View Full Version : The unofficial statement from Leica on M8
just received this information today. It is not official until released by Leica. But this is what has been passed down to RFF. Again, This is passdown and we will wait for Official Leica statement.
Dear All:
I just received the M8 announcements, and I mean Announcements. There is a letter for the agency, one for the dealer, one for the consumers that have already purchased an M8 and one additional one that is a question and answer memo. About 25 pages in all. Since all letters have to be read and re-read to make sure there are no inconsistencies for our market, I thought it best to just give you the highlights which can be shared with your dealer or consumers. Christian and Shirley will make sure all the appropriate letters are mailed on Monday. The info is also due to be on the Leica Web-site on Friday.
1. The "Banding" and "Mirror/Ghost" effects have been thoroughly investigated and the root cause has been identified and eliminated. The remedy will enable every M8 to meet and exceed Leica performance standards. All customers that have purchased and taken delivery of an M8 will be entitled to an upgrade performed in Solms, free of charge. Specific measures will be taken to enhance customer loyalty that will be outlined in detail in the memo's issued Monday. In summary, every one of these customers will be entitled to purchase a new M lens at a 30% discount directly from the factory in Solms.
2. The above average sensitivity for infrared light can be compensated by using an IR filter. Leica will make available two free IR filters of any size (there are 7 filter sizes for the current M lenses) for M8 purchasers. I am sure the logistics of this is in the memo's but I have not read all 25 pages. Delivery of these free of charge IR filters will commence in February, 2007.
Again, further details will follow, but now you know what I know. Shipment of the M8 will resume sometime next week - though the specific day of arrival and quantities deliverable are yet unknown.
Thanks again for your patience and support over the past couple of weeks. I have no doubt in my mind the M8 is back on track for becoming one of the most successful products in Leica history!
endustry
11-22-2006, 16:51
This makes it conclusive for me: I will not be buying an M8 camera.
Apparently attention to detail does not extend to proper use of the apostrophe.
Wow - is that the nicest admission ever? They'll be losing a lot of money giving away those freebies / discounts.
endustry
11-22-2006, 17:20
Trius: It's the internet, not a dissertation.
Specific measures will be taken to enhance customer loyalty
I think it's foolish on Leica's part to make this particular statement. In my experience 'loyalty' is earned, not bought and as soon as any company starts trading on assumed loyalty from it's customers they are treading on dangerous ground. Loyalty to any manufcturer is gained by the quality and reliability of it's products and service. It will be shown by sales success for what is a comparatively expensive item in the market place.
We know that Leica are not perfect ... and expecting perfection first up from any manufacturer of a ground breaking new product is just asking to be dissapointed!
However, the way that they deal with this current problem will ultimately be far more important for their ongoing success than the actual (minor teething) consumer encountered problems with the camera itself!
erikhaugsby
11-22-2006, 17:58
I appreciate how he (she?) cares not enough to read a simple 25 page memo about the pivotal that Leica has put out in recent lifetimes.
If I was a PR guy and wanted to assure confidence in the public, I'd make sure that I knew every letter of every possible reason as to the logistics behind the IR problem. Thenagain, that's just me.
I still want an M8.
jamriman
11-22-2006, 18:05
I'm still in. I think pros outweigh cons.
CameraQuest
11-22-2006, 18:09
I just spent a week testing a loaner M8 from Leica. I believe it to be the best digital M out there, for now.
Epson is just looking for a quick exist strategy. The only place end users will find an RD-2 is their dreams. That 6 MP will only look smaller as time goes by, along with even worse parts and repair situations.
I believe it will be a year or longer until another digital M platform will be available in the marketplace, if that soon. Personally I expect to see some sort of M8 Mark II before I see a digital Zeiss ZM. This is my own opinion, not inside information.
Granted, a $5000 not perfect digital M is a tough pill to swallow, but if its the only viable M digital we have right now, it is the only viable M digital we have right now.
I can't help thinking though, that a good part of the outraged posts are coming from people who would never buy any $5,000 camera anyway.
Who will buy the M8 and who will not, time will tell.
