IR Cut Filters, M8 & M9

[digger1914]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It appears that the answer to the original question i s "yes"

 

I get lost when people complain about shiny new models of anything coming out, and them paying for the development etc.

 

My M8 still takes great photos. It did that before the M8 upgrade came out and still does it after the M9 came out.

 

You can bet that in some dark corner at Solms there is a boffin working on the early stages of the M10, so are people whi are now getting the M9 paying for that development? You betcha, and that is the way business is run.

[plasticman]

What an incredible thread.

In many ways, your M8's sensor is better than the sensor in the M9. So stop getting carried away by this obsession that buying a camera has somehow given you the right to never-ending upgrades, and enjoy what you have.

[AlphAlphA]

IR On/IR Off. That's no solution. It cannot be done that way. The filter would have to physically move in and out of the path of light. A replacement is what's needed. But Leica, "is not doing that." Believe me, I called Leica to ask about this. What irks me is the willingness of Leica to offer trivial modification of the M8, rather than what's important. Leica's priorities do not answer photographers' needs. The M8/M9 cameras are incompatible with each other.

[AlphAlphA]

By the by, just to set the matter straight, I do like my M8—very much. What disturbs me is its incompatibility with the M9.

[Nicoleica]

IR On/IR Off. That's no solution. It cannot be done that way. The filter would have to physically move in and out of the path of light. A replacement is what's needed. But Leica, "is not doing that." Believe me, I called Leica to ask about this. What irks me is the willingness of Leica to offer trivial modification of the M8, rather than what's important. Leica's priorities do not answer photographers' needs. The M8/M9 cameras are incompatible with each other.

 

Please forgive me if this sounds rude, but I really think that you are over-reacting here, besides missing the point. Any IR On/Off function would be in software, not in any mechanical contrivance. But even without such, I fail to see how you can reason that having to use or remove a filter on the lens makes the cameras 'incompatible'. (Besides which, there are several reports that the M9 could benefit from using a filter too.) Please relax a little, and enjoy your camera for the wonderful results that it can give, and not get all upset about one small inconvenience. Life is way to short to waste with unnecessary stress.

[ho_co]

I usually use a yellow filter on a lens when I'm shooting black and white film. When I want to use colour film I have to remove the filter in order to avoid colour casts - rather strong ones in fact <grin>. ...

 

Steve, I think you can correct that color cast in post now. Just one of the advantages digital has given us.

 

 

I think our Alpha Male has lost his Alpha status. Pity that he's unhappy, but as Nicole said, evolution happens.

 

 

 

1) It's clearly impossible to rebuild the M8 as an M9.

 

2) We don't know yet that Leica won't offer the IR On/Off option in later M9 firmware updates.

 

3) Only lenses shorter than 50mm require removal of UV/IR-Cut filters on the M9 as things now stand.

 

So get over it, Alph!

[JQ Huang]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Camera is just a tool for photography. Leica cameras, be it M7, MP, M8 or M9 does not make you a better photographer. Why don't you go out to take more pictures? Use your M8 for the next 10 years, and the cost of an M8 suddenly becomes negligible and M9 would be a part of Leica's "evolution" history. By then, M10 or M11 might be out....

[AlphAlphA]

Thanks for the opportunity to express my thoughts on this.

[brill64]

you are welcome and thank you, your thoughts are interesting and outside of the box

[H. James Wolf]

Some of you are still missing the point. At times, it is more than inconvenient to change filters if switching lenses from film to digital and back again. The other volunteers in our fire company won't stop putting water on a burning building or operating the Hurst tool to extract an accident victim while I fiddle with filters. The only solution is two lenses, one for film and one for digital. This is more than a simple inconvenience.

[dpattinson]

Some of you are still missing the point. At times, it is more than inconvenient to change filters if switching lenses from film to digital and back again. The other volunteers in our fire company won't stop putting water on a burning building or operating the Hurst tool to extract an accident victim while I fiddle with filters. The only solution is two lenses, one for film and one for digital. This is more than a simple inconvenience.

 

Well actually - other solutions would be to use two film cameras, or buy an M9. How have you been dealing with this problem up until now?

 

(I have M7 and M8, my solution is to leave one lens on each camera - which is what I normally do anyway since my subjects very rarely wait around for me to change lenses).

[GlennB]

Yes, I am angry. I'm angry because of the incompatibility of the M8 with the M9. The beauty of Leica was seamlessness of the system. I could carry a couple of bodies and switch lenses between them without a thought. At conferences and on the fly, it was a great pleasure. The IR issue buggers it up. It's not simple. To remove a filter you have to remove a patented lens hood, or disassemble and reassemble a hood and ensure you don't damage or lose the filter after you've removed it.

