NEW info from my dealer!!!

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Andy, we don't know what the hardware fix is, but I doubt it's a sensor replacement though I agree it will need the clean room. My guess is it's quite straightforward, something like a new grounding strap or bypass capacitor, probably a firmware update and then an alignment and functional check. Good that they are specifically listing the blobs (more formally called "Mirror/Ghost") as a fixed problem.

 

Sounds like the 30% lens discount applies to people who have actually taken delivery of an M8 already (and who therefore need to send it back). 30% off a 16-18-21 T-E, if that is the deal, is a welcome gesture.

 

As for filters, I'll start at 67mm and work my way down...

 

Those 7 filter sizes: 67, 60, 55, 49, 46, 43, 39. Any others?

 

Are you going to have your camera in time for your vacation?

[Advertisement]

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

[herbkell]

Does anyone know what the 30% discount will do the the price (say in US $) of the new 16-18-21?

 

This may be too tempting to resist!

[adan]

Herb: Funny, I had the same thought. There isn't any other lens on my "buy" list at the moment (except perhaps the 135 APO).

 

I think the 16/18/21 is supposed to come in at about $3500, so I guess that would knock it down to about $2500?

 

Mark: Can't comment on timing, but - soon, says the trustworthy little bird. I think you got the filter count right (67 and 43 being oddballs for the Wide TE and commemorative 50 f/1.4). You may be right about the actual surgery needed (and I still want the clean room for it).

[Joe Bloggs]

2) " But the sensor still requires IR filters to do what it should do without them...."

 

You do understand the difference with rangefinder lenses? That an IR filter heavy enough to fully correct IR with Leica's short focus lenses would lead to fuzzy blurry color-fringed corner imaging?

 

On the M8 I can add another filter to cut the IR further and improve the color rendition - Which filter can sharpen up and remove the purple blurry mush in the corners of 1Ds/5D wide-angle pictures?

 

Color-casted, maybe, colour-'fringed', fuzzy blurry, no.

 

The filter does not have to be any thicker than it is now to filter out all IR. They could have gone with a dichroic coating of microscopic thickness, they could have made the glass even thinner than it is now, with full IR filtering. That would have resulted in some cyan colour cast with wide angle lenses requiring colour correction, as noted in a thread on this very same forum:

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/9074-cut-filter-must-see-2.html

 

It would have in no way degraded the sharpness of the image.

 

If they persisted with the dye filter approach to avoid this color cast, it would have been a matter of finding an expensive dye that would cut off IR sharply and more expensive glass compositions, not a matter of making the glass thicker. This should be no problem for a $5000 camera. Dye filters were going out of fashion but cameras as recent as the dirt cheap Pentax K100D have been able to employ such filters, with much better cutoff characteristics.

 

I have studied this issue at length and have concluded that the IR leakage problem is nothing more than a design flaw that could have easily been corrected, or possibly, Leica intentionally made the M8 leaky to IR because they thought people would love using it for IR photography...

 

You can see a summary conclusion here:

Of cabbages and kings...: News Discussion Forum: Digital Photography Review

[adan]

Joe: I'll direct your attention to: http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/10054-why-leica-did-what-they-did.html

 

With all due respect, perhaps we just have different ideas of what constitutes fuzzy and blurry.

 

As to the different types of attacking IR - I have seen it posted that both dye filtration and dichroic filtration for IR change their effectiveness with the angle of incidence of the light. Which of course is the root problem Leica has been fighting all along in making digital compatable with their tiny, close-to-the-sensor, designed-for-film M lenses.

[ptomsu]

Thanks Ralf for the info!

 

While this is a solution for banding, it is NOT the solution I would like to see for the IR problem! And I know I am not alone.

 

 

Leica should have taken any effort - even new sensor - to overcome that.

 

If this is not going to happen - sorry for them

 

Peter

[Asher Kelman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That is basically good news. I can correct most of my casting problems in RAW. The free filters will be a nice bonus though. I'm VERY HAPPY that Leica will provide a REAL FIX for the banding/blobing/ghosting. The 30% lens discount is nice but what lenses should I buy ;-) ?

 

Am I missing something, espressogeek? Are you saying that you are skilled enough to correct color casts, so you don't mind if there are residual purples or else cyan vignetting?

 

Software solutions are still needed to make corrections on RAW files straightforward.

 

According to the B&H lens descriptions, the in camera adaptions are NOT applied to the RAW output of the camera. So for RAW, the file does not appear to benefit from the lens-coded corrections.

 

This lens has been updated with the "6-bit" coding, which allows the digital M camera to read this information optically and to identify which lens is being used. The camera can then (optionally) apply a "final stage" software based vignetting correction (for RAW images the lens used is simply recorded, no change is made).

 

So how does this fit in with the new "announcements"?