Stephen
RogerDunham
11-22-2006, 18:20
Wow - is that the nicest admission ever? They'll be losing a lot of money giving away those freebies / discounts.
The recall is the big expense and they probably had little choice. 1500 cameras in the field..the rest reworked before shipping. The lenses direct from Solm ? at 30% how much was the dealer getting.??? Nice strategy to build a backlog of orders for lenses......30% is enough to get 1000 lenses on order without affecting the existing dealer stock. Filters committed to in major quantity ..lots of leverage on the manufacture because of the of all the demand from M8 users to purchase additional filters. This looks like the making of a brilliant business strategy....just hope the solution is a keeper.
mmm.....M8 owners should be able to pocket a few bucks from purchasing lenses for others(if they don't want one themselves). On a $3000 lens that's a $900 savings with the 30% discount....split it with the buyer and you keep $450....not bad.
Good fix. Of course, there'll be a pile of Leica denigrators who had no intention of even buying one in the first place....
if color is going to be nigh useless, they may as well have gone for a monochrome sensor.
Bertram2
11-22-2006, 18:49
I can't help thinking though, that a good part of the outraged posts are coming from people who would never buy any $5,000 camera anyway.
Stephen
I haven't posted any opinion about the M8 anywhere up 'til today, but I'd like to ask you if the fact, that somebody would not ever buy the M8 is enuff to make his opinion irrelevant ? Or what shall the remark above mean ? Does one need a bank reference to be allowed to call an emabarrassing desaster an embarrassing desaster ?
I read a similar remark at the German LUF and if I haven't understood anything completely wrong then I find this remark as embarrassing as the desaster itself. :confused:
bertram
Bertram,
I think the point that Stephen and others are making is that it's easy to criticize when you have no stake in the outcome. On the other hand, I can see your point that one doesn't need to buy a duck to know it quacks.
endustry: It's a slippery slope. ;) And it's NOT just the interent (you knew that) ... plus this person is a PR person, as in someone who WRITES FOR A LIVING.
However,
endustry
11-22-2006, 19:58
I think anyone who has invested in M lenses has a stake in the launch of the M8 regardless of whether they are capable of buying one right now or not.
I know this board has its optimists, but being required to physically screw a metal ring into your lens barrel (and to have to repeat this process over and over depending on how many lenses you own and how many filters you can afford) just to correct a digital capture device is painfully ironic. I don't know if another solution to the IR problem is possible, but the filter solution is now, to me at least, the definitive example of just how backward these two companies (Leica and Kodak) still are. Sure the M8 is the best bet and may remain so for a few years, but as the owner of eight Leica-mount lenses and a vested interest in the survival of M-mount photography, I cannot help but proclaim my shock at just how badly this critical product launch has gone down.
endustry
11-22-2006, 20:01
Trius: Sorry, I was under the impression that Jorge was just hastily paraphrasing the PR guy. I guess we'll find out when the whole document surfaces.
Ronald M
11-22-2006, 20:08
I don`t understand. What more can they do? They will fix the cameras, provide some filters , and heavily discount some glass, properly coded of course.
If you are not happy with the solution, trade the camers in for something more pleasing .
I think anyone who has invested in M lenses has a stake in the launch of the M8 regardless of whether they are capable of buying one right now or not.What makes you think that? There are probably quite a few RFF members with an investment in M lenses who are not as concerned as you might suppose.
CameraQuest
11-22-2006, 20:29
I haven't posted any opinion about the M8 anywhere up 'til today, but I'd like to ask you if the fact, that somebody would not ever buy the M8 is enuff to make his opinion irrelevant ? Or what shall the remark above mean ? Does one need a bank reference to be allowed to call an emabarrassing desaster an embarrassing desaster ?
I read a similar remark at the German LUF and if I haven't understood anything completely wrong then I find this remark as embarrassing as the desaster itself. :confused:
bertram
anyone is certainly entitled to any opinion they have, or want to have.
how revelent that opinion is, is another matter.
my point is that many people are likely complaining about a camera they don't have the ability to buy, or would not buy even if they could easily afford it, because they would not buy any $5,000 of any make.
it's like voting. If you are not registered to vote, you can't vote. on the other hand, you are welcome to any political opinion you have.
in the M8 world the only opinions that really count are the people who can afford and would buy a $5,000 camera IF they want to.
