Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #21 Posted November 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Guy--nice colors. Really--got the DMR's little brother there...(which is why I'm still so hand-wringy about that black thing...) Jamie from really just screwing around a little today with some images some are out of focus due to my newness to RF but the colors and tones are exactly like the DMR in many ways, reason i said i maybe a little sappy about this. Folks know how much i love the DMR files and my goal with the M8 is if I can duplicate that in a smaller M8 package than i would be happy as can be , so far it is looking that way. Color is still a little off to the magenta side regardless of the IR issue but when the cut filter or the permenant fix is in place we should be really close if not better. Let's face the facts the M lenses are also sharper than the R's so this will rock the house. I'm getting very optimistic about this as we get to work these files more and more. Now i still stand by my statement all along a new IR filter needs be in place, using Cut filters is a temporary fix and not a permenant one by my standards. not letting anyone off the hook there but what i am saying is it looks really good outside that issue so far and i am really engouraged by that. Honestly I know many folks have backed out for now and have things on hold but if the cut filters work which we will know very soon and leica makes a commitment for the permenant fix than i personally would hold off before calling my dealer to cancel. Of course that is ones choice what to do , i know this is a major struggle for everyone including myself but if things go as they should than we maybe really okay here, which I have no doubt they will in the end but questions certainly remain on when and how Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 10, 2006 Posted November 10, 2006 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here ISO 1250 stuff . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rvaubel Posted November 10, 2006 Share #22 Posted November 10, 2006 Uhh - folks, I CAN see the green mirror images of the halogen lights (reading comprehension 101). If these qualify as the "green blobs" then they are just part and parcel to the other aspects of banding (sensor-read bugs) we've seen. Which is probably good news, since whatever fix Leica has in mind for the banding should solve the blob problem as well. Most posts I've seen seem to treat the GB's as a separate issue - which would appear to be in error if this is them. Anyway - nice shootin', Tex! (or Guy, or whatever the AZ equivalent is). Hope I get my Mate by the end of next week. The green blobs have always been a manifistation of the banding thing. Go back to the "man in the cafe" picture @ ISO 1250 and you will see a beautiful example of it . Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #23 Posted November 10, 2006 Uhh - folks, I CAN see the green mirror images of the halogen lights (reading comprehension 101). Sorry Andy, I mis-read your post, 6am and too much wine last night BTW, what does "sappy" mean in Arizona-speak? The original green-blob pictures, from the LL review, aren't there any more but I can't remember if these showed banding as well. Certainly the two normally appear together but whether they have the same cause is anyone's guess. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 10, 2006 Share #24 Posted November 10, 2006 The green blobs have always been a manifistation of the banding thing. Go back to the "man in the cafe" picture @ ISO 1250 and you will see a beautiful example of it . Rex Here's the picture showing the banding and the green blobs. Notice the blobs aren't green. I think they are the negative color of the blown out highlights. Actually I know they are. Notice the blobs are a symetrical about centerline image of the blown highlights. I've seen this same effect 50 times now. I have a whole file of them Rex 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/8893-iso-1250-stuff/?do=findComment&comment=89345'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 10, 2006 Share #25 Posted November 10, 2006 Jamie from really just screwing around a little today with some images some are out of focus due to my newness to RF but the colors and tones are exactly like the DMR in many ways, reason i said i maybe a little sappy about this. Guy, I would encourage you to test the focusing really carefully. I thought I was no good at it too, but when I started looking into it, I found that my camera could not focus on infinity. Try to go somewhere up high, where you can see for miles, and focus on a distant antenna or tower. I couldn't bring mine together. Off it went to Solms, sadly. I miss the little thing terribly. I have heard other reports of incorrect focus adjustment. It is no big deal, it just means that every picture is slightly misfocused. I could only really tell at infinity. I can't wait to see the sharp pictures when it comes back perfectly adjusted. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #26 Posted November 10, 2006 One of the things I've been puzzling about is how they maintain balance between the left and right sides of the sensor. I've never seen an exposure where the "seam" between the two sides is visible, apart of course from where the banding stops. If there was separate digitising circuitry for each side, it would be very difficult to get both to track each other at all light levels and all ISO levels. Seems to me then, that the same circuitry is used for both sides, being fed pixel outputs from the left and right alternately as they are read out of the sensor. If a saturated pixel on one side is followed by a normal pixel on the other side, it's possible the electronics cannot recover quickly enough from the saturated pixel to give an accurate reading, so that blown highlights on one side cause artefacts on the other. Carsten, your comment about infinity focus is interesting. Problem is, if it will not focus at infinity, it's difficult to know if the lens or camera is out of alignment or both. If one lens out of three focusses OK and the other two do not, where's the problem? I think it would be useful to be able to buy a bayonet mount which sets the roller to the "infinity" position. It would then allow you to identify where the problem was. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #27 Posted November 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sappy Affectedly or extravagantly emotional: bathetic, gushy, maudlin, mawkish, romantic, sentimental, slushy, sobby, soft, soppy. Informal : gooey, mushy, schmaltzy, sloppy, soupy. Slang : drippy, tear-jerking. See FEELINGS. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woody Campbell Posted November 10, 2006 Share #28 Posted November 10, 2006 Andy I think those Californians call us from Arizona , Zoni's . It seems to fit us, we are all just half baked anyway. LOL I do tend to agree the GB are directly related to the banding so they should go also when that gets fixed and honestly I think we are seeing some IR in there that shows it worse than it is. I am getting a bunch of cut filters in the next several days and if they work out correctly than we are getting closer to a knowing what a permenant fix should be Guy - the ir cut filters seem to be a bit of an exotic item. Could you let us know in due course where you got them? