ho_co Posted November 8, 2006 Share #121 Posted November 8, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Leica’s statement can be read on Uwe Steinmuellers review; scroll to the buttom of this site: http://www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/leica_m8/Leica_M8_review.html# Holger-- Thanks for the link! --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 8, 2006 Posted November 8, 2006 Hi ho_co, Take a look here purple RD1 shot with M8. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ho_co Posted November 8, 2006 Share #122 Posted November 8, 2006 How intense has been testig the camera if people didnt realize the problem before? Thomas-- The problem is real and clearly the camera didn't get enough testing. But although your argument looks good on the surface, I think it's basically a red herring. The testers of the camera were serious photographers who shot the kinds of things they normally shoot. Almost everyone who has the camera today says that 99% of the time, the camera performs flawlessly. With no disrespect to the people who shot the pictures involved, I doubt that any of the M8 testers took pictures of the top plates of their R-D1s under tungsten illumination. Clearly there are problems; Leica is aware of them. The problems were not visible in the testing process, and don't appear today in 99% of pictures made with the camera. Leica felt they had taken care of all difficulties, else they would not have released the camera. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 8, 2006 Share #123 Posted November 8, 2006 If our eyes had the gamut of the M8, we would actually SEE what you are calling magenta,as a color, not black. The reason we see black is that the IR isnt 'visible' (thatis doesn't trigger those rods and cones) So, maybe this is a feature, or a great camera for snakes! Victor-- The M8 points the way to the future. The race that replaces homo sapiens will have the color sensitivity gene modification that lets it see these colors as the M8 does. I have it on good authority that our replacement on the planet will be known as homo leicaiens. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted November 8, 2006 Share #124 Posted November 8, 2006 When a new test camera arrives, I go shopping for fruits and vegetables that will give me the colors, textures, shapes, etc. that I want for testing. I hope these are always organic fruits and veggies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted November 8, 2006 Share #125 Posted November 8, 2006 third, with the M8 set to kelvin and adjustments to WB and tint made in C1: Steven, is the color correct in the third shot, the one with the M8 corrected in C1? tnx, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted November 8, 2006 Share #126 Posted November 8, 2006 I don't think so. I think Outback Photo needs to change the wording on their website regarding the "quote from a Leica note to us..." I have serious doubts about a note being an actual official Leica statement. IMHO, I think it was a response by a single Leica employee to an EMAIL posted by Uwe. And we all know how accurate email can be. Calling it a statement by Leica is a huge stretch. One Leica employee's gut reaction to an email does not make for a company wide issued statement. The only place you will see that is on Leica's own website. I think Leica will solve the problems and we just need to be patient and give them some time and breathing room. This is way too early to concede and throw in the towel and say that all is lost. Leica's philosphy has never been about instant gratification and milking the latest technological marketing phrase for fast cash - "more megapixels is better!" They're not about to start. Proper solutions will be implemented in due time. Let's give them some credit and time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mat_mcdermott Posted November 8, 2006 Share #127 Posted November 8, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Clearly there are problems; Leica is aware of them. The problems were not visible in the testing process, and don't appear today in 99% of pictures made with the camera. Leica felt they had taken care of all difficulties, else they would not have released the camera. --HC As you say there are clearly problems in certain conditions with the M8. What I would like to know is how often all the things that have been discussed here in the past couple of days--banding, WB/IR issues, etc.