 

Asher Kelman

 

The Open Photography Forums Initiative

[adan]

Asher: Sean Reid, in his 4-part (and counting) rolling M8 review quoted someone from Leica as saying the DNG files DO contain "corrections" based on the lens coding - I believe. He can correct me if I'm wrong there.

 

I hope that 25-page Q&A will clarify this.

[Jamie Roberts]

Am I missing something, espressogeek? Are you saying that you are skilled enough to correct color casts, so you don't mind if there are residual purples or else cyan vignetting?

 

Software solutions are still needed to make corrections on RAW files straightforward.

 

According to the B&H lens descriptions, the in camera adaptions are NOT applied to the RAW output of the camera. So for RAW, the file does not appear to benefit from the lens-coded corrections.

 

 

 

So how does this fit in with the new "announcements"?

 

Asher Kelman

 

The Open Photography Forums Initiative

 

Hi Asher--nice to see you here.

 

I believe the BH guys are mistaken--there is a RAW coding (DNG allows for this) that does actually affect vignetting on a per-coded-lens basis. Sean Reid's review demonstrates this quite clearly.

 

And yes, I'd say 90% of shots with magenta casts / green deficits can be corrected in RAW processing. The filters are for that last 10%, though as you say, you'll need a profile for that too...

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Jamie,

 

You’re doing sterling work, as are Guy and Sean. SR ongoing reports are wonderful and honest. I do like his style and even of there was anything wrong with the filtering of IR, his pictures of the fruit are so 3 dimensional that I can almost reach into my Eizo monitor to grab a Kiwi. I've never seen anything so real from a 35mm lens.

 

I'm here to catch up. My shooting is mostly 35mm with Canon's and Zeiss lenses. I have no IR filters at present and I'm trying to dig up one. I am talking to an optics guy about a 52mm filter until the Leica option arrives.

 

The great gap I see is the ability to use Zeiss and other M lenses and still easily neutralize the vignetting and casts with WA lenses and an IR filter.

 

However, these issues is, IMHO, a more readily solved problem than the IR reflections which can neither be predicted or tracked. All one needs are correction curves for each filter, lens and aperture and perhaps focus distance so that the artifacts can be neutralized. Essentially a DXO type filter but for which the parameters are entered manually.

 

I doubt whether assigning curves made from data sets belonging to Leica lenses would be better than just being "O.K." for Zeiss or other lenses.

 

The really problem that remains is that one has to do corrections on RAW images that have already had data discarded.

 

So I see the Lecia M8 as a wonderful work in progress. Things will only get better in the months ahead.

 

For sure, there's a lot, as Sean and others have listed, that can be done even without a new design. From my limited POV, since substantial corrections have to be made to RAW files, a new feature I'd welcome is the option of a 16BIT DNG, even if it took 30 seconds to process! Just give the option!

 

Normally, I'd not expect a MFR to be all that responsive. However, Solms, I believe will do much more. Much much more!

 

There are a lot of articulate and dedicated Leicophiles here, and that will help this process.

 

Asher Kelman

 

The Open Photography Forums Initiative

[scott kirkpatrick]

Asher, Jamie, Andy -- We've seen examples (with the DMR) in which the vignetting correction applied before the DNG file is output includes correction of the red vignetting (green cast in the corners), so I believe that with the correct strength dialed in this could be done in the M8 for any of the Leica-supported WA lenses.

 

I have read all the postings about many possible ways to filter IR out in a shallow back focus design, and I understand the differences in the angular dependence of an absorptive vs interference filter. I am left thinking that Leica only considered two extreme options which were readily available from trusted suppliers, possibly for schedule reasons. Both options (RD-1 and Kodak DCS14n -- look at page 4 of the DPreview description) have side effects, so they went with a thinned RD-1 solution as the least problematic, with the greatest chance for a software cleanup. JMNSHO.

 

scott

[egibaud]

well well well...

 

good news? yes! first part of banding etc. is solved

 

IR? with filters mmmmm :-/

 

But let's think about it. A few years ago Leica said a Digital M was technically impossible, size, the way light hits the sensor etc... BUT they managed to almost make it. So every M lense owner who wanted to go digital without sending their M Lens to a museum have an "almost ok" solution.

 

Now we know that a Digital M uses filters so anyone can decide if they feel like staying with Leica or not.

 

And not least.... this is some kind of solution until some scientist or engineer invents a solution and call it M9... when? 1, 2, 5, 10 years? physics will not change, light will still travel the same way, probably, with the present lenses anyway. Maybe a solution will be to accept a slightly differently shaped M camera, probably thicker to give enough space for light to hit the sensor differently, maybe a full frame sensor too.

 

Anyway, thank you to Leica developers for almost making it since it was impossible and big shame on Leica marketing team and testers for not finding the problems and not telling before hand that a Digital M would need filters so everyone could have made up his own mind and estimate his necessary budget.

 

I'll call my dealer to confirm I want an M8.... with filters.

