Why did you sell your DMR?

[mgcd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ok, I love the examples posted here, and my question to everyone, is what software do you use for post processing? I'm new with the DMR, and use Elements for my R8 along with iPhoto for quick reviewing.

 

Thanks,

Gene

 

The best raw processor for the DMR is still Capture One, I use it for my personal work. That said, for best workflow and ease of handling I still use Lightroom 2.0 for large batches.

 

Cheers,

[farnz]

Awww, Thorsten and Jamie, you're just not helping my hankering to go away! The pictures just spring out of my screen and I hate to think what they're like properly printed ...

 

Pete.

[Jamie Roberts]

Jamie - Actually, there is only one (1) D3 image - I was given a D3 to try out - I'm seriously tempted. The other ones mentioning Nikon were shot with R8s and film (yes it still happens...) scanned on a Nikon LS 8000 scanner. Annoyingly, the site reads the scanner metadata as shot with Nikon cameras. {snipped}

 

Thanks Conrad... I have to say I like my D3 a lot But I like the DMR better still... and in a way they're different approaches entirely. But the ergonomics on the D3 is very, very nice and there are some great lens choices there too. Just not R lens choices

 

As a bit of a hijack--have you seen the site that will re-adapt your R lenses to a Nikon mount (!!)?

 

@ Pete--thanks for the kind words on the shots. Go look at Conrad's site

 

FWIW, I agree that C1 is the best processing overall. I also like to use the FlexColor profiles in the C1 application, which, even if they aren't accurate, give a wonderful interpretation of the DMR file. Same goes for some of the phase back profiles too. Just something to try

[dritz]

My thanks to everyone's generous thoughts on the matter. It seems to me that there is one issue that challenges it's utility: focus. I would appreciate comments on these specific points, particularly ways of mitigating them.

 

1a. Several of you mentioned the challenge of focusing with aging eyes. While I have no issues with the R9 (and my 45 year old eyes) and find it joy to use, I am concerned with having to focus a 1.37x crop. The catchlight, for example, will be significantly smaller. I have looked for but not found an R8/9 eyepiece magnifier. Perhaps a diopter can be refitted with a magnifier.

 

1b. Thorsten's website annotates one of his many impressive photos with a comment that the focus isn't quite on target because of a back-focus problem. Should one expect perfect focus? Does it need to be matched to a particular body? Does this problem vary by body and/or lens?

 

Thanks for further sharing of your expertise. As I initially wrote, I will hear on Friday whether or not I will be the owner of a new DMR (perhaps the last one in the herd).

 

Regards and thanks.

Dean

[Overgaard]

Focusing is not a problem in itself because the focus is the same as the R9 with film and full frame. Its just a crop, not a smaller image in terms of viewfinder focus.

 

But with fully open lenses, backfocus becomes an issue. With my 2.8 lenses it's hard to tell if focus is completely right. But with a 80/1.4 fully open, it is ruining if the focus is off.

 

My R9 which was originally paired with the DMR had backfocus, whereas the R8 I use for backup has very little. In practical terms that's ca. 1,5 - 2 cm backfocus on the R9 at 60-80 cm distance (portriat), on the R8 it's only 0,0 - 0,5 cm.

 

Still critical for a 80/1.4 but no practical problem with a 2.8 lens. I think the worst part is yourself looking because you KNOW how sharp it can be, for many others, they will never notice. But working with the less precision, trying to adjust for it in focusing, doubting if it's the camera or you'r focus that was slightly off ... that's a bit ruining for your comfort and working style. After all, I think most of us chose Leica for perfection, not for "almost perfect."

 

Now, I haven't sent in my R9 for adjusting yet, but I fear the adjustment will only last for a while. Daily use, travel, disassembling for cleaning, etc. will probably change it.

[grduprey]

Jaime & Thorsten,

 

Thanks for the help and info on processing applications. I have C1, but it does not work too well on my Mac. I guess I will have to try Lightroom and see how I like it.

 

Thorsten, your DMR site is quite informative. Thanks for your effort.

 

Gene

[grduprey]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Focusing is not a problem in itself because the focus is the same as the R9 with film and full frame. Its just a crop, not a smaller image in terms of viewfinder focus.

 

But with fully open lenses, backfocus becomes an issue. With my 2.8 lenses it's hard to tell if focus is completely right. But with a 80/1.4 fully open, it is ruining if the focus is off.

 

My R9 which was originally paired with the DMR had backfocus, whereas the R8 I use for backup has very little. In practical terms that's ca. 1,5 - 2 cm backfocus on the R9 at 60-80 cm distance (portriat), on the R8 it's only 0,0 - 0,5 cm.

 

Still critical for a 80/1.4 but no practical problem with a 2.8 lens. I think the worst part is yourself looking because you KNOW how sharp it can be, for many others, they will never notice. But working with the less precision, trying to adjust for it in focusing, doubting if it's the camera or you'r focus that was slightly off ... that's a bit ruining for your comfort and working style. After all, I think most of us chose Leica for perfection, not for "almost perfect."

