View Full Version : A bit disappointed
olivepress
03-17-2007, 08:36
My sister called me and asked if I would help her with some photographs. She does missionary work in Brazil and needed some portraits taken of children in the City of Garbage a favela in Vitoria, Brazil. Also there was an opportunity to photograph the abandoned street children in the area.
I thought this would be a great time to test the new M8. It would be small unobtrusive and according to many reports yield terrific files. So I pushed the local dealer to get me a few bodies and a selection of lenses. The project was taking place the end of February into March. After the camera arrived and the lenses were located (thanks to Leica’s help) I gathered a few batteries, cards, and case for the outfit.
As the departure date approached, the reports started coming in about filters being a MUST. As well as the news of camera failures, battery issues started appearing and I was wondering if my choice would stand. (All the other issues I was aware of as one of the bodies I bought had been to Germany for a fix)
I waited patiently for filters. Called all the obvious US East coast and West coast sources hoping to locate the proper ones. No luck! There was no way I was going to go to the colorful Brazil without the proper IR filters for the lenses. The deadline came and went. Instead I packed some other gear and headed off to Brazil. The difference in weight and size and visibility was huge. The project however was, I believe, successful for my sister and I managed to get some personal work done as well. (A sampling of some of the children photographed can be seen at http://www.thingshopedfor.com)
As of today, I still do not have the filters needed. A bit disappointed if only in the fact that I wonder what could have been the results if I had the opportunity to work with the M8s. As they are tools, there are always some tools better suited to the job at hand. Not that others can’t be used- just some are more appropriate.
I realize it's after the fact, but did you try Tamarkin? Three weeks ago they had an amazingly large supply of 486s, considering how many people were looking for them.
Philinflash
03-17-2007, 08:53
I can sympathyze with your disappointment. However, you may have over-reacted on this filter issue. In the bright-light situations you would most likely have been shooting in your lenses would have been well stopped-down and the issues minimized.
Photography is always about making tradeoffs; aesthetic, mechanical, practical, and others. I would have opted for M8 and prayed for the best. But I know how hard it is to ignore the techno-babble.
Philip
usccharles
03-17-2007, 09:02
been using mine for color and b/w without filters for two months and have been very happy. I do have IR issues but not enough to think the M8 is not worth taking out. if you already had the M8 with all the lenses and accessories, you should have just taken it with you and tried it out.
:)
Joe Mondello
03-17-2007, 09:35
Given the incredible flexibility in post with tools like Apple's Aperture, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom -- and myriad others -- to easily remove the magenta cast in the few shots where it *might* have been problematic, I have to agree that you seem to have let the negative hype get the better of you.
I think you will find that plenty of M8 shooters don't bother with the filters or deal with it in post.
Why didn't you just make a few tests before giving up?
I'm not meaning to sound snarky, seriously, I suppose I just don't get why you gave up "without a fight" so to speak. ????
willie_901
03-17-2007, 09:42
Given you can't just hop over to Brazil any old time, and the lovely color rendition in your photos (thanks for the link), I don't think you over reacted. It is better to be safe than sorry.
Before long the IR filter supply will match the demand.
Joe Mondello
03-17-2007, 10:11
Paul, your images are superb, BTW. Really nice work.
olivepress
03-17-2007, 10:22
That was the point- Brazil and a one time access. I could not take the chance of any problem. And I would have had to bring the other gear along anyway. So I left it as IF the filters showed up fine, if not I would wait until another opportunity.
I really didn’t give up or quit. Just made what I hoped was a wise choice.
My primary work is in landscape so this was a push for me anyway and i did not want to have any- no matter how remote or slim- concerns with the tools.
Glad you like the images. I usually only photograph at workshops for landscapes- you can see that work at the sister site- http://www.thingsnotseen.com
Philinflash
03-17-2007, 11:15
I guess the real point is that you have got to trust your equipment.
In this case, you seem not to have had enough time to prepare with the M8 and to develop a comfort level (or not). That could have had a serious deliterious on your shooting whilst there in Brasil. It is too bad that you and others went to all the trouble to assemble your kit and then leave it home. Ideally, you would have been able to shoot some tests in various conditions and learn the equipment's limitations and strengths.