They will determine the success or failure of the M8 in the marketplace, not people who want to spend time complaining about a product they would never buy anyway, even if it were perfect.
Stephen
Epson is just looking for a quick exit strategy. The only place end users will find an RD-2 is their dreams.
That's what I think, too. Too bad, because the R-D 1 was a terrific concept in search of better quality control, and the more I use it, the more I think that like Frosty the Snowman's hat, there must have been some magic in that unheralded Ediart image-processing chip.
That 6 MP will only look smaller as time goes by, along with even worse parts and repair situations.
If 6 MP is enough for your needs now, it will still be enough as time goes by. The parts-and-repair situation admittedly is a bit worrisome, but that's true of any lame-duck camera. Thank goodness Epson used a non-proprietary battery type!
Personally I expect to see some sort of M8 Mark II before I see a digital Zeiss ZM.
Personally, I expect to see purple flying pigs before I see a digital Zeiss ZM, but Stephen's instincts are almost certainly better than mine...
Granted, a $5000 not perfect digital M is a tough pill to swallow, but if its the only viable M digital we have right now, it is the only viable M digital we have right now.
"Not perfect" is to some extent a matter of perspective, and there's probably still a lot that Leica can do to mitigate the PR damage out in the big wide world (as opposed to the tiny world of Internet discussion forums.)
Yeah, the bleeding and green ghosts were definite defects that it sounds as if they've positively ID'ed (probably circuitry faults, just like Mark Norton had been saying all along on the Leica forum) and a warranty fix for this problem is no more than purchasers deserve.
As to the magenta issue, try this mental exercise -- Suppose that right from the time the M8 was officially announced, Leica had described it this way:
"The Leica M8 is optimized for black-and-white photography, with a sensor design chosen for maximum sharpness and texture rendering. Photographers wishing to use the M8 for color photography may need to employ a lens-mounted infrared cutoff filter for critical results."
I'll bet that would have made real Leica nuts even MORE rabidly enthusiastic about the M8. They'd have cheered Leica's commitment to monochrome tradition and reveled in the esoteric complexity of IR cut filters. The occasional appearance of magenta blacks wouldn't have shaken anyone's confidence in the camera's overall quality; Leica buffs would blame the photographer for not following Leica's recommendations.
Well, I think they can still reach that position, even now that the horse is out of the barn. If they consistently emphasize that the need for IR-cut filters is driven by Leica's desire to optimize image quality (which is true) and not by some defect in the camera's design, I think most Leica enthusiasts eventually will come around.
So while this (still unofficial) program may not give everybody everything they hoped for, I think it will strike most reasonable people as an appropriate response. Personally, even though I can't afford an M8 right now, this announcement (assuming it pans out similarly to Jorge's inside info) pretty much restores my interest in owning one eventually. Who knows, maybe the increased demand for IR-cut filters will ramp up their production and lower the price!
[Speaking of IR filters, eventually somebody will have to eat the cost of the free ones mentioned in the unofficial plan -- but maybe they can bury it within the inflated price tag of some collector-targeted special edition model. "Leica M8 F_ck-Up Commemorative Edition," anyone? With a certificate of authenticity on which Leica's CEO has written "I will not rush products to market" a thousand times?]
I haven't posted any opinion about the M8 anywhere up 'til today, but I'd like to ask you if the fact, that somebody would not ever buy the M8 is enuff to make his opinion irrelevant ? Or what shall the remark above mean ? Does one need a bank reference to be allowed to call an emabarrassing desaster an embarrassing desaster ?
I read a similar remark at the German LUF and if I haven't understood anything completely wrong then I find this remark as embarrassing as the desaster itself. :confused:
bertram
How would you solve it? I believe they have decided to try and solve this problem in decent and acceptable way. Could you honestly ask for Leica to give more to early buyers?
enough of senseless bashing.