 

Now, I haven't sent in my R9 for adjusting yet, but I fear the adjustment will only last for a while. Daily use, travel, disassembling for cleaning, etc. will probably change it.

 

Is this a back focus problem at wide open? Or is it a focus accuracy problem of the viewing system? I can't see this being a back focus problem, as it should be right on if you focus correctly. Now if you stop down and the focus is wrong, then it would be a back focus, or focus shift problem, as seen on fast lenses used on the M8 or other M cameras. Or, am I missing something?

 

Gene

[Jamie Roberts]

Is this a back focus problem at wide open? Or is it a focus accuracy problem of the viewing system? I can't see this being a back focus problem, as it should be right on if you focus correctly. Now if you stop down and the focus is wrong, then it would be a back focus, or focus shift problem, as seen on fast lenses used on the M8 or other M cameras. Or, am I missing something?

 

Gene

 

Always hard to tell how the intersection of lens, screen, sensor and diopter interconnect. I found with the Brightscreen screen in my R9 / DMR that it was impossible for me to tell what was really in focus and what wasn't at 1.4 on the 35, 50 or 80 Lux.

 

The Leica split screen helped a lot in this regard.

 

Of course, the *sensor* could be off enough to cause backfocus (so it looks in focus but is not).

 

Having said that, we should all remember that an 80mm at 1.4 focusing at 8 feet away only has about 2.5 inches for DOF error. Not very much if you or the subject moves

[topoxforddoc]

Focussing issues can be due to incorrect seating of the focussing screen below the prism finder. Try removing and reseating it first if you have issues with back focussing.

 

Charlie

[Overgaard]

True about focusing. There's several possible errors for focus problems, and my R9 might suffer from both the focusing screen being shaky (the holder feels different than my R8 which is very firm), or it could be the sensor.

 

Currently I actually use the original focusing screen and not the Brightfinder I also have.

 

Focusing can be wrong due to:

1) Focusing screen misplaced.

2) Sensor misplaced (or not accurately placed after cleaning/assembling).

3) Mirror misplaced.

4) 20CM-BTC (20 cm. behind the camera = user error).

 

When I use 2.8 lenses or use my 80/1.4 @ 5.6 I simply get larger DOF which handles incorrectness.

 

At least I feel Leica is more competent to adjust all possible parts into standard. I was very impressed when they had my R8 some time ago and called back that the bajonet was tilted and if I wanted it adjusted to be 100% plane. I would never have guessed So they must use some sort of laser measuring NASA equipment.

[jc_braconi]

This a copy of what I posted in the digital forum :

 

My DMR was back at the Leica dealer shop today after 3 month in Solms, (due to ERROR Code #2) after that, it was speaking in German.

 

Back on the R8, with a loaded battery and a fresh card, it looks as it was never been sick !

 

My experience with the Digilux 3, lent to me by Leica during this time, is very positive in many ways, I will regret it no doubt about...

[grduprey]

This a copy of what I posted in the digital forum :

 

My DMR was back at the Leica dealer shop today after 3 month in Solms, (due to ERROR Code #2) after that, it was speaking in German.

 

Back on the R8, with a loaded battery and a fresh card, it looks as it was never been sick !

 

My experience with the Digilux 3, lent to me by Leica during this time, is very positive in many ways, I will regret it no doubt about...

 

JC,

 

Good to hear your DMR is finally back. Mine also had the language problem when I first purchased it. But then I did buy it in Germany. ;-)

 

Gene

[jaapv]

True about focusing. There's several possible errors for focus problems, and my R9 might suffer from both the focusing screen being shaky (the holder feels different than my R8 which is very firm), or it could be the sensor.

 

Currently I actually use the original focusing screen and not the Brightfinder I also have.

 

Focusing can be wrong due to:

1) Focusing screen misplaced.

2) Sensor misplaced (or not accurately placed after cleaning/assembling).

3) Mirror misplaced.

4) 20CM-BTC (20 cm. behind the camera = user error).

 

When I use 2.8 lenses or use my 80/1.4 @ 5.6 I simply get larger DOF which handles incorrectness.

 

At least I feel Leica is more competent to adjust all possible parts into standard. I was very impressed when they had my R8 some time ago and called back that the bajonet was tilted and if I wanted it adjusted to be 100% plane. I would never have guessed So they must use some sort of laser measuring NASA equipment.

 

They don't The tool is a very basic little telescope with a base that lies on the flange of the bajonet. As the telescope is exactly at 90 degrees, it easily shows any tilt by shifting the image of the film gate off-centre.

[leicanut2]

Here is a question why would you have to send in the R8 to get it to work with the DMR?

 

Jan

[grduprey]

Here is a question why would you have to send in the R8 to get it to work with the DMR?

