For those who feel “Leica should have known”

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Pascal Meheut received the first M8. It was about 24 hours before he discovered Problem #1, “streaking.” After Forum members became aware of the problem, we began to discover that it had actually been present on some of the other images that had been posted, but we hadn’t noticed it.

 

As Forum members tried to duplicate the “streaking,” we became aware of Problem #2, the “green blobs.”

 

And as more and more Forum members got their M8’s, we discovered Problem #3, the “discordant blacks.”

 

It took several days and a number of Forum members working step by step and communicating with each other, sometimes several times in an hour, for us to uncover the extent of the problems.

 

Contrast that with the camera testers. I argued in another thread that a photographer asked to test the camera would normally use it for the kind of picture s/he normally takes. Sean Reid confirmed this in yet another thread and added that he had no reason to look specifically for the effects of excessive IR sensitivity or highlight streaking because they hadn’t been noticed.

 

The camera testers had the disadvantage that they were not asked to comment on image quality because the firmware wasn’t fixed. They also had the disadvantage that they were not showing their work among themselves. Sometimes the same camera might go to one reviewer and later to another, so there was no way they could compare their findings by phone.

 

My point is that even with the 7000 or so members of this Forum it took us several days to uncover the problems of these babies, and that was with general knowledge and experience being made readily available. The *last* thing we discovered was actually the most devastating problem, the effects of excessive IR sensitivity. Given the constraints they were under, it would have been a matter of sheer luck for the testers to have noticed the flaws and relaid the information to Leica.

 

Thus, in my opinion, it is almost inconceivable that Leica could have known about the issues before bringing the camera to market. Now it has been out for just over a week, and Leica has acknowledged the problems and is working on them.

 

I think that is excellent reaction time and good customer service.

 

--HC

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Guest stevenrk]

Leica's response today speaks very well of them. It gives confidence that M8.01 will be a camera equal of the company's own standards.

 

Your points about Sean's and other reviews are absolutely on point. To hold these indivduals somehow "responsible" makes no sense. They still are excellent reviews that highlight many of the real qualities of the camera -- ones that the reviewers focused in on because -- as you point out -- they were looking at the images in the context of how they would/did use the camera and RFs. Sean also deserves our appreciation for staying with this and helping us all understand what is going on.

 

However, it is inconceivable that Leica and/or Phase One were not aware of the impact of the choices made with respect to IR. From reading posts on this and other forums:

 

Comments on the Leica statement...: Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

it's clear that anyone with any technical knowledge of the IR issue would have been aware that this was not just some esoteric issue limited to a few fabrics used in fashion. No doubt Leica and Phase have a number of engineers familiar with the imapct of IR on rendition of colors within the visible spectrum. As the discussion in the link points out, it impacts shots of people (for example, highlighting of veins near skin) just as much as many black surfaces.

 

How Leica convinced itself along the way that this would not be an issue is a fascinating question that we will have to leave to the business schools to uncover. And I'll bet Leica itself is trying to figure out the answer to that question as well.

[ho_co]

Steven, thanks for the response! I laughed when I saw that you were the first person to respond, since we've covered this territory before.

 

The fact that IR has influence on all subjects goes without saying, but again for you to say that it is "inconceivable that Leica ... was not aware" does not follow.

 

You could just as well argue that it is inconceivable that NASA should fail to recognize that one part of a team was using Imperial and the other metric measurements on a Mars mission.

 

--HC

[M6J]

Your thoughts are right and I feel the same with you, still, beta-testing a product means that we TRY to make it fail.

Testers should first look for problems that other cameras had in the beggining, then check about the picture quality which would be excellent anyway.

I think that instead of beta-testing they were rather enjoying the M8 that they were lucky to have in their hands during the spring and summer.

[marknorton]

OTOH, Leica knew that they were stepping outside an established comfort zone by "messing" with the IR filter, so you'd think it would be a bullet item on someones list to evaluate the impact of having done that.

