So what will the magenta solution be? Technically and marketting?

[rfleica]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

we don't yet know what the fixes entail. the issues/problems are significant, of course. i am not technical, but would be amazed if there were a quick fix which didn't, of itself, introduce new problems. it looks like quite a bit of development work still needs to be done. marc's right: leica need to work in "crisis" mode to get on top of the customer relations side, as well as the tech development side.

[rvaubel]

Victor, truth is we do not know the extent of any hardware changes. There's no way they could re-use the sensor by replacing the cover glass. This is not like replacing the windshield on a Hummer.

 

If its any consolation, the IR filter can be replaced, at least on all the cameras that I have had personal experience with or have heard of.

It is relatively common for us folks in the astrophotography community to remove and replace our IR filters. There are little mom and pop shops that do this for a living. Actually some pretty big astronomy houses do it routinely. My 20D has a specially hi pass IR filter on it that was done by Canon itself.

 

There might be some special reason that the Kodak chip can't be retrofited with a different filter but it would be the exception, not the rule. Would probably cost about $400 bucks

 

Rex

[marknorton]

Don't know how, looks to me (looking at the real sensor) like the cover glass is bonded in place to maintain optical alignment and keep the dust out.

[rvaubel]

Don't know how, looks to me (looking at the real sensor) like the cover glass is bonded in place to maintain optical alignment and keep the dust out.

 

You need to get a pry bar from your local auto supply house then.....

 

No, seriously, It may be bonded in some way that is impractical to remove but for the Canon 20D, 350 & the Nikons, this was par for the astrocamera course.

 

Rex

[rick_dykstra]

Thanks for these comments folks.

 

There's a complex mix of emotions in this, naturally.

 

- Concern, felt by all of us.

- Dissapointment, annoyance and maybe even anger, for those with M8s in hand.

- Confusion, from wanting to pack it up and send it back (or cancel an order), but also wanting to keep using it (or accelerate delivery) for what it does well. Very well.

- Guilt, to some degree, for having been so quick to spend so much on what we knew might not be a perfectly sorted out invention.

- Shock, that the flaw we all knew might be lurking was such a frightening one.

- Hope, that Leica will make it go away.

- Anticipation, of the relief when it has.

- Anxiety, from concern that it wont, completely.

- Disbelief, that we will ever look back at this time and see it for the reality check that it was - that in this world nothing is ever perfect and that progress is made in small steps, some of which are stumbles or even backwards.

- Pride, in ourselves for having had the resilience to persist with our desire for excellence and for having the patience to give our partner in this endevour the chance to fulfill our lofty expectations.

 

Leica could have saved us much of this emotional rollercoaster by holding back delivery. Impatience would have been the predominant emotion then. How many manufacturers around the world have this sort of emotion associated with their products? Few, and it's those who strive to be more than the others, in trying to satisfy customers who want more, who are more demanding and more appreciative should they succeed. A high wire act, indeed. Perhaps the thing to do at the moment is to give the high wire artist the opportunity to make it across the chasm safely, with support and encouragement, rather than to boo so loudly that they fall.

[earleygallery]

The answer is of course a new range of 'digital' M lenses with the necessary IR filtration built in, i.e. the 28mm 2.8 dElmar

[eronald]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Leica needs to shift into "crisis mode", and even set up a hot swap crisis line of action ... giving professional photographers (like Guy and Sean for example) a priority status like Canon and major MF back makers do. For example, compared to this, I recently had an relatively small issue with a digital back. I had a "hot swap" new one the next day.

 

Sorry for being so direct.

 

If they treat us pros like amateurs, we'll treat their camera like a toy.

Fair's fair.

 

Edmund

[petermcwerner]

The fact that they are still selling them is a telling sign, non?

 

I was at a Leica dealer today in Geneva, Switzerland (the biggest in town), and he told me they were issued this morning the order by Leica not to sell their demo M8. Deliveries planned for next week will be rescheduled until a solution is found.