What makes you think that? There are probably quite a few RFF members with an investment in M lenses who are not as concerned as you might suppose.
I agree with him (that M-system owners have a stake in the success of the M8 whether they intend to buy one or not.)
The way I see it, Leica's ability to enter the digital market successfully with the M camera line will be a key determiner in their future willingness to invest in the development of M lenses.
I can't see how the film M-camera segment can do any better than hold steady, and most likely it will shrink over time. Moreover, Leica's present lenses are already so good (probably exceeding the abilities of most films and likely exceeding the abilities of most users!) that there wouldn't be much incentive for current owners to replace them with the next "improved" model.
The only way Leica is going to be able to sell more M lenses is to sell more M cameras, and the only segment where there's much potential for growth is the digital segment. I see the M8 as very much a survival necessity for the M system.
Could you imagine Canon or Nikon making an offer like this?
if color is going to be nigh useless, they may as well have gone for a monochrome sensor.
I know this board has its optimists, but being required to physically screw a metal ring into your lens barrel (and to have to repeat this process over and over depending on how many lenses you own and how many filters you can afford) just to correct a digital capture device is painfully ironic.
http://static.flickr.com/109/303686521_fd3c11f92a_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/blakley/303686521/)
(M8, 35/1.4 ASPH Summilux, 1/180@f/4, Auto WB, B+W 486 filter, RAW processed in Capture One LE; post-processed in Photoshop - cropped, lightened, saturated. No WB correction or sharpening)
I don't see why anyone's ability/desire to own an M8 should have anything to do at all with what opinions they express about the Leica / M8 situation. I'm not making this a personal issue and I have no intention (currently) of owning an M8, but surely, hypothetically, a person has the right to make a judgement and pass an opinion on a product by a manufacturer who has already removed a large amount of money from their bank account. :)
I know there are a lot of doomsayers out there just itching to see what they perceive as a 'rich boy's toy' fail miserably in a market dominated by cameras costing half as much, but ... there's also a lot of people like myself with collections of Leica camera gear dating back to the thirties that have enough money tied up in them to buy a decent car!
The mere fact of spending $3500.00 on an M7 definitely gives a person the right to pass comment on the successor M ... whether they intend buying one or not! ;)
does anyone seriously think the ir design flaw won't deter enough buyers to make the m8 flop?
Gabriel M.A.
11-22-2006, 21:13
Apparently attention to detail does not extend to proper use of the apostrophe.
This reminds me of those dysfunctional families, where the wife that cleans, cooks, does everything to perfection, only to be told instead of what a good job she did, just how dumb and inconsiderate it was not to use the brown steak knives instead of the red steak knives. :rolleyes:
Gabriel M.A.
11-22-2006, 21:26
I think the point that Stephen and others are making is that it's easy to criticize when you have no stake in the outcome. On the other hand, I can see your point that one doesn't need to buy a duck to know it quacks.
True. I'll let the quacks quack all they want. When a number of solutions were proposed, the quackers went humorously silent. Some are simply ignoring facts and repeating the same filth over and over. Perhaps the quackers think that if they quack long enough, they'll turn the very thing they hate into quack?
quack quack quack (it's contagious)
none of the solutions really work, or do they?
Nachkebia
11-22-2006, 21:37
Who is the quack is deeply depending on viewfidner :D
my point is that many people are likely complaining about a camera they don't have the ability to buy, or would not buy even if they could easily afford it, because they would not buy any $5,000 of any make.
it's like voting. If you are not registered to vote, you can't vote. on the other hand, you are welcome to any political opinion you have.
in the M8 world the only opinions that really count are the people who can afford and would buy a $5,000 camera IF they want to.
They will determine the success or failure of the M8 in the marketplace, not people who want to spend time complaining about a product they would never buy anyway, even if it were perfect.
Stephen
I have to disagree with you as well Stephen. I had an M8 on order and after all the problems started coming up I canceled and purchased the MP3 kit. That kit is a 1k more then the M8. My money goes to the quality product. I still spent the cash on a Leica product just not the flawed one.