 

Someone else here pointed out that people who test products need to have a different mindset from the ones who develop them because, looking for an easy life, developers only test what they know works. Similarly, user testers only test what they are interested in so don't achieve the breadth of coverage. For example, people testing here mainly ignore what JPEGs do because they are wedded to the idea of post processing - another take on the "I can fix that later" mentality. My examples of how truly awful the white balance is with JPEGs barely met with any comment, yet this is a function which is meant to work.

 

Professional testers step outside the comfort zone and go looking for problems and 100% coverage of the product functionality. That's their job and as I say to my testers, "If there's nothing wrong, you're not looking hard enough".

 

The big mistake made here was believing that any and all problems could be sorted out by firmware which has minimal cost implications. Issues on image quality were dismissed with the wave of the magic "firmware isn't final" wand. Instead of which, Leica are finding to their cost that the most fundamental elements of a digital camera - capturing an image accurately and successfully reading that image out and converting it to digital - cannot be fixed in firmware.

[carstenw]

I am certain that Leica knew that there might be an issue with the IR leaking into pictures; otherwise their statement makes no sense. However, I am equally certain that they did not know the *extent* to which it could be a problem, or they would not release the camera.

 

Leica doesn't need the money right now, given that only recently an Austrian gentleman who is a big fan of Leica has bought 90+% of the shares, and infused lots of money into it to make it really go places. However, it is a very bad time to lose reputation, just as you are trying to grow.

 

To put it in the words of a previous poster, it is inconceivable that Leica walked into this with their eyes wide open. The little issue turned out to be much bigger than expected.

[chetccox]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I received my M8 on Thursday, and I am very happy with it. However, my first picture was of my dog on a couch that happened to have my cell phone in its black leather case. I of course had already been reading this forum so I knew about the magenta problem. However, on this first picture there is no way that I could not have seen it. The blue, which is a little purple to begin with, shifted to a very obvious magenta as did the straps on the black leather case. The dog at least remained the proper color. Leica has some very good physicists who specialize in optics (lens design, lens coatings etc.) They know where every photon of light is going. If they did not know about the magenta problem then it is time for them to either get rid of their current R&D team or outsource it. It really makes no difference how one looks at it - if they knew, then they tried to pass it off on the public, and if they didn't then they have failed as well.

[stunsworth]

I still find it difficult to believe that what appears to be an IR problem on black synthetic cloth didn't show up in the testing. The conspiracy theorist would argue that they _did_ know and that was why they were so reluctant to show images.

 

My _personal_ opinion - and I'm probably wrong - is that being aware of the fiasco of the delayed DMR release, the M8 release was forced on the engineers to meet the heavily trailed marketing deadline of Photokina and they (the engineers) were aware of the issues.

 

I also don't doubt that there was great pressure from the new shareholders to get the camera out and improve the company's cash flow. I can only guess what the imminent release of the M8 had done to sales of the M7 and MP.

 

Maybe if the camera had been built in the 70s the IR magenta cast would have been more obvious.

 

Anyhow, my M8 order is staying for the moment, but I'll be very interested in seeing Leica's solution in a couple of weeks.

 

The main thing to concentrate on if you find yourself in a hole is working out how to get out of it, and I believe this is what the engineers at Leica are currently doing. Analysing _how_ you got in the hole can wait for the time being, but when that happens I'd expect there to be resignations at Leica.

[MSmelik]

I know this is a bit of a "my brothers next door neighbours hairdressers dog food-supplier" thing, but apparantly some US consumer organization have proof that Leica knew about this very problem and continued delivery. On the basis of this they will be filing a suit against Leica for misusing customer trust or what ever.

Again I don't know if this is true, but everybody knows that in the US everything is possible. And if there is proof that Leica did know about this (and personally I have no reason to believe that they didn't, for it's quite a big thing) and still distributed the M8 out, their might be some ground for concern, for Leica that is.

