marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #41 Posted November 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Interesting the colour balance improved, looks like this IR has got a lot to answer for! It will be interesting to see you get on with no daylight. BTW Guy, you've got some sensor dust already! LOL. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 10, 2006 Posted November 10, 2006 Hi marknorton, Take a look here ISO 1250 stuff. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #42 Posted November 10, 2006 Yes Mark I noticed that also, man 2 days old and i need to clean it. LOL I have eclipse and sensor swaps here so i will get that done It is very interesting becuase i have no banding with more light in the room. Not sure what to make of that. Will wait until tonight and re run this and see if the Cut filter actually may have some effect. Fingers crossed. I mean i don't have this issue with the DMR . Really we could get lucky here. This would be heaven if this was the cure all and a lot easier on leica for a permenant fix Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterv Posted November 10, 2006 Share #43 Posted November 10, 2006 Really we could get lucky here. This would be heaven if this was the cure all and a lot easier on leica for a permenant fix That would be great! Here in Northern Europe it\s allready been dark now for a few hours. I sure wish I could do some testing right now... ( my M8 still underway allthough Solms is only 300 miles from here...) BTW Guy, I think you are doing a wonderfull job making these tests. They are very helpfull. Thanks a lot for that. I admire your positive attitude towards this very much. Cheers, Peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 10, 2006 Share #44 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. Bill-- I argued the same way for awhile until Mark pointed out to me that the 'reflections' are always mirrored orthogonally across the center of the frame. If this were reflection off the lens, it would be mirrored at various angles and distances from the source, no? But in fact, the mirroring is always at the same height as the subject reflected. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #45 Posted November 10, 2006 It is very interesting becuase i have no banding with more light in the room. Not sure what to make of that. Will wait until tonight and re run this and see if the Cut filter actually may have some effect. Fingers crossed. I mean i don't have this issue with the DMR . Really we could get lucky here. This would be heaven if this was the cure all and a lot easier on leica for a permenant fix With more light in the room from daylight, the halogens are going to be less over-exposed because your overall exposure is going to be less. Tonight, if you repeat last night's shots, it will be interesting to see what difference the IR cut filter makes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 10, 2006 Share #46 Posted November 10, 2006 Guy-- Do check your infinity focus. Leicas almost never have problems with focus, but some of your close work indicates you may be having problems with the focus. Could be inexperience with the rangefinder patch, but most people quickly find it quicker and easier to use than an SLR finder. Of course, with the flowers (for example) just shifting your body after setting focus could throw them out, and you don't have a full-screen indication of that as you do in an SLR. --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #47 Posted November 10, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Good point mark and i bet if i underexpose it would progressively go away so it must be related to the over exposre of those lamps . i will run again tonight for sure, maybe we will get somewhere on this Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #48 Posted November 10, 2006 Yes Howard i do need to check all my focus on my lenses , It maybe me though as i get used to RF. It really is new to me. one thing I have done is put the 1.25 mag on and honestly I could use it from 28 up. I don't wear glasses but 35mm frame line is a piece of cake 28 is good and at 24 i have to look around some . But from 35 up it really is nice to have there. The flower shot i shifted back and forth Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 10, 2006 Share #49 Posted November 10, 2006 Guy, you've done well to get up and running with the filters today. I tried - and failed - to find any immediately available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted November 10, 2006 Share #50 Posted November 10, 2006 Good point mark and i bet if i underexpose it would progressively go away so it must be related to the over exposre of those lamps . i will run again tonight for sure, maybe we will get somewhere on this Guy, if you take a look at the images (banding) you'll note that the images look very much like what you get on a CRT TV/monitor if your signal is overdriving the whites. Ever work on a CRT TV adjustment? http://www.stevelarkins.freeuk.com/images/magenta_grey_scale.jpg Does the Leica M8 allow selective adjustment of RGB? If it does, turn down the green channel by increments. If that doesn't work, try turning up the greens. By the way, when you have shot some of these problematic pix, are you using a grey card at all for balance setting? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 10, 2006 Share #51 Posted November 10, 2006 You can't change the RGB settings by channel in the M8. WB yes and no. If we take the indoor light to WB it will take it to daylight temp so at this point so far we really are trying to see where the banding is . Tonight when i reshoot with the cut filter we can try it boths ways. What i am trying to figure out mostly is which is the most offending light causing the issue. Sodim Vapor looks like a given for that but tungsten does not than the hologans due. So what is the biggest culprit and how can we tame it. This is a big test to figure that out and really leica's gig. i just want to understand who is the most offending light source and will the cut filter help or not. i have a feeling it may Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastFashnReloaded Posted November 10, 2006 Share #52 Posted November 10, 2006 You can't change the RGB settings by channel in the M8. WB yes and no. If we take the indoor light to WB it will take it to daylight temp so at this point so far we really are trying to see where the banding is . Tonight when i reshoot with the cut filter we can try it boths ways. What i am trying to figure out mostly is which is the most offending light causing the issue. Sodim Vapor looks like a given for that but tungsten does not than the hologans due. So what is the biggest culprit and how can we tame it. This is a big test to figure that out and really leica's gig. i just want to understand who is the most offending light source and will the cut filter help or not. i have a feeling it may Sodium vapor lights have a LOT of green... Some. Not all sodium vapor lights are the same. High pressure (HPS) lamps radiate strongly in greens and blues and look kind of pinkish, low pressure (LPS) are orange/yellow and radiate almost exclusively at 589.3 nm. It's easy to notch filter an LPS sodium light source. I don't think you are seeing an IR problem here, but people have been chasing that rabbit because of all the talk about weak IR filters. Believe it to be more complex than just an IR sensitivity issue, really suggest trying to knock green channel down. Lots of things are really, really IR sensitive and don't give you a magenta black or grey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 11, 2006 Share #53 Posted November 11, 2006 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 was able to test the lens on an MP which was known to be good, so I know it is the camera. Anyway, I sent in both together. I only have the one lens so far. At least if I have problems in the future, I will know that the camera is good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted November 11, 2006 Share #54 Posted November 11, 2006 Guy, I've shot a bunch of stuff both outside and inside, and I don't always get banding; and in most of the shots where the banding is bad, the lights are very, very bright, usually halogen, I think. And with halogens, you can literally feel the head radiating out of them. I suspect there is a good deal of IR there, and the IR cut filter may alter the banding as well. I shot some non-halogen antiquey street lamps, which gave off the same kind of yellowish glow as your outside lights did, and I got no banding at all. I think there's more to be found out about this IR thing... JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 11, 2006 Share #55 Posted November 11, 2006 Yes Howard i do need to check all my focus on my lenses , It maybe me though as i get used to RF. Guy-- Getting used to RF should come quickly. You only need to check one lens. If it focuses to infinity on the body, then the body is good. You almost never see a defective rangefinder on a Leica M. (Rangefinder patch can get out of alignment vertically, and has to be repaired; but almost never does it slip so that it's off horizontally, which is what measures distance.) So check one lens: If it focuses to infinity, your body and your lens are good. And all the other lenses are good, to an even higher level of probability than with the body. Check them if you want to, for surety's sake. The only reason I mentioned it is to be sure the focusing errors are yours and not the camera's. (We have enough complaints about the M8 right now, don't need another one! ) --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 11, 2006 Share #56 Posted November 11, 2006 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? Mark, good logic, but that's highly unlikely. There's just not that kind of tolerance with Leica. If the body is out, you'll know it with the first lens and the others will just confirm the fact. If two lenses work and a third doesn't, it's the lens. And you of course have hit on the one other possible questionable condition. Take it from a previous employee of Leica, your proposition is highly improbable. Or pull out another body and run the same check there. I think it would be useful to be able to buy a bayonet mount which sets the roller to the "infinity" position. Actually, Leica uses a jig that is bolted to the floor. The camera is clamped to it and looks at a chart, what, about 10 m away. I think there is a steel plug that is folded up against the front bayonet that duplicates the 10 m distance. (That's my remembrance. Very simple and direct but very exact mechanism; and more accurate than a visual infinity check.) --HC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 11, 2006 Share #57 Posted November 11, 2006 Okay I went back and shot the kitchen halogens again and for the life of me could not get the streaking but I did discovery something very interesting . Remember those reflections now they are gone . at 1250 again Top without the Cut filter bottom with a cut filter watch for the reflections or bleed off 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=90339'>More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 11, 2006 Share #58 Posted November 11, 2006 Again I did no WB these becuase i wanted you to see the effect Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asher Kelman Posted November 11, 2006 Share #59 Posted November 11, 2006 Guy, You are doing yoeman's work! It's impressive. I do see purple ghosts from each light in the first image. The left lights have the ghost to the left, The right side lights have the ghosts to the right of the lights. So are these the purple streaking effect? They are absent in the lower image. Also are the white spots on the ceiling simply light shining up from the top of the lights, or else are these blobs? Asher http://www.openphotographyforums.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 11, 2006 Share #60 Posted November 11, 2006 That is just light hiiting the ceiling Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.