 

He was very angry at Leica for reasons different than what we are discussing on this forum:

 

1. He insisted on the bad image quality of JPEG: under-exposures and WB. Any cheap P/S would do better than the M8. When he showed me his shots, I had to agree completely. This had never occurred to me, as I have been shooting RAW exclusively.

 

2. When I mentioned that there were very easy work-arounds for these problems in post-processing, he said most of his customers did not have the knowledge to shoot RAW and post-process and would not want to sit in front of a computer screen to do so. What they wanted (that is my interpretation of what he said) would amount to a P/S that would give the best results they could expect from the Leica glass in JPEG straight out of the box. He himself had made all his test shots in JPEG and rejected the camera on this issue alone. His customer base must be very different from the majority on this forum.

 

3. There was a short notice in the Swiss press that represented the situation very differently. According to this article, the reason for not being allowed to sell their demo M8 was that pre-orders were such that no replacement could be expected for delivery before February/March.

 

Peter

[carstenw]

Peter, if point 3) is currently true, maybe Leica will find that some ordered cameras will free up in the next few days

 

I may actually be in the worst possible situation with my M8: having ordered, received and paid for it, but sent it to Solms for focus adjustment. I wonder if I won't get it back for weeks and weeks?

[rosuna]

I wish and hope a simple software solution will be enough, by means of firmware update and new profiles for Capture One. I don't want to send my camera to Solms for "repair".

 

I bought my M8 (black) and Summicron 28mm yesterday. The image quality is impressive. It is a great camera, but the cast problem must be fixed or reduced to a minimum (like moiré, I can accept occasional problems in exchange for better performance in most cases).

 

Leica has done a great job. It is a wonderful camera, and many difficult design problems have been well resolved (lens to flange distance, size of the battery and many others). I am not nervous nor angry, and I will wait for a solution. I trust Leica. Hopefully, a software solution.

[petermcwerner]

Peter, if point 3) is currently true, maybe Leica will find that some ordered cameras will free up in the next few days

Carsten, I rather tend to believe that the press release was worded that way in order not to alert the public about the real problems. Another (white?) lie? I do not know the situation in Germany, but in Switzerland sales have been halted until a solution is found.

 

I wonder if I won't get it back for weeks and weeks?

If you do not get it back fast, harrass them, phone in every day, send a box of chocolate candies to the lady in charge, be creative... Good luck, Let me know the result.

 

In the meantime I continue enjoying my M8. While I see the magenta problem in many shots, in most pictures it is not a big issue. Who cares after all if a person in a street scene like the one below wore a black or a magenta coat? Of course, the situation is very different for wedding or fashion photographers, or for product photography.

 

Peter

 

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!

 

M8 - ISO=160, Voigtländer 35/1.7 - RAW + C1

[Joseph S. Wisniewski]

seems to me its entirely possible to retro fit a fix

there are other cameras that have in built IR filters

this would be little different to a filter draw on a mirror lens

excepting that removal would be more difficult

 

Riley

M8, bless it's soul, is a rangefinder, one of two such on the market, and the one with the biggest sensor...

 

There are unique problems with IR filters on rangefinders. I summarized some of the physics here:

 

Or a tougher problem than ever before...: Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Basically, an IR filter on (or directly in front of) the sensor of a rangefinder camera has to cut off at a longer wavelength (letting through more IR) than on an SLR. If you use the same filter as an SLR, you get cyan corners with wide angle lenses.

 

I have no doubt Leica will find a solution, but it's probably going to be a combination of hardware and software: a new, more aggressive filter on the lens, and new firmware that uses the lens's exit pupil location to compensate for cyan corners. Hopefully they won't require all lenses to be barcoded. Leica needs to look at the way Nikon implemented manual focus (no ROM or CPU chip) lenses starting on D2X. If lens has a barcode, everything works automatically. If the lens doesn't have a barcode, there's a menu option for setting the exit pupil manually.