I could be the only one that had the money and shifted away from the M8 but I doubt it.
As to the magenta issue, try this mental exercise -- Suppose that right from the time the M8 was officially announced, Leica had described it this way:
"The Leica M8 is optimized for black-and-white photography, with a sensor design chosen for maximum sharpness and texture rendering. Photographers wishing to use the M8 for color photography may need to employ a lens-mounted infrared cutoff filter for critical results."
I'll bet that would have made real Leica nuts even MORE rabidly enthusiastic about the M8. They'd have cheered Leica's commitment to monochrome tradition and reveled in the esoteric complexity of IR cut filters. The occasional appearance of magenta blacks wouldn't have shaken anyone's confidence in the camera's overall quality; Leica buffs would blame the photographer for not following Leica's recommendations.
]
Truer words are rarely spoken.
none of the solutions really work, or do they?
Jorge's example pictures show that an IR cutoff filter really does eliminate the problem of magenta cast in black objects. (Some M8 owners have been griping about the cost of this solution, but I sense irony in the notion of someone who just bought a $5,000 camera that uses $3,000 lenses complaining about the extra expense of a $100 filter.)
The bleeding and green-blob problems have to have been caused by a defect in the sensor circuitry; if they fix the defect, that problem should go away.
dreamsandart
11-22-2006, 23:03
My first thoughts of the M8 was that this is great - the never going to happen digital M is happening - and at some point in the year 2007-2008AF (After Film) I would be getting one, but only when the 'bugs' of an all new product were taken care of - lets be realistic, new 'teeth' = 'teething'. I would have been surprised if there wasn't a few problems.
Reading the first very positive reviews had me wondering if sooner than later wasn't such a bad idea, the M8 may be better than anyone thought it could be.
Next, problems... Ok, time to just wait and see. Hope it all works out for everyones interests.
Now, with one major problem to be fixed at the factory and the other solution with a simple filter it didn't work out ideally, but it works. I just used an orange filter this past week to deepen-highlight some sky/clouds with B&W film, and I've taken to having a B+W MRC UV filter on a couple lenses most of the time this past year, no big deal if it works and with the M8 seems to be the case. The added offers of filters and a lens discount are very fair. In the end M8 buyers get the digital Leica they wanted and extras.
I'm still going to wait awhile, but the M8 and whole digital idea, problems and all have got me thinking more in an M8 direction.
if color is going to be nigh useless, they may as well have gone for a monochrome sensor.
Who told you that? Some of the comments on my M8 shots are "glorious colour"
Nachkebia
11-22-2006, 23:31
The colors are so glorious even fuji got scared and said no no they will not put velvia back to production (sarcasm) :D
c.poulton
11-22-2006, 23:32
The filter issue only comes into play if you are intending to shoot colour. I only shoot B+W nowadays, so if I could afford to the buy M8 (the jury is still out with me over the look of digital, compared with film) I would be more than happy with Leica's solution to this issue.
One easy fix for Leica would be to ship a free IR filter with every new lens bought - a minor cost compared with the overall cost of a new lens, then any new lens would be fully 'Leica M8 colour ready' - if you shoot B+W, fine, don't use the filter. Just my opinion.......
Don't you dare use filters on your camera's, Vladimer - Your Fuji Velvia will be accused of "having severe colour cast issues"!
Can I just ask why everyone is thinking that the IR "problem" only affects black objects? It can affect EVERY object of ANY colour. All depends on the materials used in the object and their IR reflectability. Even human skin can show up differntly than expected, and that can be seen even in B&W mode. Ever used a green filter to shoot a person? Similar thing with IR.
Nachkebia
11-23-2006, 00:20
I don`t care about colour cast on velvia, because it will still look deep, elegant, magical, powerfull, and amazingly alive!
Jorge's example pictures show that an IR cutoff filter really does eliminate the problem of magenta cast in black objects. (Some M8 owners have been griping about the cost of this solution, but I sense irony in the notion of someone who just bought a $5,000 camera that uses $3,000 lenses complaining about the extra expense of a $100 filter.)