I personally find it stimulating and challenging to stray a little from my comfort zone and experiment with new equipment in new situations. But we're all different.
Philip
SteveRD1
03-17-2007, 11:23
Just saw your link and the photos are great. You should of taken the M8 as the whole filter thing is overblown. 3000+ shots so far on my M8 with no filters. I do not feel the need for any either.
Paul, Nice work indeed. Would have been nice to be able to shoot with an inobtrusive rangefinder but you did the right thing. You're not the only one who's decided that at this point he can't depend on the M8. Eventually...
Stop complaning. It is what it is. Go shoot the project in B&W. I know, easy for me to say. I don't have one.
Sailor Ted
03-17-2007, 14:47
Paul, Nice work indeed. Would have been nice to be able to shoot with an inobtrusive rangefinder but you did the right thing. You're not the only one who's decided that at this point he can't depend on the M8. Eventually...
Russ most people who own this camera, take it out and shoot with it, learn its traits and LOVE the M8, or at least respect it. Just because you did not feel comfortable jumping in the water does not mean the rest of us are not enjoying the swim.
Now hurry up and take that survey and explain why you don't like your M8 Russ :rolleyes:
PS. 4000 exposures and NO filters.
NickTrop
03-17-2007, 14:54
Well, whatever camera you used, these pictures are fantastic. Right decision not to bring the Leica. You would have been distracted by the possibility of failure, and possibly the reality of it. Whatever gear you used, I don't think it would have been improved at all by an M8 judging from the results.
Rule #1 of pro shooters, NEVER take a piece of equipemnt on a job that is in question. It doesn't matter whether it's one block away or around the world. NEVER test equipment on the job!!! It doesn't amke any difference whether it's film or digital, canon or leica, don't take chances on important work. I learned many years ago the hard way about this.
Learn the equipent like the back of your hand before launching into an assignment. It doesn't sound like you have much experience with digital and the comfort level is low. Learn the system, photoshop and the fine points to insure success.
The M8 is questionable at best and not worth risking your reputation on.
Take it from a pro, don't be stupid and risk a job and family relations. You did the right thing and came away with beautiful images.
Matthew Runkel
03-17-2007, 15:02
I can sympathyze with your disappointment. However, you may have over-reacted on this filter issue. In the bright-light situations you would most likely have been shooting in your lenses would have been well stopped-down and the issues minimized.
Photography is always about making tradeoffs; aesthetic, mechanical, practical, and others. I would have opted for M8 and prayed for the best. But I know how hard it is to ignore the techno-babble.
Philip
Philip, I would be interested in your reasoning here. I can't think of a reason why stopping down would reduce the need to shield the sensor from IR in order to ensure uncontaminated rendition of colors.
You images look great. I love my M8 but I have to agree with X-ray on this -never test equipment on the job and never take a rig that you are not 100% comfortable with. You will have other opportunities once you are totaly confident in the Leica.
On the subject of IR I made the attached test image.
Joe Mondello
03-17-2007, 15:55
Rule #1 of pro shooters, NEVER take a piece of equipemnt on a job that is in question. It doesn't matter whether it's one block away or around the world. NEVER test equipment on the job!!! It doesn't amke any difference whether it's film or digital, canon or leica, don't take chances on important work. I learned many years ago the hard way about this.
Learn the equipent like the back of your hand before launching into an assignment. It doesn't sound like you have much experience with digital and the comfort level is low. Learn the system, photoshop and the fine points to insure success.
The M8 is questionable at best and not worth risking your reputation on.
Take it from a pro, don't be stupid and risk a job and family relations. You did the right thing and came away with beautiful images.
I guess the real point is that you have got to trust your equipment.
Philip
You are so right about that Phillip.
Paul, I totally get it now, so you can disregard my earlier comment about giving up. (Hey I can admit when I'm wrong!)
Phillip and X-Ray just reminded me of why I would probably have made the same decision you did under those actual circumstances.
And yes, I can see why you'd be a bit disappointed.