[Fotomiguel]

I think that are very good news. I wait for my M8. I'll get it fix and with two IR filters. To start I going to buy just two lenses, so that's perfect for me. When will I receive it? I can't wait more. is shipping starting next week?

Thanks for this nice information.!

[erg]

How is Leica going to manage the sensor change of thousands of M8's ? Aren't they already overburdened with the production of the M8 ? I can't live without my M8 for several weeks !

 

Leica should offer exchange of our M8's with a brand new one. At least for us early adopters.

[rosuna]

When you merge all the facts together--having to send your camera back to Solms, then having to use IR filters, but getting a 30% discount through the factory on one lens--I must say I'm not a happy camper.

 

I am not very happy.

 

The banding issue is a serious mistake of Leica. I must to send my camera to Solms for "repair". We will be paying $5,000 for a refurbished camera!

 

The compensation is a 30% discount in a new lens, but if the lens costs $3,000 you should to invest an additional $2,000 in order to get some kind of "compensation" for the mistake.

 

The filters will ship in February of 2007. Until then we must to accept the poor performance of the camera in terms of color reproduction, or buy filters at our expense. There are not color profiles for using B+W filters, so in any case you will be getting suboptimal results for the next three months.

 

All this mess will be very, very expensive to me.

 

If I would have had all the information in advance I would have canceled my order. I made my decision from some incomplete information. I am not happy indeed.

[mwilliamsphotography]

If this is indeed the solution, then I'm good to go. An E46 and E55 will cover all my lenses except the 75/1.4 which is E60 (as is the Noctilux). I would hope Leica would offer other IR filter sizes at wholesale cost to those with a wide selection of M glass. After all, those customers are the most loyal to Leica and have invested the most in their product line up.

 

Frankly, Jamie fixed 90% of the IR problem with his C-1 color profile. I went back and reprocessed a bunch of my first shots with the M8, and if I had been using THAT profile I most likely would never have blown the whistle on the magenta cast when shooting the black velvet background camera pics.

 

Not that it is 100% cured, but the vast majority of images are just fine now ... and in fact exhibit the look and feel I had fully expected from a M digital.

 

All that said, I hope Leica has a quick response system for supplying the filters. I went to my local camera store who usually has at least one of everything, and in fact usually has B+W IR cut filters ... but unfortunately had none in stock : -( I need at least one E46 for my wedding shoot on Dec. 2nd.

 

Here's a color correct snap without any filter that I took of Kevin at Adray's Camera in Michigan ... mixed temp fluorescent overheads easily handled by setting the WB on Fluorescent ... as far as I'm concerned Leica could have left off the Auto WB feature altogether.

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!

[earloffarnborough]

1) R. Horn is gonna go ballistic, Ralf - did your dealer know you were going to post this on the web?

 

2) " But the sensor still requires IR filters to do what it should do without them...."

 

You do understand the difference with rangefinder lenses? That an IR filter heavy enough to fully correct IR with Leica's short focus lenses would lead to fuzzy blurry color-fringed corner imaging?

 

I've seen what a Canon 14 or 20 or 17-35 lens does in the corners on a 1Ds or a 5D. Leica specced a filter that allows my 15mm Voigtlander lens to perform about 500% better in the corners while reducing 90-95% of the IR. And it performs THAT task extremely well and exactly as designed.

 

On the M8 I can add another filter to cut the IR further and improve the color rendition - Which filter can sharpen up and remove the purple blurry mush in the corners of 1Ds/5D wide-angle pictures?

 

Hello adan: could you please give me detailed info on the Leica Filter for the Voigtländer 15mm, since I also intend to use it on my M7. Thank you and have a very nice day. Peter (earloffarnborough)

[KevinA]

On the M8 I can add another filter to cut the IR further and improve the color rendition - Which filter can sharpen up and remove the purple blurry mush in the corners of 1Ds/5D wide-angle pictures?

 

Agreed, there are some that think the Canon 17-40mm is a great lens.

This is the aspect that is keeping me interested in the M8....sharp wide angles. If only Leica had more to offer than 16mm f4 = 22mm. IR issues etc are not the problem that fuzzy edges are. The way I see it for now if you want sharp wides it's either MF or M8.

 

Kevin.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[SteveYork]

That would be about 10% ABOVE Hong Kong prices.

 

 

It's probably 30% off list. I suspect Leica is still making a small profit. What warranty would apply?

 

It's an important gesture, and along with the free filters will help restore a lot of faith with Leica and may recapture a lot of lost sales from people who were on the fence and fell off on the side of not getting one when these issues arose.

[SteveYork]

How is Leica going to manage the sensor change of thousands of M8's ? Aren't they already overburdened with the production of the M8 ? I can't live without my M8 for several weeks !

 

Leica should offer exchange of our M8's with a brand new one. At least for us early adopters.

 

Your assuming that everyone returns there camera for warranty work. That may not be the case.