[Joseph S. Wisniewski]

If its any consolation, the IR filter can be replaced, at least on all the cameras that I have had personal experience with or have heard of.

It is relatively common for us folks in the astrophotography community to remove and replace our IR filters. There are little mom and pop shops that do this for a living. Actually some pretty big astronomy houses do it routinely. My 20D has a specially hi pass IR filter on it that was done by Canon itself.

 

There might be some special reason that the Kodak chip can't be retrofited with a different filter but it would be the exception, not the rule. Would probably cost about $400 bucks

 

Rex

M8 is part of a rare breed. It uses a filter that's actually deposited (metal and dielectric materials plated on in a vacuum chamber) directly on the cover glass of the chip.

 

There have only been two other cameras that I know of to incorporate such a sensor design: The Sigma SD9 and the Fuji S1/S2. Both of those are "sensor driven" designs, the sensor company (Foveon for Sigma, Fuji for, well, Fuji) came up with a "kewl" new sensor, then cobbled together a "Frankenstein's camera" to have a platform to showcase the sensor. In Sigma's case, they used their own (largely unknown) SA-9 film body, in Fuji's case they modified a Nikon N60 or N80).

 

Fortunately, the neat thing about infrared filters is that you can stack a strong filter (say a 700nm or 720nm dichroic) on top of a weak filter (say the estimated 785nm filter on the M8 sensor) and gain all the operating characteristics of the stronger filter. You don't have to breech the chip (that's for all the folks with "pry bar" or "clean room" comments). But because of the M8 design, the new filter would have to be on a very thin piece of glass (fortunately, glass down to 10 microns is common enough to be used) and should be glued onto the existing filter with UV cured optical cement. Leica should already have a lot of vacuum chambers and UV curing setups for lens making, so all they have to do is move a station or two into a relatively simple clean room (one of those portable, rent by the day, week, or month class 100 rooms should be fine) and they're all set to do the installation...

[Riley]

M8, bless it's soul, is a rangefinder, one of two such on the market, and the one with the biggest sensor...

 

There are unique problems with IR filters on rangefinders. I summarized some of the physics here:

 

Or a tougher problem than ever before...: Leica Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

 

Basically, an IR filter on (or directly in front of) the sensor of a rangefinder camera has to cut off at a longer wavelength (letting through more IR) than on an SLR. If you use the same filter as an SLR, you get cyan corners with wide angle lenses.

 

I have no doubt Leica will find a solution, but it's probably going to be a combination of hardware and software: a new, more aggressive filter on the lens, and new firmware that uses the lens's exit pupil location to compensate for cyan corners. Hopefully they won't require all lenses to be barcoded. Leica needs to look at the way Nikon implemented manual focus (no ROM or CPU chip) lenses starting on D2X. If lens has a barcode, everything works automatically. If the lens doesn't have a barcode, there's a menu option for setting the exit pupil manually.

 

 

there is a history of people removing filter material from canon and early nikon P&S

in order to improve their ability to photograph in IR medium

from what i read this also develops a short focus (with the loss of the glass)

 

Riley

[marknorton]

When I mentioned that there were very easy work-arounds for these problems in post-processing, he said most of his customers did not have the knowledge to shoot RAW and post-process and would not want to sit in front of a computer screen to do so. What they wanted (that is my interpretation of what he said) would amount to a P/S that would give the best results they could expect from the Leica glass in JPEG straight out of the box. He himself had made all his test shots in JPEG and rejected the camera on this issue alone. His customer base must be very different from the majority on this forum.

 

The market for this camera extends far beyond the enthusiast fringe here which accounts for, what, 200 cameras? One or two weeks production let's say. Long after we've got our cameras, they have to go on selling it, week in, week out.

 

My position has always been that this camera stands or falls commercially on its JPEG quality with RAW processing being the key to unlocking the highest image quality. Many potential buyers will just not have the time, still less the inclination to mess with RAW processing but they are going to see red (or purple) when the images from it are not as good as their kid's phone camera.