 2-3 stops or more in low light with a long shutter. There's usually never enough information to retrieve, and the results are usually poor in the first place. Maybe if you really want to keep them, convert to B&W? Yeah, a BW conversion is usually ok because you can throw out the blue channel, which tends to be noisiest. But honestly, even in low light, at low ISOs, the M8's RAW is pretty darned good (though of course it's always best to have a good exposure ) When you go up beyond ISO 640 you don't have the shadow buffer to be able to push the file around much. But still they shouldn't ever look like the streaking shown here... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted March 6, 2009 Share #26 Posted March 6, 2009 Slight overreaction on my part, I admit - but footnoteblog - it seems to me that you've neither carefully read what the OP has said, nor (it would appear) have you bothered to look at the examples he posted elsewhere. These weren't images that he was desperate to save - they were examples of a problem that's recently arisen, or at the very least, recently worsened. Anyway, I get worried by these sensor problems - they feel like a horrible doom hanging over digital cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
footnoteblog Posted March 6, 2009 Share #27 Posted March 6, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I suppose it's just par for the course, unfortunately. Film process is tested and predictable, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaMSeattle Posted March 6, 2009 Share #28 Posted March 6, 2009 Here are just a few examples from about a third of all of my images from the wedding reception I shot a couple of weekends ago. I shot these with my 35 cron at ISO 640, note the color pixels, green steaks and blobs. I sent these on to Leica for their take on the situation where they requested that I send my camera in. It is now there for sensor sensor and upgrades. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/78652-m8-green-streaky-lines-at-iso-640-diagnosis/?do=findComment&comment=831576'>More sharing options...
footnoteblog Posted March 6, 2009 Share #29 Posted March 6, 2009 Huh. Looks like some kind of micro-flare. Yeah, looks bad. But that's a bit different from the OP, right? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted March 7, 2009 Share #30 Posted March 7, 2009 LeicaMSeattle, Unless I'm missing something obvious, the only blobs I see are reflections of specular highlights, most of which appear to have been caused by your UV/IR filter or lens elements. For example in the last photo the green blobs on the dark jacket of the man on the right are clearly an inverted reflection of the (unavoidably) blown-out chandelier. Same for the blobs in the woman's hair in the second photo. I don't see anything that I wouldn't see in my own images under those conditions if I left my filter on and some even if I took it off. It's the 'nature of the beast' that specular highlights in particular will reflect off the sensor, reflect off the back of one of the lens elements and record as a misplaced blob. Personally I always (try to remember to ) remove IR filters when shooting at night. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell c. greenberg Posted March 7, 2009 Share #31 Posted March 7, 2009 Thanks, everyone, for posting thoughts. I'm feeling like it's a trip to NJ but I'm loathe to ship it. Here's a quick follow-up reproducing the problem and with some additional information. (1) About 1 in 3 underexposed shots show this green streak condition. Sometimes, the green streak shots are in a row, other times not. (2) Lens doesn't matter. Cron, older glass, coded, non-coded, no difference. (3) Battery is fresh. Swapped batteries mid-testing to be sure of freshness. (4) Problem does not appear in properly exposed shots. (And, in underexposed shots *in the past* that I've adjusted severely, the problem didn't appear.) (5) Problem will appear at 160ISO, also. Last photo in set was shot at 160. (6) Camera is a chrome M8 (Feb. '07, SN 310xxxx), firmware 2.004 installed (many OK shots on .004 before this developed), little over 34K shots. (7) Spurious radiation in the room is not an issue, nor has the camera been exposed to radiation/high energy situations. Perhaps it's my kids' latent psychic powers manifesting. New shots attached, replicating the issue. Note that *some* of the shots in this series (not posted) had no signs of streaking--even with identical shooting conditions, seconds apart. So, frequency is random, but can be reproduced. If you look in the dark areas on the original shots I'm providing, you can see the streak even before I (overly) bump up the exposure/brightness. I guess what I'm getting at is that gross underexposure used to mean just bad noise--not a streak, too. It might be OK to say "just don't underexpose your shots" but sometimes underexposure/bumping in post is needed to grab shots in bad light (or with f/4 glass in marginal light). I'll be contacting Leica today to see what, if anything, they can do. Thanks, Will Will, If you are afraid to mail your camera, call Dave Elwell or Sarah Mayville to set up an appointment to bring your camera to Leica NJ ( they are in Allendale, about 3 hours from Phila.) You will lose a day from work, but I believe the "face time" will be worth a lot to you concerning this problem. I also read that you purchased your camera in February 2007. Leica NJ is pretty good about an extended grace period after end of warranty (especially when it comes to defective sensors) but ACT QUICKLY!!. If you decide to follow my advice, try to get an early morning appointment, and start your drive "at the crack of dawn". Hope this helps. Russell Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaMSeattle Posted March 7, 2009 Share #32 Posted March 7, 2009 I know all about reflections from the filter and these are not from the UV/IR filter. The upload process has muted the defects that are clear and present in the original files believe me. There are red, green and blue pixel spots sometimes on consecutive frames while the green ghosting is more sporatic all in the same areas of the frame. I emailed these files to Leica in N.J. with a reply from Mark Brady requesting that I send the camera in for sensor replacement and there it awaits service. I'm pleased that they are standing behind their product. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted March 7, 2009 Share #33 Posted March 7, 2009 LeicaMSeattle, Personally I always (try to remember to ) remove IR filters when shooting at night. Pete. Unfortunately, at a wedding reception, removing the UV/IR filter would result in most of the guests seemingly having attended wearing purple. This type of scenario seems like a no win either way - get reflections or see black become purples. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted March 7, 2009 Share #34 Posted March 7, 2009 Yep, clearly reflections. I think we all have examples of these. Sorry. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted March 7, 2009 Share #35 Posted March 7, 2009 Unfortunately, at a wedding reception, removing the UV/IR filter would result in most of the guests seemingly having attended wearing purple. This type of scenario seems like a no win either way - get reflections or see black become purples. Simon True, although the magenta can be easily lost by processing as black and white where desired but specular reflections can be difficult to repair or hide so I treat the risk of magenta as the lesser of two evils. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted March 7, 2009 Share #36 Posted March 7, 2009 True, although the magenta can be easily lost by processing as black and white where desired but specular reflections can be difficult to repair or hide so I treat the risk of magenta as the lesser of two evils. Pete. I did see somewhere an example of processing non-UV/IR filtered pictures as B&W where it showed that the black was not correct as it is a conversion from magenta rather than the actual black. I believe it looked more grey than black in the resulting picture. I guess even that is correctable though. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted March 7, 2009 Share #37 Posted March 7, 2009 ...and so a discussion about possible future sensor decay problems dissolves yet again into filter reflections and IR. Will - let us know what the final outcome with the camera is. Obviously it's of benefit to everyone in the future if these events are properly documented, as it may effect out-of-warranty repairs if the sensor has an inherent fault. Mani Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted March 7, 2009 Share #38 Posted March 7, 2009 ...and so a discussion about possible future sensor decay problems dissolves yet again into filter reflections and IR. Will - let us know what the final outcome with the camera is. Obviously it's of benefit to everyone in the future if these events are properly documented, as it may effect out-of-warranty repairs if the sensor has an inherent fault. Mani For my part I apologise for leading the discussion away form the OPs subject. It is too easy to get caught up in a side conversation as one replies to other's replies. Please do let us know the outcome as it may affect more of us in the future. Simon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted March 7, 2009 Share #39 Posted March 7, 2009 I know all about reflections from the filter and these are not from the UV/IR filter. The upload process has muted the defects that are clear and present in the original files believe me. There are red, green and blue pixel spots sometimes on consecutive frames while the green ghosting is more sporatic all in the same areas of the frame. I emailed these files to Leica in N.J. with a reply from Mark Brady requesting that I send the camera in for sensor replacement and there it awaits service. I'm pleased that they are standing behind their product. ???? What I see is highlight reflections from the lamps in the roof repeated as reflections on the dark jackets etc. These kind of reflections you will get with just any digital camera! I took some paralell pictures here with both my M8 and 1Ds III were the same kind of reflections appeared with both cameras. This is a general problem with digital all cameras. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted March 7, 2009 Share #40 Posted March 7, 2009 To prove my point, I have attached two pictures: 1) M8 & Noctilux 50 mm 1,0 2) Canon 1Ds III & EF 50 mm 1,0L These pictures are taken around 12 o'clock the 22. June last year, the brightest night of the year, at 60 degrees North (at about Oslo, Stockholm, Helsinki, St.Petersburg etc.) hand held, facing south. You will se the reflections of this lamp on both pictures. I took some with a small point & shoot were the green blob was even larger (not my camera). I could move this green blob around depending on how I was standing in relation to the lamp. Please note that the bright light on the horizon on the 2.nd picture is a lantern on top of a telecom mast. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/78652-m8-green-streaky-lines-at-iso-640-diagnosis/?do=findComment&comment=832111'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.