Have you had the time to put the M8 through its paces since your return from Brazil?
boilerdoc2
03-17-2007, 16:10
Paul, those shots damn near make me weep they are so gorgeous. You didn't have any trouble because no one was wearing synthetic black clothes under a tungsten light!
Steve
Philinflash
03-17-2007, 16:15
Philip, I would be interested in your reasoning here. I can't think of a reason why stopping down would reduce the need to shield the sensor from IR in order to ensure uncontaminated rendition of colors.
My understanding is that the phenomon occurs only in low-light wide-open conditions.
Philip
Matthew Runkel
03-17-2007, 16:35
My understanding is that the phenomon occurs only in low-light wide-open conditions.
Philip
I don't think that is correct, nor have I seen that suggestion made before. The M8's sensor itself is more sensitive to IR than it should be, a fact that does not change according to lighting conditions or aperture. The factors that should matter are the amount of (invisible) IR in the lighting mix and the IR reflectivity of objects in the frame. My expectation is that no easy generalization can be made about the relationship between light intensity and the amount of IR present. And I cannot imagine how stopping down would change the mix of visible and IR radiation reaching the sensor.
Russ most people who own this camera, take it out and shoot with it, learn its traits and LOVE the M8, or at least respect it. Just because you did not feel comfortable jumping in the water does not mean the rest of us are not enjoying the swim.
Now hurry up and take that survey and explain why you don't like your M8 Russ :rolleyes:
PS. 4000 exposures and NO filters.
I'm obviously guessing but normally I would guess these would be black slacks if the guy's working on public transport.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sailorted/345158417/in/set-72157594451678528/
purple puffa or black?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sailorted/396030840/in/set-72157594451678528/
I can sympathyze with your disappointment. However, you may have over-reacted on this filter issue. In the bright-light situations you would most likely have been shooting in your lenses would have been well stopped-down and the issues minimized.
Philip
What does stopping the lens down or bright light have to do with the IR content? The problem is in the ratio of IR to visible light. Stopping the lens down reduces both visible and IR the same. The ratio doesn't change. Certain kinds of light have higher IR to visible ratios for example tungsten vs daylight.
Look at the spec sheet for IR film and see how the ISO changes with different light sources using the same filter like an 87c.
Nigel Meaby
03-17-2007, 16:56
Superb series of photos. If you have the talent, doesn't matter what the camera is, you'll get great results.
My understanding is that the phenomon occurs only in low-light wide-open conditions.
Philip
If you look at the sample I posted that was 5200K light at f/16. No synthetic fabrics and the difference between filter and no filter is not subtle. So loads of light, stopped all the way down and no synthetic fabrics and still lots of IR problems.
Superb series of photos. If you have the talent, doesn't matter what the camera is, you'll get great results.
So very true!
[quote=Sailor Ted]...most people who own this camera, take it out and shoot with it...quote]
But unless they've lost their minds they don't try to do a shoot with it they can't go back and re-shoot.
Sailor Ted
03-17-2007, 20:06
This whole thing is lame beyond words. NEVER make untested changes BEFORE race day. That said if you're comfortable with the M8, and if this comfort is based on experience, then you will know what to expect and you can use this understanding to communicate your vision. Photography is about expression and this expression is seldom about mere objective observation. This at least is what is important to me in the photography I respect- I hate Hallmark cookie cutter dreck.
PS. The photograph of veggies without a filter does not take away from the image IMO. The image sucks either way but it's representation is as good, to my mind, as the equally bad image without the filter. If you want to use filters then great and if this helps you express your image the way you want then great again. But if your expression lacks vision then the image will be just as bad as if you had not used a filter in the first place. Likewise if your vision is important**you or others then it would likely have been just as meaningful had you used filters or not.
PS. The photograph of veggies without a filter does not take away from the image IMO. The image sucks either way but it's representation is as good, to my mind, as the equally bad image without the filter. If you want to use filters then great and if this helps you express your image the way you want then great again. But if your expression lacks vision then the image will be just as bad as if you had not used a filter in the first place. Likewise if your vision is important**you or others then it would likely have been just as meaningful had you used filters or not.
