jelderfield Posted November 15, 2006 Share #41 Posted November 15, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm disappointed at the way Leica have handled all of this. I think they should have been up front about the issues and let people decide whether thay wanted to make the compromise of filters. Personally I usually have a B+W filter in front of the lens most of the time when I'm shooting. I always have the camera out on the street and with a filter I donl need a hood or cap - so it's faster to use and the lens is protected. I haven't had a problem with my images - I even published a book of them - and I think the IR filter will be ok. However the price of $5000 for the camera where you are required to code and by filters seems a lot. I think Leica needs to step up to the plate and offer some serious deals for the coding and filters. Like for free or close to it!. Jonathan Elderfield Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 Hi jelderfield, Take a look here Some news about the M8 . I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 15, 2006 Share #42 Posted November 15, 2006 Worth repeating and we should all be chanting this None of this solves the problem with C1 and new profiles and the issue with wide angles and cyan corners that i proved several times over along with others so in essence we are screwed after 28 mm. leica NEEDS TO ADDRESS THIS. Also they should swap camera's for us , BS on sending it in for reapir . I NEED TO SHOOT TO EAT. Okay i feel better but I will NOT let them off the hook that freaking easy , trust me I will be down there throat:D __ Seriously this stuff needs addressing and is not a joke Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted November 15, 2006 Share #43 Posted November 15, 2006 Erl, The IR wavelengths aren't visible anyway, so for most situations it shoudn't matter, Where it will matter though, is with wide angles where you'll get a cyan shift in the corners as demonstrated by Guy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsmith Posted November 15, 2006 Share #44 Posted November 15, 2006 Leica should give (FREE) all registered M8 owners a COMPLETE ir filter set. (39,46,49,55, 60 etc.) Why just for the lenses we own now ? If I decide to later spend $3500 on a new lens, I should have the filter to use it on my $5000 M8. Don't be so quick to accept less than a complete filter set. Also these are brand new $5000 cameras, they should EXCHANGE them for a non-defective camera, not make us wait 3-6 weeks while retrofitting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&W Posted November 15, 2006 Share #45 Posted November 15, 2006 Also these are brand new $5000 cameras, they should EXCHANGE them for a non-defective camera, not make us wait 3-6 weeks while retrofitting. Why not just return it and by a new one. Good for you but not so good for Leica;) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted November 15, 2006 Share #46 Posted November 15, 2006 WHAT? This just the kind of news I WAS NOT hoping for! This is absolutely outrageous. The truth is that they did not have a fix in sight. They LIED! And now, we are forced to BUY THEIR filters, BUY THEIR coded lenses, or have our lenses coded BY THEM AT A COST. And what about the lenses that can't even be coded? And why did they wait untl now to tell us? Why didn't they tell us right from the start? We know they knew. They PRETENDED they were looking for a fix, when actually they were only waiting for as many orders as possible to come in. And they were not even supposed to give us the bad news until another week. Remember they hypocritical "message to customers" of a week ago? Asking for our support? Telling us our investment will be protected. What a load of BS! This little dirty scheme, I would have expected from some of the big-name mass-market DSLRs giants, not from Leica. After all their lies, is there anybody now who really believes that they are going to do a "commercial gesture"? I know I don't. They just don't deserve their "loyal followers". It's the lies I can't swallow, not the M8's defaults. Do you see the aburdity of it all: I was going to receive an M8 in a month, which I KNEW was going to be defective, which Leica KNEW was going to be defective but would have managed to sell me nonetheless, which I would have had to return to Solms right away, without even having to open the box (that's the absurd part), and which I would then have had to wait another two to three weeks to recover, HALF FIXED. If Leica hadn't lied again about the turnaround time, that is. In the meantime, they would have cashed my money, and gotten away with it? No, siree. I have been through several phases of cancel-keep my order-cancel-keep my order in the last week. But I'm afraid this does it. I am totally appaled. Shame on Leica. They are doomed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 15, 2006 Share #47 Posted November 15, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Okay i feel better but I will NOT let them off the hook that freaking easy , trust me I will be down there throat:D This reminds me of your condom theory, Guy ... you have my wholeheart support! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 15, 2006 Share #48 Posted November 15, 2006 Worth repeating and we should all be chanting this None of this solves the problem with C1 and new profiles and the issue with wide angles and cyan corners that i proved several times over along with others so in essence we are screwed after 28 mm. leica NEEDS TO ADDRESS THIS. Also they should swap camera's for us , BS on sending it in for reapir . I NEED TO SHOOT TO EAT. Okay i feel better but I will NOT let them off the hook that freaking easy , trust me I will be down there throat:D __ Seriously this stuff needs addressing and is not a joke The 6-bit coding will, most likely solve the cyan corner issues (see Rob's pictures with the DMR showing the ROM effect). In addition, I suggested including a "manual lens selection in the camera menu" via firmware update. This would solve MANY problems, namely: 1) requirement to get any lenses coded (both time and cost); 2) speed up the solution (no need to send the lenses in for hardware changes); 3) extend the solution to non Leica lenses. This is by far the most elegant and cost effective solution. By adding the lens data (including CV and Zeiss) to the firmware and allowing users to select the actual lens, Leica actually extends the value of the M8 by optimizing *ANY* lens (including 3rd party) beyond their value with film bodies (by also correcting vignetting). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted November 15, 2006 Share #49 Posted November 15, 2006 I absolutely support your idea, JR ... though I seriously doubt that Leica would do it. It actually won't be that complicated (from a user's perspective) ... all you need to do with the Nikon is to punch in the maximum aperture and focal length of the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 15, 2006 Share #50 Posted November 15, 2006 None of this solves the problem with C1 and new profiles and the issue with wide angles and cyan corners that i proved several times over along with others so in essence we are screwed after 28 mm. ...... . I NEED TO SHOOT TO EAT. Guy, C1 needs to shoot their targets again with three or four M8s with filters on the lenses and construct new profiles, test 'em, and release 'em. 2-3 weeks at most. If you are one of their beta testers you might see them a week early. Leica already includes the ability to remove the cyan corners when they occur in the DMR. Did you see the thread on this earlier today? Definitely can be added to the firmware. Of course, now they have another problem. 6 bits makes it possible to code exactly 64 lenses. Do they use a separate code for the filtered and unfiltered variant of each lens currently manufactured? That wastes one of their 6 spots and leaves only 32 lenses covered. Or do they insist that the existing 64 codes all describe lenses with filters in front of them, and if you leave the filter off, you get some novel behavior, like red fringes at the edges of the frame. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dhoelscher Posted November 15, 2006 Share #51 Posted November 15, 2006 ...Do they use a separate code for the filtered and unfiltered variant of each lens currently manufactured? ... scott Seems to me they should just make a new menu item entitled "IR Barrier Filter ON/OFF" and then that would allow the 6-bit coding schema unchanged, right? DH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&W Posted November 15, 2006 Share #52 Posted November 15, 2006 The 6-bit coding will, most likely solve the cyan corner issues (see Rob's pictures with the DMR showing the ROM effect). In addition, I suggested including a "manual lens selection in the camera menu" via firmware update. This would solve MANY problems, namely: 1) requirement to get any lenses coded (both time and cost); 2) speed up the solution (no need to send the lenses in for hardware changes); 3) extend the solution to non Leica lenses. This is by far the most elegant and cost effective solution. By adding the lens data (including CV and Zeiss) to the firmware and allowing users to select the actual lens, Leica actually extends the value of the M8 by optimizing *ANY* lens (including 3rd party) beyond their value with film bodies (by also correcting vignetting). Good thinking - I love the idea - hopefully Leica does it too:cool: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted November 15, 2006 Share #53 Posted November 15, 2006 The 6-bit coding will, most likely solve the cyan corner issues (see Rob's pictures with the DMR showing the ROM effect). In addition, I suggested including a "manual lens selection in the camera menu" via firmware update. This would solve MANY problems, namely: 1) requirement to get any lenses coded (both time and cost); 2) speed up the solution (no need to send the lenses in for hardware changes); 3) extend the solution to non Leica lenses. This is by far the most elegant and cost effective solution. By adding the lens data (including CV and Zeiss) to the firmware and allowing users to select the actual lens, Leica actually extends the value of the M8 by optimizing *ANY* lens (including 3rd party) beyond their value with film bodies (by also correcting vignetting). An elegant solution until you switch from a CV15mm to a 90mm Cron and forget to change the menu setting:rolleyes: I keep remembering how peaceful it was back when Leica announced that a digital rangefinder was impossible...... Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 15, 2006 Share #54 Posted November 15, 2006 Guy, C1 needs to shoot their targets again with three or four M8s with filters on the lenses and construct new profiles, test 'em, and release 'em. 2-3 weeks at most. If you are one of their beta testers you might see them a week early. Leica already includes the ability to remove the cyan corners when they occur in the DMR. Did you see the thread on this earlier today? Definitely can be added to the firmware. Of course, now they have another problem. 6 bits makes it possible to code exactly 64 lenses. Do they use a separate code for the filtered and unfiltered variant of each lens currently manufactured? That wastes one of their 6 spots and leaves only 32 lenses covered. Or do they insist that the existing 64 codes all describe lenses with filters in front of them, and if you leave the filter off, you get some novel behavior, like red fringes at the edges of the frame. scott There does 2600 on a new leica 21mm . I saw Roberts images . Guess we are going to have to code at least 24 and 21 to corect this issue. Guess my Zeiss 21 is on the block Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrc Posted November 15, 2006 Share #55 Posted November 15, 2006 I really like JR's idea for a menu-driven lens selection option. The coding is more elegant, as long as there aren't problems -- but now there are problems. The menu-driven lens selection would do a couple of things: - Open up the number of lenses that could be coded. - Eliminate costs for people who'd rather not be coded. At one point, it seemed, the coding was optional -- the vignetting could easily be cleared up in PS or other programs. But now, with the color-shift problem on wide-angles, the coding is mandatory if you want the lens to work properly. This is, in effect, a mandatory surcharge to the original $5,000 camera. -A people who choose could still get the coding. Frankly, the coding always looked to me like an extra-revenue driver for Leica -- to replace a ring shouldn't cost $100+. The things can be mass produced, after all. I doubt that Leica likes the menu idea, because then there would be pressure to add other non-Leica lenses. Well...tough. JC Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted November 15, 2006 Share #56 Posted November 15, 2006 Not playing this game just ordered a coded 21mm leica . I'm down for the count now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billh Posted November 15, 2006 Share #57 Posted November 15, 2006 Which 28? the little one takes an E39, and no one has reported finding the B&W 486 in that size. Scott, I received this email from Germany today: The B&W Company will now produce the IR in size E 39. I just did change the order and so there is no need to buy the additional filter ring. I do hope that you will agree. I assume this is because of the situation with the M8, but these will apparently now be available. Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrgeoffrion Posted November 15, 2006 Share #58 Posted November 15, 2006 An elegant solution until you switch from a CV15mm to a 90mm Cron and forget to change the menu setting:rolleyes: I keep remembering how peaceful it was back when Leica announced that a digital rangefinder was impossible...... Bob It's not perfect... but it's not worse than forgetting to change from 1600ISO coming out of the church and shooting outdoors... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted November 15, 2006 Share #59 Posted November 15, 2006 Scott, I received this email from Germany today: The B&W Company will now produce the IR in size E 39. I just did change the order and so there is no need to buy the additional filter ring. I do hope that you will agree. I assume this is because of the situation with the M8, but these will apparently now be available. Bill That's nice. Any time estimate? I have two older lenses that could use the E39, and will wait for Leica to provide the filter if I buy the 28/2.8 "kit lens." scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted November 15, 2006 Share #60 Posted November 15, 2006 It's not perfect... but it's not worse than forgetting to change from 1600ISO coming out of the church and shooting outdoors... Many of my cameras in my collection have a dymo label saying "CK ISO" and you can guess why:D I may put a decal on my M8 with all the new stuff to check:o Check ISO - WB - EV Lens code Remove lense cap Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.