--occur in everyday conditions. If the M8 really is performing well in 99% of situations then while there are genuine problems to be corrected, ultimately we're talking a problem that occurs very infrequently. Out of 100 photos you take how many are keepers? On another note, if a filter will fix the problem temporarily that seems like a good solution until Leica comes up with a more permanent one. I've never understood why people have such an aversion to filters on Leica lenses. In the film world filters are used all the time (sometimes stacked two or three deep, horrors!) and no one complains excessively about image degradation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayh Posted November 8, 2006 Share #128 Posted November 8, 2006 I keep seeing this 99% success rate figure being bandied about. I think this is true if you are only shooting outdoor pictures of your cat, but if you are shooting available light outdoors at night or tungsten lit interiors at night, your failure rate (defined as either hopeless, or requiring *a lot* of photoshop gymnastics) is going to be more like 50%. In my opinion, a $5000 professional camera should not have any of these problems. I have voted with my feet and sent the thing back to my dealer. I may pick up another when they fix these problems. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 8, 2006 Share #129 Posted November 8, 2006 I'm not a color expert but I have a friend who is and who used to work for C1. We expect to discuss this later today and I'll know more. Sean, be sure to ask if it is possibly to distinguish between real purple, and black resulting in that same shade of purple... if not, any attempt is doomed to fail, because this is the situation. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 8, 2006 Share #130 Posted November 8, 2006 I keep seeing this 99% success rate figure being bandied about. I think this is true if you are only shooting outdoor pictures of your cat, but if you are shooting available light outdoors at night or tungsten lit interiors at night, your failure rate (defined as either hopeless, or requiring *a lot* of photoshop gymnastics) is going to be more like 50%. In my opinion, a $5000 professional camera should not have any of these problems. I have voted with my feet and sent the thing back to my dealer. I may pick up another when they fix these problems. Edit ABr Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
abrewer Posted November 8, 2006 Share #131 Posted November 8, 2006 Again, please don't personalize your posts with respect to other members' opinions. You can make an argument without indicting someone. Thanks. Allan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsmith Posted November 8, 2006 Share #132 Posted November 8, 2006 The problem is not only with tungsten lighting,I hung my black tuxedo on my office chair (indirect, window light only and shot, M8, 28. 2.0 abobe rgb, jpg, auto white balance and manual wb.( firmware 1.05) Results " black tux looks cyan, silk black lapels look very magenta. Taking PS numerical values of the background , the whites and light grays are pretty close (128,129, 133 etc) as the tonal range moves darker, all the blacks and darker grays are all way too cyan and blue. Shot the same scene a few seconds later with my Digilux2 , auto wb... all shades of grey and black, and white, and all colors PERFECT. Tuxedo , exactly as it looks ! elements in the Digilux scene numericaly measure white, grays and blacks evenly in RGB values. Manual or auto wb, daylight or tungsten, there is definitly a color problem even with firmware 1.05 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 8, 2006 Share #133 Posted November 8, 2006 I keep seeing this 99% success rate figure being bandied about. I think this is true if you are only shooting outdoor pictures of your cat, but if you are shooting available light outdoors at night or tungsten lit interiors at night, your failure rate (defined as either hopeless, or requiring *a lot* of photoshop gymnastics) is going to be more like 50%. In my opinion, a $5000 professional camera should not have any of these problems. I have voted with my feet and sent the thing back to my dealer. I may pick up another when they fix these problems. Clay-- You're right. I'm saying 99% because I read others saying 99%; and they may be saying 99% only because they are getting confirmation from me. The problem is serious and needs solution, but I believe MOST people shooting the camera are getting PRIMARILY good results from it. The trouble with that logic is that it's what I *believe,* and it covers only those who are *using* the camera. People who have put the camera back in the box or refused delivery are thereby ruled out, and the statement becomes meaningless--especially to those who shoot a lot under tungsten. As I said before, you made the only reasonable decision for you. I'm getting a bit leery of the situation for the first time, and I'm glad to see the results and opinions posted here. I know Leica will fix the problem soon, but it's a small company and reliant on companies both smaller (Phase One) and larger (Kodak) in these issues. My hat is off to them for a generally good first iteratiion; I hope it gets better very quickly. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayh Posted November 8, 2006 Share #134 Posted November 8, 2006 Don't get me wrong. I am most likely going to be a buyer in the future. It has too much going for it in everything but its current ability to create a digital image that doesn't require a lot of post processing intervention. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