Ted,
Comments like this are just not acceptable - this is the kind of response I'd expect from a nine year old. Stop trying to defend the indefensible. I really like my M8, but it is flawed. IR sensitivity is a significant issue in all lighting conditions. If you, or anyone else, are happy with the results you get from your M8 without a filter, then that is great and I am happy for you all. Just don't pretend that it is a myth - that is just plain dishonest.
Mate, your decision not to take the M8's was the right thing, in my opinion. I saw IR problems in most images taken with my M8's, not to mention too many mechanical and electrical problems to mention or bother rewriting about in this thread. In the end it comes down to knowing your gears limits when going out on a job and god knows the M8's limits are well documented. It's a great camera to hold and shoot but nothing to rely on for professional use yet. Soon it may be all it was supposed to be, but who knows when Leica will actually deliver on their promises. I'm still waiting for my lens to return from Germany's repair dept, that's only taken blah blah blah
Sailor Ted
03-18-2007, 02:50
Gid old boy where in my post did I say that IR sensitivity is not real? Go back and re-read what I wrote.
Regarding the OP, why if he did want to take the M8 and concerned as he was regarding IR contamination polluting his vision on a "once in a lifetime photo op" (or words to that effect) did he not just buy an IR filter or two? Was it the cost of getting filters? It seems to me that faced with having my Leica on such a trip and forking out a couple hundred dollars or not having the camera I'd spend the money. What's the old saying? "penny wise and pound foolish."
What is the point of this whole thread? That the M8 needs filters if you want accurate color under all lighting conditions? That Leica is not getting the filters out as fast as we'd all like? Is any of this news?
Ted,
Re-read the OP. He did try to acquire some filters, but they are not exactly growing on trees (at least they weren't). I don't read the OP as didsappointed at Leica or the M8 per se, but disappointed that he didn't get the chance to use his new M8(s) on what would most likely have been an ideal shoot. I understand and support his stance not to trust to a new camera set up with documented problems (however inflated these may be) - regardless of brand.
Sailor Ted
03-18-2007, 03:07
I too agree that he has the right not to trust the camera "exclusively" however I would have taken the camera and that is the point of many people who have responded to this thread. Regarding IR filters and their availability, I am of the opinion that if you look on the Internet and not procrastinate before a looming photo date you'll find what you need then, now, and in the future.
Sorry but my Kleenex box is not getting used very much as a result of this thread.
OTOH he may have just purchased the camera prior to departure and this would be a case of a new car on race day- always a bad idea but at least he would not have had the opportunity to get filters or perhaps he tried, really tried and with two or three weeks to spare and none were available. If so then it's a shame he could not have used his Leica on this trip.
PS. The photograph of veggies without a filter does not take away from the image IMO. The image sucks either way but it's representation is as good, to my mind, as the equally bad image without the filter.
Ted, that is a small detail from the image. It was not taken for esthetic value but to test the effect of using filters or not. I thought that was so obvious that it would not require explanation. I was wondering if I could get away with out IR filters for subjects that did not contain synthetic fabric lit by strobes.
If you'd like to critique the esthetic value of my photos you can find them on my photoblog -the address is in my signature.
Sailor Ted
03-18-2007, 03:31
Ted, that is a small detail from the image. It was not taken for esthetic value but to test the effect of using filters or not. I thought that was so obvious that it would not require explanation. I was wondering if I could get away with out IR filters for subjects that did not contain synthetic fabric lit by strobes.
If you'd like to critique the esthetic value of my photos you can find them on my photoblog -the address is in my signature.
I do understand and was not being critical of your work- sorry. My point was very different and yes the M8 exhibits IR sensitivity in it's images. A well worn fact.
olivepress
03-18-2007, 04:28
I too agree that he has the right not to trust the camera "exclusively" however I would have taken the camera and that is the point of many people who have responded to this thread. Regarding IR filters and their availability, I am of the opinion that if you look on the Internet and not procrastinate before a looming photo date you'll find what you need then, now, and in the future.
Sorry but my Kleenex box is not getting used very much as a result of this thread.