But then again M8 rumours are plenty these days, we will just have to wait and see.

 

On the other hand if they knew the extent of the problem and still distributed for what ever reason they would know they could face some serious charges... still who knows?

 

(my brothers next door neighbours hairdressers dog food-supplier knows)

 

:-)

[jpbeer]

@ho_co

Your reference to the NASA is very fitting, but not in the sense meant by you.

 

For both major accidents of the space shuttle, we know now that it has not been so much an engineering failure but rather a management failure, that is, what management did with the technical information avilable to them and how it impacted the launch decision.

 

I suspect that at least some engineers in Solms had been aware of the potential problem or even of the problem itself. I bet, that there are some memos from engineering to marketing (and/or management), prior to the first delivery, concerning all the issues we are talking about.

 

But like at NASA, there was a launch date and time (or should I say launch window), and the decision was made to launch. Dont forget that such an operation means a large downpayment, that is, marketing and sales expenses. From a management's perspective, you dont back off without a very very good reason. And from this point of view, I can understand Leica's decision.

 

You see, what's bothering me a little, is to read a post on the german forum saying that a dealer admits that the M8 is selling very well (dozens) and only one customer complained about some issues. So apparently, Leica keeps selling, even after the problems have been made public. Do they need the money so badly? Maybe, but in any case it would validate the marketing decision in the short term.

 

Here on the forum, we can only see that some flight parameters are off, and yell "Houston, we have a problem", not much more, and this is probably frustrating for many Leica lovers.

[Vivek Iyer]

The camera testers had the disadvantage that they were not asked to comment on image quality because the firmware wasn?t fixed. They also had the disadvantage that they were not showing their work among themselves. Sometimes the same camera might go to one reviewer and later to another, so there was no way they could compare their findings by phone.

 

 

Thus, in my opinion, it is almost inconceivable that Leica could have known about the issues before bringing the camera to market. Now it has been out for just over a week, and Leica has acknowledged the problems and is working on them.

 

I am sorry but I do not buy this at all.

 

IR leaks on CCD is a well known problem in the digital world (Nikon's D1, >7 years ago).

Streaking/banding is also is a known headache.

 

Leica did not do a good job in test shooting with the camera they had. Prototype firmware or not, the IR problem would have shown up regardless.

 

Leica should also choose better beta testers and ask them to comment on the image quality as well.

[mwilliamsphotography]

It took me 2 days to discover the Magenta issue.

 

I recieved the camera last Saturday at 10:30AM... charged the battery, then took the M8 on a early afternoon walk in town because it offers a wide variety of colorful subjects for evaluating digital capture.

 

After downloading the files I was perplexed by the color shift in most shots. I read about the magenta issue also. However, being a new camera, I suspected that color profiles may have to be tweaked to maximize it.

 

So, thinking it user error (as I always do at first), I tried to set new RAW profiles in ACR. Failing that, I loaded the C-1 softwear. Not a fix.

 

That's when I set up the studio test I posted. By Monday it wasn't speculation, but a confirmed major issue.

 

All digital cameras are color cameras (unless a special model is engineered otherwise). A primary criteria should be how faithfully color images can be captured. What you do with them afterwards is up to you.

 

In looking back over my first shots during that walk around town, the magenta (red) blacks are in all but a couple of them. Almost as important is that some of the other colors are to hot ... like using a double dose of UC film. It's not uniformly vivid, but selectively so. I assume this is also an IR issue.

 

Here are two of those shots ... some of the pinks and reds are much hotter than they really were and the remainder of the colors are okay. The painted wall shot is color correct except the flowers are much more saturated than they really were.

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!

[clayh]

I got streaking in the very first photo I shot with the M8 last Saturday, five minutes after my batterry was charged. And impossible-to-color-balance files (which I now know are due to the IR sensitivity). The effects were noticed immediately, in other words, but the cause took a little longer to figure out.