Leica has done a disservice to M8 users.

 

I think you already know this but look at it this way, If you were a LTM body owner when the M bodies came out it wouldn't have been seamless to be switching lenses between the older and newer bodies when you would have to remove or install a M adaptor onto the older LTM lenses to use them on both bodies.

 

Truly, The only constant is change.

 

As always, just my 2 cents, YMMV, etc.

GlennB

[dpattinson]

Yes, I am angry. I'm angry because of the incompatibility of the M8 with the M9. The beauty of Leica was seamlessness of the system. I could carry a couple of bodies and switch lenses between them without a thought. At conferences and on the fly, it was a great pleasure. The IR issue buggers it up. It's not simple. To remove a filter you have to remove a patented lens hood, or disassemble and reassemble a hood and ensure you don't damage or lose the filter after you've removed it.

 

Leica has done a disservice to M8 users.

 

I agree that having to remove/replace filters when swapping lenses is irritating. I have to do it when I swap lenses onto my M7 after using them on the M8.

 

I'm curious, why would you want to swap lenses (in haste) between two digital cameras anyway? I can understand with film bodies, since one might be colour and the other B&W or they might have different speed film in them.

On digital cameras, I really don't see why you would need to do this? The difference in image quality is marginal, and the M8 crop means that you're not swapping equivalent fields of view anyway between it and the M9.

My understanding of the need for multiple digital camera bodies was precisely to avoid having to swap lenses (apart from the backup role).

[plasticman]

I'm curious, why would you want to swap lenses (in haste) between two digital cameras anyway? I can understand with film bodies, since one might be colour and the other B&W or they might have different speed film in them.

On digital cameras, I really don't see why you would need to do this?

 

David, I think you nailed it!

To be brutally frank, some people just seem to be irritated that they've been somehow left 'behind' by new developments, even if these appear in many respects to lead to an inferior end result. They just want what's new, but don't seem to want to pay for it.

[footnoteblog]

And I thought my kids whined a lot!

 

[wilfredo]

Probably because Leica would no doubt ask almost much as the cost of trading over to an M9. What would be economically feasible to facilitate using an M8 and M9 together would be if Leica added an IR-ON setting in the M9's firmware so filters could be left on lenses being swapped between an M8. At the same time it would encourage those of us to buy an M9 who would need to use IR filters on the M9 because it's still too IR sensitive for our work.

 

I Agree. Too much is made of the IR/UV filters. I would have preferred keeping them with the M9. I won't give up the M8 "look" for the M9. Especially when it comes to B&W photography, from what I've seen, the M8 still maintains the edge.

[AlphAlphA]

Many of the comments I read here seem to me to regard the Leica as a fashion accessory. I'm looking at it as a tool. Comments like, 'the M8 has the "edge" over the M9,' are meaningless. What the heck is 'the edge?' Go ahead, say I'm a whiner, but I think my complaints are legitimate insofar as they relate to these tools. I think Leica deserves to be chastised for complicating a simple camera and not making a fix available. Again, Leica touts minimalism: few menus for a simple approach and swift reaction to what the photographer sees, but the filters hinder rather than help if the photographer is working with M8 & M9—and why in the world would any one want to switch lenses? It's a matter of what the chip records, and because the 2 are different, it is highly likely that a photographer will switch his 21 mm or 50 mm from M8 to M9 and back again for the wider or narrower angle. And it's no good if someone is wearing red in one image and black in the next. The filter problem makes working with the M8 and M9 as simple as buying groceries in kilos and pounds simultaneously.

 

—then paying for them with dollars, francs and Euros—really swift.

[erl]

As usual, one clear fact emerges. Some photographers simply choose the wrong tool for their purpose. If the tool does not work for you, I humbly suggest the fault may lie with your choice.

 

After 50+ years (and continuing) working with a vast range of gear I always had to choose the cameras (and other gear) that minimized the compromises for my work. The good points took care of themselves which is why I often refer to myself as a "troubleshooter" rather than a photographer. You can't have a solution unless you identify the problem!

 

I work with all of the gear referred to above this post. It all works beautifully, provided I know its weaknesses and allow for them. It is also vital to know your own weaknesses and allow for them! This is true of any camera gear you care to name. Why should Leica be any different? If you can't work with tools as they are, you have simply chosen the wrong tool for the job, or you are without sufficient skill to do the job.

 

Good pictures need teamwork to happen. You and your camera are the basic team. You must work together and support each other and cover for each other when the need arises. Anything short of that is a recipe for ultimate failure.

 

P.S. Like any good carpenter, photographers need multiple tools to confidently complete a job. If that means having a second camera, and it mostly does as a minimum, then just do it.