M'Ate Posted November 8, 2006 Share #135 Posted November 8, 2006 It's not 99% at all. It's 99% if you don't shoot where the banding will occur or where subjects are wearing black attire, maybe. 1st dance at a wedding with all the disco lights - 100% banding ? Groom & best man in black morning suits - 100% magenta ? Even if it's 15% incidence in these conditions, it's 100% unusable for me , because I get too many discards as it is. I can't shoot an unrepeatable paid shot with it, I just can't take the chance. I'd rather take an MP, forgo the convenience and get a better negative. I love using my Leicas and will buy the M8, but I depend on the results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 8, 2006 Share #136 Posted November 8, 2006 Again, please don't personalize your posts with respect to other members' opinions. You can make an argument without indicting someone. That wasn't particularly personalised, just pointing out that one fictional number was rejected, and another presented... Fine, I will back off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhoelscher Posted November 8, 2006 Share #137 Posted November 8, 2006 I posted a shot of my RD-1 in IR ... I think it shows that black synthetic fabrics and the purple areas of Steven Kinberg's RD-1 really strongly reflect infrared light. DH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
llc Posted November 8, 2006 Share #138 Posted November 8, 2006 [quote name=rvaubel What I'm trying to say is' date=' if you gave me a camera with a yellow filter on it, I could develop a color profile for it that would subtract out the color of the filter. So no matter what a "error" Leica has made with regard to IR filter selection, it can be completely compensated for with the proper color profile. Infrared reflectivity is highly dependent on subject matter. While there is a minor overall color cast introduced by infrared sensitivity, that is not the issue--a uniform cast across the image is easily dealt with using white balance, assuming the camera has a reasonably color rendition. The problem is that color will vary all over the frame, depending on the proportion of visible light and infrared light reflected by the subject matter. Items that are coal-black in visible light might be extremely "white" in infrared, such that there are many stops more of infrared light than visible light, and thus the infrared light will dominate the exposure. No color profile can address this issue, any more than it can address uneven polarization across the frame. Faces will look sunburned, black velvet will look magenta, brown fabrics will look purple, etc. And at the same time, other objects will be perfectly normal. I know this from personal experience with a Nikon D2H, which had eerily similar problems, and it is simply mind-boggling that Leica chose an IR-blocking filter a la Nikon D2H, which caused enormous trouble to wedding photographers and the like, especially those shooting with flash (which emits a huge amount of infrared). Only by using a B+W 489 infrared-blocking filter (or similar one) can the influence of infrared be eliminated. While the B+W 489 introduces its own slight cyan cast, it is easily corrected because the entire image is affected uniformly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 8, 2006 Share #139 Posted November 8, 2006 It's not 99% at all. It's 99% if you don't shoot where the banding will occur or where subjects are wearing black attire' date=' maybe.... Even if it's 15% incidence in these conditions, it's 100% unusable for me , because I get too many discards as it is. [/quote']You're correct. See my note to Clay above (http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8881-purple-rd1-shot-m8-7.html#post87896). I've now sworn off using a percentage figure. What's 100% suitable for me may be thoroughly wrong for you. My point, not well expressed, is that some people are very impressed with their results from the M8. These problems should not be there, but they don't affect everyone equally. BTW--If you haven't seen it, S Reid has posted official Leica response to two of the three issues at http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8937-official-leica-statements.html#post87924. Respectfully, --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayh Posted November 8, 2006 Share #140 Posted November 8, 2006 Carsten, that is a valid point. I dismissed one number and pulled another one out of thin air. But mine was based on shooting with the M8 for four days. Still an estimate, though. I'll revise my statement to saying that the 99% number is optimistic. I offer no competing estimate, and only assert that the success rate will be smaller than that, and will depend on what you are using the camera to photograph. For me, the problems occurred at a frequency that was unacceptable. Others may be perfectly content. It is a very well made and solid camera. That wasn't particularly personalised, just pointing out that one fictional number was rejected, and another presented... Fine, I will back off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.