MP3 Posted November 19, 2006 Share #121 Posted November 19, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) While at it, I thought I would throw in one more. I'm wondering what you all see in these shots. I do not see any artifacts. But, I don't have the experience many of you do. I'm using a new iMac calibrated with Apple's in OS display calibration. Hi Alan Your exposures are just fine. Me too got some wonderful night shots with great colors. I don't want to see those light tweakings in my pictures either. However, they are there if my pictures are overexposed or with strong light spots. Great to know you enjoy the M8. Right now, I agree it brings me surprise one after one. I use manual kelvin temp and avoid over-exposure. Though looking forward to what Leice would offer. Cheers Matthew Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 19, 2006 Posted November 19, 2006 Hi MP3, Take a look here Leica: Message to the customers of the LEICA M8 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
rob_x2004 Posted November 19, 2006 Share #122 Posted November 19, 2006 I'm wondering what you all see in these shots. I do not see any artifacts. Alan I would guess it depends what you are looking for in an image. Nothing wrong with the ISO, no artifacts either. One should mention you still have burnt out hights in the lamps themselves. So what? Matthews exposure is up the squirter altogether, and he demonstrates how you can get artifacts. So...I kind of wonder what the point is. The bottom line with both images is that there is a limit to the exposure latitude with digital, and while the M8 seems fine to me, there are limits to what you can reasonably expect. The camera has limits, sure, fine, so it has. And trust me I have no tickets on Leica Camera per se I think they are a bunch of .... yellow card here. Go to places like American Color, get a feel for what what that photographer found the cameras limits for this sort of stuff to be, work within them, and then push it further when you understand the beast. Any cretin can take a photo of an inky black sky and moan that there is no detail except for the artifacts encouraged by a camera working at what was it, six and a half hundred ISO average centre weight. Stone Leicas management, they deserve it, but cripes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stnami Posted November 19, 2006 Share #123 Posted November 19, 2006 In the beginning......... "Customer feedback to us following the start of the shipwreak of the LEICA M8 points to a performance under certain conditions that does not meet the expectations in the Leica brand"...........and........?????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted November 19, 2006 Share #124 Posted November 19, 2006 Yea I want a camera that I can take out at midnight and do Ansel Adams landscapes with spotlights too. :D :D You know when I was a carpenter I had one hammer and one four inch chisel and I could turn out Chesterfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob_x2004 Posted November 19, 2006 Share #125 Posted November 19, 2006 ehhhh....I couldnt really, I had to own a joinery shop and employ tradies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AShearer Posted November 19, 2006 Share #126 Posted November 19, 2006 Hi Alan Your exposures are just fine. Me too got some wonderful night shots with great colors. I don't want to see those light tweakings in my pictures either. However, they are there if my pictures are overexposed or with strong light spots. Great to know you enjoy the M8. Right now, I agree it brings me surprise one after one. I use manual kelvin temp and avoid over-exposure. Though looking forward to what Leice would offer. Cheers Matthew Thanks Matthew. I am also anxious to hear what Leica comes up with. I do have couple shots that show banding, but that was at 1250. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AShearer Posted November 19, 2006 Share #127 Posted November 19, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Alan I would guess it depends what you are looking for in an image. Nothing wrong with the ISO, no artifacts either. One should mention you still have burnt out hights in the lamps themselves. So what? Matthews exposure is up the squirter altogether, and he demonstrates how you can get artifacts. So...I kind of wonder what the point is. Rob; Yeah I see the blown hl in the lamp. I guess what I was looking for was to see if I was missing streaking or banding, i.e. just not seeing it. Some shots I have looked at where folks point out the banding, I have to look really hard to see it. Your points about pushing digital to the limits are well taken. I have seen how that works using my Nikons. Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espressogeek Posted November 20, 2006 Share #128 Posted November 20, 2006 I'm not asking be have the soul of AA embodied in the camera. But sometimes you have to blow out the background or a light where detail is not required. If so I don't want big blocking and banding and I don't have to look for it. If my D200 and D70 don't get wonky when blowing out highlights then a 5k rangefinder shouldn't either. If I wanted a studio camera I would have bought a MF with a digital back. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espressogeek Posted November 21, 2006 Share #129 Posted November 21, 2006 Where is the announcement? I need to figure out what I am going to do with this turkey. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reven Posted November 21, 2006 Share #130 Posted November 21, 2006 it will come but two weeks are not over... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grober Posted November 21, 2006 Share #131 Posted November 21, 2006 I need to figure out what I am going to do with this turkey. Mark, Wash and dry the insides, season lightly, stuff it with Grandmothers stuffing receipe, truss up the legs and roast it in the oven according to the formula on the label. Oh, and don't forget to say grace before you eat it. (I have one too.) -g Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 21, 2006 Share #132 Posted November 21, 2006 Helpful culinary advice for Thursday.... LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
espressogeek Posted November 21, 2006 Share #133 Posted November 21, 2006 Helpful culinary advice for Thursday.... LOL Thanks, praise God I'm not cooking the bird. I thought the announcement was scheduled for Monday. I will sit tight until Friday I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 21, 2006 Share #134 Posted November 21, 2006 Let's keep the discussion on track, folks ... otherwise, Leica may NOT take this too seriously. I just had some random thoughts, there have long been all kinds of funky filters, plug-ins for Photoshop to simulate these IR effects, red, yellow, green filters for B/W etc. ... is it technically possible, how difficult would it be for Leica to integrate such a software IR cut filter into the M8's firmware? or, can they let Phase One to rewrite the raw converter to include such a function? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 22, 2006 Share #135 Posted November 22, 2006 Simon, whatever you try to do with image processing, you come back to the idea that the camera cannot tell what impact the IR is having. Is the item magenta because it's magenta or is it magenta because the black has been contaminated with IR. Expecting the software to filter out the IR would be a bit like expecting it to conjur up a colour image with the Bayer filter removed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 22, 2006 Share #136 Posted November 22, 2006 Simon, whatever you try to do with image processing, you come back to the idea that the camera cannot tell what impact the IR is having. Is the item magenta because it's magenta or is it magenta because the black has been contaminated with IR. Expecting the software to filter out the IR would be a bit like expecting it to conjur up a colour image with the Bayer filter removed. But the camera can tell to some extent what the contributions of the IR to the color information. It is even possible to get passible color images from 2 channels color. The 3 channels of color information is plenty to represent the IR portion of the spectrum. The camera isn't actually defective, its just representing the IR spectrum in colors we can see. In scientific terms the IR is being displayed as a false color. It is really there. Software solutions can work to some extent but can be fooled some of the time. In cameras with only a moderate amount of IR sensitiviy (like the RD1) the software solution is fine. It remains to be seen if software thru color profiles can be completely successful with regards the M8. Defeating the purple blacks may be easier than some of the green issues. Personally, I wish Leica would add a thin film dichromic coating to their existing absorbtive filter to reduce the effects of the IR. In conjunction with better software color profiling, I think that a no external filter solution is possible. Whether Leica has the will to do this is questionable. It means ripping the camera apart and replacing the sensor. Actually does anyone know if the IR filter on the Kodak 100500 is bonded to the sensor or is it removable? A new composite IR filter could be implimented a lot easier if it is removable. But for some reason I think its bonded. Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 22, 2006 Share #137 Posted November 22, 2006 Well they cant recall all the cameras worldwide. So it is filter or software or it is nothing, for this generation of M digitals. Why not?There are far less than 2000 out there... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted November 22, 2006 Share #138 Posted November 22, 2006 Jaap, are you sure? The first batch was meant to be 20.000 I thought. Where did you find out? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rvaubel Posted November 22, 2006 Share #139 Posted November 22, 2006 Jaap, are you sure? The first batch was meant to be 20.000 I thought. Where did you find out? But does anyone have any idea how many were released so far? It doesn't seem to be that many Rex Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhoelscher Posted November 22, 2006 Share #140 Posted November 22, 2006 But does anyone have any idea how many were released so far? It doesn't seem to be that many Rex There was a post in the Rangefinder Forum that stated (not confirmed) that about 1,500 cameras were shipped in the first round. DH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.