The bleeding and green-blob problems have to have been caused by a defect in the sensor circuitry; if they fix the defect, that problem should go away.
do we have any samples that prove this, yet? all i've seen is a thread on leica-camera-user.com, and....
http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/9637-new-m8-profiles-c1-instructions-4.html#post98571
Who told you that? Some of the comments on my M8 shots are "glorious colour"
the (relatively few) shots in color that i see on flickr are nowhere near "glorious". there's a definite preponderance of purple in photos of people in normal social situations.
You are right, Remy an IR cut filter is a necessity on a considerable number of digital camera's and even from time to time on film. Heliopan did not introduce their "digital" filter line just for the fun of it.
There is a very interesting thread on the Leica Camera Users Forum (http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/10054-why-leica-did-what-they-did.html) (registration required) that compares the various problems and artifacts produced by the sensors of the Canon 1DsII and RD1, amongst others. I never realized the considerable sensor-flare and CA-like effects produced by the filtering on the sensor. It makes me very-very happy that Leica chose for the compromise they did and has me reconciled to the use of IR filters, as I am reconciled to the use of yellow filters etc on B&W film or 1A and pol filters on slide film. Tanstaafl.... But Leica bears the blame for a very incompetently handled introduction of what is likely to be one of the most sophisticated photographic tools the world has ever seen.
Thanks for that link, Jaap. I'll read it asap.
J. Borger
11-23-2006, 00:53
Jeeze .. and this is only the discussion in respons to the unofficial anouncement. Can't waite for monday when the official 25 pages come out and we can do this all over again .........:rolleyes:
Jeeze .. and this is only the discussion in respons to the unofficial anouncement. Can't waite for monday when the official 25 pages come out and we can do this all over again .........:rolleyes:
Didn't I see your name in that thread I pointed out, Han? ;) Guilty of the same crime you accuse us of!:p :p
J. Borger
11-23-2006, 01:02
Didn't I see your name in that thread I pointed out, Han? ;) Guilty of the same crime you accuse us of!:p :p
Unfortunaltely ..... positive and balanced threads like the one you linked to related to the M8 get very low attention in comparison to the ... well you know;)
Do not you get tired of preaching in the wrong church .....:angel:
I think i will stay out for a while and start shooting the beast ... in the meantime prepare myself for a short personal trip to Solms to get the streaking fixed :)
Kim Coxon
11-23-2006, 01:05
I don't think anything is "free" in this world. If you included an IR filter with every lens, the people whose interest was monochrome could rightfully claim that they were being subjected to an unneeded expense.
Kim
One easy fix for Leica would be to ship a free IR filter with every new lens bought - a minor cost compared with the overall cost of a new lens, then any new lens would be fully 'Leica M8 colour ready' - if you shoot B+W, fine, don't use the filter. Just my opinion.......
Unfortunaltely ..... positive and balanced threads like the one you linked to related to the M8 get very low attention in comparison to the ... well you know;)
Do not you get tired of preaching in the wrong church .....:angel:
I think i will stay out for a while and start shooting the beast ... in the meantime prepare myself for a short personal trip to Solms to get the streaking fixed :)
I'm waiting a bit. Mine has a very rare and exotic sensor flare problem which manifests itself every 200 shots or so - I'll get both fixed at the same time when I can miss the camera. Sometime in March I think.
There is a very interesting thread on the Leica Camera Users Forum (http://www.leica-camera-user.com/digital-forum/10054-why-leica-did-what-they-did.html) (registration required) that compares the various problems and artifacts produced by the sensors of the Canon 1DsII and RD1, amongst others.
Thank you for that link. It's certainly very informative and a must read, especially for those who state their intent to get an R-D1 instead.
As far as the whole discussion is concerned: I used to think that Leica has a touchy userbase that tends to complain a lot. This whole episode shows that it's not so much the actual userbase. It's really the image in the head of the crowd that counts, not so much the actual product.
