My Poor Parka turned red

petermcwerner · 11-09-2006

M8-ANORAK_ROT_L1000009.jpg

M8 - Artificial Light (overhead household 60 W bulb)

DMR-ANORAK_DBLAU_L8041098.jpg

Same with the DMR - sorry for unsharpness, my fault but color is dead on the spot

Both photos Automatic W/B, RAW, converted with C1 3.7.6, downsized and saved as jpeg for the web - no color corrections applied

fgianni · 11-09-2006

OMG is it really that bad?

ClayH · 11-09-2006

This is a train wreck for Leica.

jaapv · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by fgianni

OMG is it really that bad?

No: levels blackpoint, 20% desaturate. Leica has already admitted that AWB must be improved. (a very small jpeg is not really suited to PS..) White balance is best adressed in DNG conversion...

dcsang · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaapv

No: levels blackpoint, 20% desaturate. Leica has already admitted that AWB must be improved. (a very small jpeg is not really suited to PS..) White balance is best adressed in DNG conversion...

You gotta be kidding me.

So for every photo that has black in it you have to jump through hoops huh...

This is a big problem if the camera can't get it right initially - I can understand a small tweak here or there if skin tones might be slightly off but the coat is clearly NOT BLACK; not even CLOSE to being black.

I would just hope that a firmware fix is in the works (if it can be fixed via firmware) for Leica's sake.

Dave

FrankS · 11-09-2006

It is beyond me why anyone would decide to buy a camera like this from the first production run and without waiting for the bugs to be ironed out. Did they think there wouldn't be any bugs? I guess there's the prestige of being the first kid on the block with it, but that is just not a prudent descision in my mind. Oh well, it's not something that I have to worry about.

rogue_designer · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankS

It is beyond me why anyone would decide to buy a camera like this from the first production run and without waiting for the bugs to be ironed out. Did they think there wouldn't be any bugs? I guess there's the prestige of being the first kid on the block with it, but that is just not a prudent descision in my mind. Oh well, it's not something that I have to worry about.

:three trees:

jaapv · 11-09-2006

In my experience all higher and high level digital camera's need at least levels,,curves and sharpening to get a good result in raw conversion

KM-25 · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaapv

In my experience all higher and high level digital camera's need at least levels,,curves and sharpening to get a good result in raw conversion

Ever use a 5D?

80% of the time, it is good to go with no PP for me.

jaapv · 11-09-2006

As a matter of fact I did. I think M8 files generally need less processing. I am very happy with 90% of the photo's I'm taking, the next 8% will be resolved by the filters I have just ordered, there will be another 1% improvement with the banding by the firmware update. I'm not switching for 1%

ywenz · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaapv

In my experience all higher and high level digital camera's need at least levels,,curves and sharpening to get a good result in raw conversion

You're kidding right? are you actually trying to legitimize this IR issue? You know that IR magenta cast has nothing to do with WB, levels, curves, and sharpening right? Your solution does not work because you are crushing the shadow details by picking a black point that is not actually black on screen. Further more how do you correct a red parka jacket next to a black rubber or metal that doesn't reflect IR? Draw a mask around the jacket and paint it black manually?

If you're happy with the above, then that's cool. For the rest of us, a piece is still a piece.

leica must be laughing their way to the bank with the customer loyalty they have.. WOW!

jaapv · 11-09-2006

No I'm not. I just don't think posting a mini-jpeg that hasn't even been converted properly ( see the background)if it was raw to begin with-which I doubt, is a very constructive thing to do.

Kin Lau · 11-09-2006

I wonder if the extra IR sensitivity is contributing to the M8's reportedly good B&W performance?

Great way to get that extra "glow" I guess.

fgianni · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kin Lau

Great way to get that extra "glow" I guess.

It is called "glow" only when it comes from Leica lenses, otherwise the correct term is "flare"

ywenz · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaapv

No I'm not. I just don't think posting a mini-jpeg that hasn't even been converted properly ( see the background)if it was raw to begin with-which I doubt, is a very constructive thing to do.

Weren't you the one who said little processing M8 RAW files are required?

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaapv

As a matter of fact I did. I think M8 files generally need less processing.

Whether or not it was correctly raw processed doesn't really matter because the color is soo blatantly wrong. Plus, if he had put a less IR reflective black object next to the coat, that object would be black in the image. How would you RAW process a picture like that?...