 

Jan

 

Jan,

 

I bought my DMR (used) in Germany last October, and when I got back to the US, I put it on my R8 and it seemed to work just fine at first, but then the shutter started to lock up when using the motor advance. I had to completely remove the motor base unit and manually cock the shutter and reinstall the motor unit and then it would be OK for a while, usually about 10 exposures or so. It was just fine with manual advance. I found out after several inquiries, here and other forums, that some R8's need to be updated to work 100% properly with the DMR, but not all R8's. I guess it is a firmware problem with the R8's or some other feature that needs to be updated to the latest spec's. The update is done at no cost as a warranty update. Whatever they did, it now works perfectly, and it took about 2 weeks to get it back from Leica NJ. As far as I know there is no problem with the R9's, this is just a R8 problem, and does not effect all R8's.

 

Gene

[rsolomon]

The DMR works with the R8 - no one can say it doesn't, but the DMR was designed with the R9 in mind, a good example of that is when turning off the camera the R8 requires you to turn off the camera and the DMR separately - with the R9 powering off the R9 also powers off the DMR, a small but telling function in how the electronics differ. Addtionally some of the early R8's had problems with motor drives and required an upgrade, some R8's have smooth electical contacts on the bottom, all R9's have dimple contacts for better connectivity, all R9's work with motor drives, and all R9's work with the DMR. There are some other differences - most mentioned above, the most noteable one missed is related to enhanced flash operation on the R9.

 

i received one of the very first DMR's in North America and arranged to pick it up at leica in NJ to save a few days in shipping time - i was so excitied. It worked with my R8 but seemed to need constant dismantling and reconnecting of the camera to reset the DMR - i brought it back to leica NJ and they could not figure it out - i waited all day for a determination from them - they upgraded the R8's operating system ( yes it has one) they cleanned the contacts, they were unable to solve the problem so they offered me a trade in for an R9 at a "reasonable" offer so i took it and bever looked back, they also matched my R9 and DMR mechanically - it was sweet.

 

in about 3 weeks i received a call from leica NJ telling me the issue was the contacts and a replaced contac board in the camera would make it work fine - they kinda offered to switch back but i was happy to get the R9 and save some weight especailly after adding the weight of the DMR ......

 

i would recommend an R9 for your DMR

 

Rich

[grduprey]

Rich,

 

Well, that gives me a better idea of what they did to get my R8 working correctly with the DMR. Right now the R9 is out of the question, but maybe someday when the R8 dies, or when I have some extra cash laying around. Right now the R8 and DMR are real happy with each other and work very smoothly together.

 

Gene

[ptomsu]

The DMR works with the R8 - no one can say it doesn't, but the DMR was designed with the R9 in mind, a good example of that is when turning off the camera the R8 requires you to turn off the camera and the DMR separately - with the R9 powering off the R9 also powers off the DMR, a small but telling function in how the electronics differ. Addtionally some of the early R8's had problems with motor drives and required an upgrade, some R8's have smooth electical contacts on the bottom, all R9's have dimple contacts for better connectivity, all R9's work with motor drives, and all R9's work with the DMR. There are some other differences - most mentioned above, the most noteable one missed is related to enhanced flash operation on the R9.

 

i received one of the very first DMR's in North America and arranged to pick it up at leica in NJ to save a few days in shipping time - i was so excitied. It worked with my R8 but seemed to need constant dismantling and reconnecting of the camera to reset the DMR - i brought it back to leica NJ and they could not figure it out - i waited all day for a determination from them - they upgraded the R8's operating system ( yes it has one) they cleanned the contacts, they were unable to solve the problem so they offered me a trade in for an R9 at a "reasonable" offer so i took it and bever looked back, they also matched my R9 and DMR mechanically - it was sweet.

 

in about 3 weeks i received a call from leica NJ telling me the issue was the contacts and a replaced contac board in the camera would make it work fine - they kinda offered to switch back but i was happy to get the R9 and save some weight especailly after adding the weight of the DMR ......

 

i would recommend an R9 for your DMR

 

Rich

 

WoW - I see the DMR is a real piece off High Tech and advaned ergonomics :cool:

[andybarton]

The DMR was designed AFTER the R8 was already on sale. It's a fantastic achievement by the people both at Leica and Hassleblad that the DMR works at all on an existing camera.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[rsolomon]

The DMR was designed AFTER the R8 was already on sale. It's a fantastic achievement by the people both at Leica and Hassleblad that the DMR works at all on an existing camera.

 

 

Yes, the DMR was designed after the R8 - many years after the R8 design, and i also agree the DMR is a remarkable acheivement and an engineering feat. My biggest disapointment by far was they Leica didn't leverage that effort and produce a 2nd version or an upgrade - a DMR II. I do understand the partnership had issues and utimately was ended, but in the end the customer lost out - atleast this one .

 

Rich