You can apply this to the M5 as well; it was probably not so much the actual users (of which there never were many) that killed it but tech journalists and people in photography clubs. Most of them probably never had an M5 in their hands for more than five minutes, yet people were very vocal about how the device was completely unusable for them.
What's sad is how we lose people like Sean in the process.
Philipp
Now there I was thinking GAS was over by lack of subjects of desire..:(:( 30% off factory price?? Noctilux??????????:bang: :bang: :bang:
Kim Coxon
11-23-2006, 02:03
Don't think of the cost, just think of the saving. :D
Kim
Now there I was thinking GAS was over by lack of subjects of desire..:(:( 30% off factory price?? Noctilux??????????:bang: :bang: :bang:
I'm waiting a bit. Mine has a very rare and exotic sensor flare problem which manifests itself every 200 shots or so - I'll get both fixed at the same time when I can miss the camera. Sometime in March I think.
That's the sensor flare that all the collector's are raving about - I'd vacuum seal that camera right now!
Kim Coxon
11-23-2006, 02:14
Too late for that - The camera has been taken out of the box and horror of horrors actually used. :eek:
Kim
That's the sensor flare that all the collector's are raving about - I'd vacuum seal that camera right now!
Leica seems to be be very concerned about it's customers and their reaction is like it could have been expected from them. Has Nikon or Canon ever offered discounts on lenses after they sold partially unfunctional cameras? Never. Many Nikon D200 users for instance had to wait months to get the banding problem resolved - without any official communication from the manufacturer.
The M8 is not in my financial reach yet, and I would anyway have waited until the (predictable) children's diseases are cured, before I would buy it. But their reaction to the here well discussed M8-issues let me feel shure that they really try everything to offer a digital rangefinder which is worth it's red dot.
Didier
That's the sensor flare that all the collector's are raving about - I'd vacuum seal that camera right now!
I was photographing a rainbow and got far more than I bargained for...(photo not profiled btw) I would love to hear a technical explanation. I am very happy that there is no sign of the camera making a habit of it :):angel:
http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e32/jaapv/flare-1.jpg
Nachkebia
11-23-2006, 02:35
Spaceship is about to land in your park jaapv! its good to see people shooting on the weekend in the park with $8000 outfit :D :D :D
It's my garden. I've got Alf staying with me now....One cat already narrowly escaped being eaten...
Nachkebia
11-23-2006, 02:39
Great! he likes M8?
http://www.bananadine.com/m/alf.gif
:) :D Hey! That's great!
Now I challenge you: You produce this effect on film to prove its superiority! :p
Nachkebia
11-23-2006, 02:46
Yeah, we need some positive vibe lately, even though M8 is rubish (kidding) I am happy whenever I think that camera has nothing to do with photography and I get really happy that even if I buy all the best cameras and lenses I still have to learn and discover more and more! so that keeps me with hope to live and discover! regardles any lens or body :) so I love photography!!! god I want to shooot!!! :)
I don't think anything is "free" in this world. If you included an IR filter with every lens, the people whose interest was monochrome could rightfully claim that they were being subjected to an unneeded expense.
Maybe they could make it a free option. If you don't need it, you don't have to take it :D :D
Philipp
summilux
11-23-2006, 20:20
from now on, let pictures talk, please.
Tom Diaz
11-24-2006, 09:46
I wish I did not have to anticipate my M8 taking a trip to Solms. However, the fix and other offers sound right to me.
I am ever so slightly unclear on one point: why exactly is there not a more intrinsic solution for the IR problem, like a filter directly over the sensor? I would think that a "mark II" will eventually come out and will solve that problem intrinsically. Do I infer correctly that, with today's technology, a better IR filter on the sensor would compromise resolution or other image quality factors?
I'm an occasional infrared shooter but would prefer to load a film camera with IR when I want that--until of course they stop making IR film... maybe that will be soon....
Anyway, can someone explain succinctly why the on-the-lens filter is the best IR solution? I am not looking for an argument or a Leica bash, I'm trying to learn.
Gabriel M.A.
11-24-2006, 10:01
from now on, let pictures talk, please.