2001alal · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankS

It is beyond me why anyone would decide to buy a camera like this from the first production run and without waiting for the bugs to be ironed out. Did they think there wouldn't be any bugs? I guess there's the prestige of being the first kid on the block with it, but that is just not a prudent descision in my mind. Oh well, it's not something that I have to worry about.

but my friend if no one bought the camera how could we work out the problems
sorry but that how you have more than half the objects that you have.
someone has to do the work for you

dcsang · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2001alal

but my friend if no one bought the camera how could we work out the problems
sorry but that how you have more than half the objects that you have.
someone has to do the work for you

And that is why software is beta tested first - get out as many bugs as possible before releasing the software to the general public for PURCHASE. You see.. in this case one shouldn't have to purchase a product to "work the bugs out" for a company that should have the foresight to do that for their clientelle.

It will never reveal EVERYTHING but something this glaring would have been noted if the people who were, well, reviewing, the camera did due diligence.

This of course is dependent on how long they actually had the camera to use. I would think a weeks time to shoot targets, varied lighting, etc. would be ample but who knows just how long they actually had the camera in their hands.

Dave

jaapv · 11-09-2006

Don't think I like the IR issue- I don't. but I like the camera- so I simply ordered IR cut-out filters for my lenses...

ywenz · 11-09-2006

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/dig...html#post88614

SIMPLY SICK!

FrankS · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2001alal

but my friend if no one bought the camera how could we work out the problems
sorry but that how you have more than half the objects that you have.
someone has to do the work for you

All I can say is, "Thank you!" to those folks willing to be guinea pigs and accepting these risks. Also to those who buy new, and later sell used items, like all of the RF gear I own. I'm glad there are folks like this in the world that need to be first with the latest. Isn't this where the term, "bleeding edge of technology" comes from?

ywenz · 11-09-2006

I never understood the practice of putting down money for vaporware, which evidently is what a lot of these people did. See no product, feel no product, and in the end received no product.

rpsawin · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2001alal

but my friend if no one bought the camera how could we work out the problems
sorry but that how you have more than half the objects that you have.
someone has to do the work for you

Ok, if it is up to the early adapters to work out the bugs why should they have to pay full retail? Shouldn't they receive a substantial discount for their trouble?

It seems that only in the digital world (cameras, computers, software) is this type of nonsense tolerated. You surely would not put up with this when you purchase film or a lens. When dining out and your meal is half cooked or only part of it is served do you put up with that? How about buying a new car with 3 wheels and half an interior?

Personally I think that the rush to get a product to market asap overrides technical and quality issues. It's not just Leica. Look at Microsoft and Nikon and you will find they have rushed products to market before they were properly "vetted".

As long as consumers tolerate this crap we can look forward to more of it.

Bob

etherfarm · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankS

It is beyond me why anyone would decide to buy a camera like this from the first production run and without waiting for the bugs to be ironed out. Did they think there wouldn't be any bugs? I guess there's the prestige of being the first kid on the block with it, but that is just not a prudent descision in my mind. Oh well, it's not something that I have to worry about.

It's beyond me why it's necessary to issue blanket judgements about people who already have the M8.

I find it ironic that in attributing M8 ownership to the desire for some sort of prestige, you yourself express some smugness in somehow being "smarter" than those who purchased the M8. My intention here is not to bait you (or anyone) into an argument, but just to point out that comments like yours are completely unnecessary.

Let's talk about the cameras, not the people who own or don't own them. I'm a relative newcomer to this forum, but several recent threads have made me wonder if there's any point in seeking refuge from dpreview forum antics...

FrankS · 11-09-2006

Quote:

Originally Posted by etherfarm

It's beyond me why it's necessary to issue blanket judgements about people who already have the M8.

I find it ironic that in attributing M8 ownership to the desire for some sort of prestige, you yourself express some smugness in somehow being "smarter" than those who purchased the M8. My intention here is not to bait you (or anyone) into an argument, but just to point out that comments like yours are completely unnecessary.

Let's talk about the cameras, not the people who own or don't own them. I'm a relative newcomer to this forum, but several recent threads have made me wonder if there's any point in seeking refuge from dpreview forum antics...

I have an opinion relevent to the M8 issues, and I am free to express it. You are free to disagree. I don't see a blanket statement, and my judgement is on the prudence of the M8 buying descision, which I was relating to the bigger issue of buying into the bleeding edge of computer technology which is a pretty well developed and established idea.

Did you consider this before buying?

Socke · 11-09-2006

Hm, if I understand all this than buying a Leica for

simplicity, i.E. just drop of Portra at the lab,
image quality, i.E. great glass which must not be compromised by filters,
low light capability, i.E. wide open slow shutter at high ISO

is not a valid proposition anymore.

Looks as if I stick to film for my rangefinder needs :-)

Edit:

P.S.: what was that? Digital Sensors not good enough for Zeiss' expectations at the moment?