OTOH he may have just purchased the camera prior to departure and this would be a case of a new car on race day- always a bad idea but at least he would not have had the opportunity to get filters or perhaps he tried, really tried and with two or three weeks to spare and none were available. If so then it's a shame he could not have used his Leica on this trip.
Ted-
I had the M8s for 3 months before the trip. Plenty of time to get to know them. In the months of January/Feb I oculd not locate filters for the lenses I was bringing. I tried all the obvious/not obvious places and enlisted Leica people's help as well. No luck. As I noted in the original post I really wanted to take the cameras because of size and image quality to Brazil. As I was preparing to leave in the begining of February the dealer and Leica reported that there were some issues with batteries and camera start up issues.
So I felt IF I could get the filters in time I would bring the cameras and play thru. IF I did not get the filters that was a sign to leave them home. I also brought 2 Canon 1DS mIIs, and had a Hasselblad H3D 39 for personal work in landscape. SO NO BIG DEAL if the Leicas had issues. The legendary size and rangefinder prowess would be welcomed in the City of Garbage and streets of the Favela where I would be shooting!
When the filters did not make it, I said OK that is NOT MEANT TO BE and left them home. The point of the thread was two fold - one to express my personal disappointment in not being able to SHOOT LEICA, not that the cameras failed, not that the camera had issues, not that the quality was in question, or that IR issues are real or not real- simply I was disappointed in not being able to SHOOT them in Brazil. Missed opportunity. And secondly, I was not prepared to use equipment that I had a question about in any way- not then, not now not EVER! It's not worth it.
YOU and otheres may feel different! You may make other choices. And thats fine. One member said he likes to try new stuff on a shoot for creative reasons. Thats okay too. Its not how I work. I really dont care what kind of camera it is I am holding as long as I get the desired results. As I posted in the original post- SOMETIMES there is a BETTER TOOL for the job and a preferred tool. In the case of the Brazil photos, the best choice would have been Leica, BUT I didnt have the opportunity so I was a bit disappointed...... that's all!
Joe Mondello
03-18-2007, 05:34
Welcome to the Forum! :)
bottley1
03-18-2007, 06:38
A benifit of increased CCD IR sensitivity is that by using an IR transmission filter, and B&W mode, lovely IR images are possible with the M8. So, great colour, great B&W, and great IR all in one camera, and all without carrying film through airport secxurity checks!! Sorry to be slightly off topic.
Ted-
I had the M8s for 3 months before the trip. Plenty of time to get to know them. In the months of January/Feb I oculd not locate filters for the lenses I was bringing. I tried all the obvious/not obvious places and enlisted Leica people's help as well. No luck. As I noted in the original post I really wanted to take the cameras because of size and image quality to Brazil. As I was preparing to leave in the begining of February the dealer and Leica reported that there were some issues with batteries and camera start up issues.
So I felt IF I could get the filters in time I would bring the cameras and play thru. IF I did not get the filters that was a sign to leave them home. I also brought 2 Canon 1DS mIIs, and had a Hasselblad H3D 39 for personal work in landscape. SO NO BIG DEAL if the Leicas had issues. The legendary size and rangefinder prowess would be welcomed in the City of Garbage and streets of the Favela where I would be shooting!
When the filters did not make it, I said OK that is NOT MEANT TO BE and left them home. The point of the thread was two fold - one to express my personal disappointment in not being able to SHOOT LEICA, not that the cameras failed, not that the camera had issues, not that the quality was in question, or that IR issues are real or not real- simply I was disappointed in not being able to SHOOT them in Brazil. Missed opportunity. And secondly, I was not prepared to use equipment that I had a question about in any way- not then, not now not EVER! It's not worth it.
YOU and otheres may feel different! You may make other choices. And thats fine. One member said he likes to try new stuff on a shoot for creative reasons. Thats okay too. Its not how I work. I really dont care what kind of camera it is I am holding as long as I get the desired results. As I posted in the original post- SOMETIMES there is a BETTER TOOL for the job and a preferred tool. In the case of the Brazil photos, the best choice would have been Leica, BUT I didnt have the opportunity so I was a bit disappointed...... that's all!