Sometimes they say the worst things about our hand-holding skills :angel:
Tom: I've skipped large portions of this thread, but I infer that the physical dimensions of the camera and its interior preclude using a thicker filter. And there isn't glass available with more IR filtering unless you increase the thickness of the glass.
Maybe Olympus had it right when they decided on a whole new set of digital specific lenses for the 4/3s system. They made the OM-4/3s adapter available only after a huge hue and cry from the Oly faithful. While the older lenses perform well under certain conditions, they don't conform to the standards that the Olympus designers developed. Not that they didn't want to sell a bunch of new lenses, too...
Tom: I've skipped large portions of this thread, but I infer that the physical dimensions of the camera and its interior preclude using a thicker filter. And there isn't glass available with more IR filtering unless you increase the thickness of the glass.
Maybe Olympus had it right when they decided on a whole new set of digital specific lenses for the 4/3s system. They made the OM-4/3s adapter available only after a huge hue and cry from the Oly faithful. While the older lenses perform well under certain conditions, they don't conform to the standards that the Olympus designers developed. Not that they didn't want to sell a bunch of new lenses, too...
Maybe the next generation M lenses will have the IR filtering built into an element?
Kim Coxon
11-24-2006, 12:13
It is explained in post 3 here. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=425012#post425012
Kim
Anyway, can someone explain succinctly why the on-the-lens filter is the best IR solution? I am not looking for an argument or a Leica bash, I'm trying to learn.
I am ever so slightly unclear on one point: why exactly is there not a more intrinsic solution for the IR problem, like a filter directly over the sensor? I would think that a "mark II" will eventually come out and will solve that problem intrinsically. Do I infer correctly that, with today's technology, a better IR filter on the sensor would compromise resolution or other image quality factors?
Yes, that's exactly what Leica says the problem is. A more effective IR filter would have to be thicker; a thicker filter would scatter light rays more at the edges of the sensor, leading to color fringing.
The problem is worse with an M camera than with a DSLR because the M body is shallower, causing the light rays from the lens to strike the edges of the sensor at a steeper angle. Steeper angles produce more scattering in the filter and thus more color fringing.
A thicker body, like those used on DSLRs, would reduce the angles and allow a thicker IR fliter to be used over the sensor without degrading the image quality too much... but then the body wouldn't accept M lenses.
Leica really was stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one; any solution they chose would involve some kind of compromise, so they chose the one that compromised image quality the least.
Kim Coxon
11-24-2006, 12:18
Apart from the fact that some Leica users seem to have a pathalogical hate of filters, I am not sure what the problem is. Due to the properties of an RF camera and the sensitivity of sensors to IR, a lens filter will give the highest possible quality. Putting the filter in the lens is a bit like putting a yellow filter in a lens for B/W work. It saves putting a filter on true but it spoils it for other work.
Kim
Maybe the next generation M lenses will have the IR filtering built into an element?
darkkavenger
11-25-2006, 16:14
Good luck to all of you who purchased an M8. I'm sure you'll love your camera more once it'll be fixed, I'm curious to see how those who are violently criticising the camera and Leica policy will react in 6 months - 1 year - 2 years...once their camera will be fixed.
I'm sure most of those will be fondling their M8 and letting everyone know how it's the best camera they ever had and how it is outstanding. Let's hope ;)
I'll stop the rant and i'll go fondle my FSU cameras ;)
Hope this upgrade/repair will be helpful to all of you!
Max
Tom Diaz
11-25-2006, 16:48
Leica really was stuck between a rock and a hard place on this one; any solution they chose would involve some kind of compromise, so they chose the one that compromised image quality the least.
Thanks, jlw. If they'd documented this design tradeoff up front, as part of their product launch, and if they had also made the "free filters" offer up front, they would be looking 100% all right with me on the IR issue. The fact that they are coming up with this solution while embarrassed makes them only 75% OK with me, but it is still a solution.
If they get through this and become a stronger company (which I hope), I think they'll learn from this experience, and meanwhile I think I will be just as well off as if they had handled the problems more proactively.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.