 

But good for Leica to owning up to the problems and making some moves to fix them.

[billh]

It took me 2 days to discover the Magenta issue.

 

I recieved the camera last Saturday at 10:30AM... charged the battery, then took the M8 on a early afternoon walk in town because it offers a wide variety of colorful subjects for evaluating digital capture.

 

After downloading the files I was perplexed by the color shift in most shots. I read about the magenta issue also. However, being a new camera, I suspected that color profiles may have to be tweaked to maximize it.

 

So, thinking it user error (as I always do at first), I tried to set new RAW profiles in ACR. Failing that, I loaded the C-1 softwear. Not a fix.

 

That's when I set up the studio test I posted. By Monday it wasn't speculation, but a confirmed major issue.

 

All digital cameras are color cameras (unless a special model is engineered otherwise). A primary criteria should be how faithfully color images can be captured. What you do with them afterwards is up to you.

 

In looking back over my first shots during that walk around town, the magenta (red) blacks are in all but a couple of them. Almost as important is that some of the other colors are to hot ... like using a double dose of UC film. It's not uniformly vivid, but selectively so. I assume this is also an IR issue.

 

Here are two of those shots ... some of the pinks and reds are much hotter than they really were and the remainder of the colors are okay. The painted wall shot is color correct except the flowers are much more saturated than they really were.

 

I discovered the magenta colors the evening I received the camera, but it did not occur to me the camera was responsible (I thought it was stage lighting). I think Steve’s take (see post above) probably describes the most likely thinking at Leica. But whatever the motivations/pressures, the issue now is dealing with the problem. It appears the IR filters are a fix, so at least we can still use the cameras while Leica works on a more palatable solution. I do hope the “consumer organizations” and anyone else seeking publicity by suing Leica will rethink their position. That has the potential to harm both Leica and by extension, those of use who want to use their products. If that does look as though it is going to happen, hopefully the more vocal folk on this list can refocus their energy on the people contemplating such an action, and get them to abandon such a plan.

 

I wonder if the early M8s will come to be viewed as having certain characteristics that are more desirable to some than the revised/fixed cameras?

[jafleming3]

I'm sorry, but this is not one minor problem, but several serious ones.

 

The M8 is not a $200 point and shoot, but a $5K camera - with lenses the cost could approximate $10K or more. It's the equivalent of buying a Porsche or a Mercedes rather than a Chevy Chevette or a Rolex instead of a Timex. You expect the M8 to work properly and flawlessly out of the box.

 

Sure, at some juncture Leica will fix the problems. But where was their quality control? Better yet, where were our fabled testers and reviewers - one even charges for his reviews and touted the M8 as the best digital camera ever made (or words to that effect).

 

This was a first class disaster for Leica and one for the reviewers as well. Not to recognize it as such will ensure a repeat performance. It makes absolutely no sense to find excuses and justifications for what went wrong, but rather admit to the problem, identify what went wrong and why, and fix it quickly.

[jlm]

anyone notice this:

What's New 2006

[rob_x2004]

From the above. "And, I would have held back again on the issues that I was requested to because that's the proper way to deal with manufacturers"

 

Reviewing is a job. I stand by my other thread response which was removed? No?

[larry]

anyone notice this:

What's New 2006

 

 

Wow -- if true, that's very damning!

 

Larry

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[dimfinder]

I could not possibly agree with the original poster's comments. Leica obviously knew about these problems and asked reviewers not to write about them. Read Michael Reichman's comments on his site linked above. Shame on Leica and shame on the reviewers for not providing an objective report of their testing and holding information back (specially those that charge for their reviews).

Trust is difficult to gain and easy to lose.

[Vivek Iyer]

Shame on Leica and shame on the reviewers for not providing an objective report of their testing and holding information back (specially those that charge for their reviews). Trust is difficult to gain and easy to lose.

 

Fully agree. This is insidious, especially given the current price tag (I am positive that this will plummet sooner than later).