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #29 Posted November 10, 2006 I picked some up at Adorama and also Popflash. they are very hard to get BTW. I bought 6 of them at a cost of about 800 dollars , there not freaking cheap either. But i want to put this M8 into service if everything is okay. I will get some today so i can try some things immediately and have some answers but this is not the final solution I want and after that I will be lucky to sell one of them. Maybe the smart thing to do is buy a larger one and step up rings for now, it will be a pain but at least a lot cheaper Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 10, 2006 Share #30 Posted November 10, 2006 I picked some up at Adorama and also Popflash. they are very hard to get BTW. I bought 6 of them at a cost of about 800 dollars , there not freaking cheap either. But i want to put this M8 into service if everything is okay. I will get some today so i can try some things immediately and have some answers but this is not the final solution I want and after that I will be lucky to sell one of them. Maybe the smart thing to do is buy a larger one and step up rings for now, it will be a pain but at least a lot cheaper I have a huge 77mm Heliopan UV/IR Digital filter that I bought to compensate for the lack of an IR filter in my astro specific Canon 20Da. It worked fine but because of the hassle and cost of having and using multiple filters, I developed a color profile to compensate. That worked fine too. Now I find out that my RD1 has a very high infrared sensitivity and suffers from the purple/black syndrome. I haven't run any test yet but their are examples being posted on the web. So, because I don't have my M8 yet, I will do test to see how the RD1 responds to the Heliopan IR filter. And, gee wiz, I didn't even know I had a problem!! Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill vann Posted November 10, 2006 Share #31 Posted November 10, 2006 I think the green blobs may not be related to the banding. effects like this are seen often shooting in IR and they are typically reflections either within the lens or in the mirrorbox and occassionally in the sensor cover (filter) itself. looking to see if i can post a similar effect in IR but typically delete the images exhibiting it. bill vann Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #32 Posted November 10, 2006 Bill I plan on reshooting the Kitchen today since I know where i can find the bandingand I will have the Cut filter here in a hour or so . Let's see what happens , maybe we will get lucky Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
freecitizen Posted November 10, 2006 Share #33 Posted November 10, 2006 I still think the increased IR sensitivity is either causing, or at least worstening the banding ...... previous post .... http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/8946-ir-sensitivity-causing-banding-too.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #34 Posted November 10, 2006 Bill, I think it's too much of a coincidence that the green blob always appears as a mirror image the other side of the centre axis and I feel sure it's to do with the readout of the sensor data. Here's an example of a green blob without banding; slightly difficult to see because the camera is showing the wall as green, it's actually yellow... 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/8893-iso-1250-stuff/?do=findComment&comment=89731'>More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #35 Posted November 10, 2006 Sappy Affectedly or extravagantly emotional: bathetic, gushy, maudlin, mawkish, romantic, sentimental, slushy, sobby, soft, soppy. Informal : gooey, mushy, schmaltzy, sloppy, soupy. Slang : drippy, tear-jerking. See FEELINGS. Thanks Guy, now I look in my dictionary, "overly sentimental". As they used to say in the Readers Digest: "It pays to improve your word power". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumshoecamus Posted November 10, 2006 Share #36 Posted November 10, 2006 One of the things I've been puzzling about is how they maintain balance between the left and right sides of the sensor. I've never seen an exposure where the "seam" between the two sides is visible, apart of course from where the banding stops. If there was separate digitising circuitry for each side, it would be very difficult to get both to track each other at all light levels and all ISO levels. Seems to me then, that the same circuitry is used for both sides, being fed pixel outputs from the left and right alternately as they are read out of the sensor. If a saturated pixel on one side is followed by a normal pixel on the other side, it's possible the electronics cannot recover quickly enough from the saturated pixel to give an accurate reading, so that blown highlights on one side cause artefacts on the other. \ hi mark on the LL medium format forum some leaf aptus 65 and 75 users have a problem with a seemingly split sensor. a few users have pix that show a sharp vertical line down the centre of the image, with exposure on one side slightly different to the other, as if two photos had been butted together. looks awful, and it seems that leaf is upset about it. for now I think there is a temporary software solution (called a gain adjuster) while leaf tries to sort out the mechanical/electronic problem. d Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexr Posted November 10, 2006 Share #37 Posted November 10, 2006 Bill, I think it's too much of a coincidence that the green blob always appears as a mirror image the other side of the centre axis and I feel sure it's to do with the readout of the sensor data. Here's an example of a green blob without banding; slightly difficult to see because the camera is showing the wall as green, it's actually yellow... Yes, yes, it is very clear. Must be a mirror image, it is in the exact candle shape...very interesting. thank-you for sharing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill vann Posted November 10, 2006 Share #38 Posted November 10, 2006 re the opposed orientation, recall that in optics orientation of rays / reflections shift and the reflections can be oriented as shown. not sure, but still a technically viable explanation bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #39 Posted November 10, 2006 \ hi mark on the LL medium format forum some leaf aptus 65 and 75 users have a problem with a seemingly split sensor. a few users have pix that show a sharp vertical line down the centre of the image, with exposure on one side slightly different to the other, as if two photos had been butted together. looks awful, and it seems that leaf is upset about it. for now I think there is a temporary software solution (called a gain adjuster) while leaf tries to sort out the mechanical/electronic problem. d Very interesting, it was exactly that effect I was thinking about! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #40 Posted November 10, 2006 I just shot the room with daylight coming in at 1250 and no bancding at all. Than tried the cut filter and took all the IR light out and actually color balnced itself since the halgons are just pouring out IR light. i will try again tonight with just the halogens but look at this. I will repeat this tonight without daylight. This will be a interesting conversation now. Top is no filter and bottom filter but NO banding 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/8893-iso-1250-stuff/?do=findComment&comment=89832'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.