I'm a bit puzzled - I had no problems getting filters over the internet . I just had to hunt around a bit....Welcome to the forum btw.
most people who own this camera, take it out and shoot with it, learn its traits and LOVE the M8, or at least respect it. PS. 4000 exposures and NO filters.
Ted, I'm glad you love your M8. It's all right to love your M8. But there's a difference between "taking it out and shooting with it" and doing a serious shoot for someone else. I expect I'll love my M8 if Leica ever gets it fixed. As far as respect is concerned, I respect the IDEA of the M8, but at this point it's like a beautifully designed suspension bridge that keeps falling into the river. I'm not ready to depend on it to get to the other side.
I'm also glad you've shot so many frames with no filters and haven't seen the problems we all know are there. Again, there's a difference between shooting for your own pleasure and shooting for someone else's specific requirements. You need to go back and read what Paul wrote in his first post. He wasn't "taking it out and shooting with it." He was doing a job that couldn't reasonably be re-done. That's different from "taking it out and shooting with it."
Why is everyone having such trouble getting IR cut filters? I got E39 Heliopan with my M8 (because it was just in stock) and Tamarkin, Adorama, etc. have most other sizes that I need. People buy a $5000 camera and then act like it doesn't work because they can't locate an IR cut filter in common sizes which are in stock every time I've ever needed one. I must be missing something here. Maybe you planned to shoot a particularly hard to find lens size.
It is going to be really interesting to see how this whole filter thing pans out.
The IR cut filter is now taking the place of a protective filter, bummer.
You see, I often shoot in situations where a protective filter is mandatory. The auctioneer yelling spit with my 28 in his face, the blowing snow spray of a fine winter storm, the dust as the wind picks up at the cattle drive. All of these things put the front element of multi-thousand dollar Leica glass at risk. Enter, the B&W filter for $39.95.
If the filter gets damaged or scratched, the filter can be removed and replaced, the shooting does not have to stop. But now we have a expensive filter that is now part of the optical path of necessity. Are pros carrying spares then? If a pro is on a long term assignment with say two M8's and 4 lenses, are they carrying at least $600 in filters? What about the use of polarizers or other special effect filters? Are people stacking all that glass on a optically perfect 28mm 2.0 aspheric?
Hmmm....
Daniel, yes, with a polarizer you MUST stack filters, as a pol doubles the IR contamination. Fortunately, one uses a polfilter 90 degrees of the sun, so the lenshood will cut all skew rays, minimizing the undesirable effects of stacked filters.
I must be missing something here. Maybe you planned to shoot a particularly hard to find lens size.
It took B&W two weeks to supply my special order 41mm 486.
It is going to be really interesting to see how this whole filter thing pans out.
It's already panned out. Whoever wants an M8 badly enough accepts the filters. Who doesn't accept the filters could deal with the contamination in post, could use a band-aid profile or the new "tweaking" in the firmware, could pretend they don't see it, could shoot only subjects that don't reflect IR and/or in light that contains little or no IR...but basically the filters seem like the simplest way.
The IR cut filter is now taking the place of a protective filter, bummer.
You see, I often shoot in situations where a protective filter is mandatory. The auctioneer yelling spit with my 28 in his face, the blowing snow spray of a fine winter storm, the dust as the wind picks up at the cattle drive. All of these things put the front element of multi-thousand dollar Leica glass at risk. Enter, the B&W filter for $39.95.
If the filter gets damaged or scratched, the filter can be removed and replaced, the shooting does not have to stop. But now we have a expensive filter that is now part of the optical path of necessity. Are pros carrying spares then?
I'm not a pro and I don't have an M8 yet (not because of the IR filters, though I still believe they are a stupid consequence, but because of such a high reported failure rate) but if/when I get one I will still have all those MRC UV filters leftover and will do some experimentation. If I don't see any ill-effects I'll probably keep one stacked to protect the IR filter. After all, what's one more suspension of common sense in comparison to having the wonderful IQ :rolleyes:
grduprey
03-20-2007, 14:41
I ordered the filters the day i ordered the camera, had the camera 2 days later and the filters arrived 1 week later. No problem getting the filters at this end.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.