Leica's "permanent solution" to the M8 problems? Buy IR filters!

Vinay:

 

"... I'm not quite as livid as Bernard, though, because I easly cancelled my order, I'm not

being stiffed by my dealer..."

 

Why do you feel you absolutely have to sprinkle your posts with crap like this? I never said

my dealer wouldn't cancel my order, I said I had traded-in some gear that he had already

put up for sale, and that I wouldn't cancel my order. Distorting reality doesn't do you any

good. Don't you realize the extent of damage this does to your credibility?

 

Now that I have vented my anger at Leica, I must repeat that all the images from the M8

made by good photographers I've seen so far, be it in print, or on the Web, are impressive.

I had already said that the first day I posted about handling the M8, last week. I use Nikon

DSLRs, and they're terrific, but there is something special in the M8's images. Depth, relief,

sharpness, glow... Yes, good old glow :-) Is it Leica glass plus a darn good sensor

(magenta cast notwithstanding), in the usual mirror-less rangefinder M, I don't know, but

it's there.

 

And again, the M8 IS an M, with all its great qualities of built and handling.

 

Sorry for my show of frustration, friends. I have been disappointed by the accumulation of

bad news after my initial enthousiasm. One cold shower was one thing (the banding issue),

two was already very annoying (the magenta cast), three was downright exasperating (the

filter

solution).

 

But, after a good night sleep, I think I will (sigh) put up with the filter solution, and go on

with my life with the M8. Now, if I can only get it mid-December as expected.

"...I am quite impressed at the extreme loyalty shown by many Leica users..."....no, not impressed at all. Banding, purple fringe, possible anti-liasing problems to come, re-coding lenses, the "filter solution"..........putting up with all that, plus being lied to, is not impressive at all to this photographer. I will be civil and not write what I really think. But, it ain't what I would call loyalty.......

I?ve been a silent observes of the M8 threads since several months, often undecided whether I find the comments of both the Leica aficionados of those of the Leica bashers more amusing. I bought my firs Leica M (an M7) about 18 months ago and loved it from the first moment, not because it necessarily takes better pictures, but because for most shots I prefer the rangefinder concept over the SLR concepts.

 

Here are my 5 cents worth of comments:

 

1. When Leica announced the M8 the two dominant comments were (a) they will not manage to get the product out within the announced time frame and (b) there will be flaws in the first lots shipped so better wait a few months before buying. Well (a) turned out to be wrong and (b) correct. Funny thing is that now everyone seems to have forgotten (b). Perhaps the reason were the many raving reviews that the M8 received.

 

2. The lens coding issue has been around for a long time and seems not to have bothered people so much until the IR issue came up. Leica always said that to get the best of the M8 and the lenses, they have to coded. I recall a conversation I had with a sales man in a photo shop who told me that while I could use the lenses I bought for my Canon 50 in the mid 90s on a Canon DSLR, in order to make full use of the camera?s capability, I would have to buy new lenses. Coding seems better than buying new.

 

3. I would love to be fly on the wall in Leica?s sales communication department. These guys must be under heavy fire because I agree with an earlier comment that they f****d up big time, irrespective of whether the rumors that started this thread are true or not. If they are true, Leica should have communicated the problems immediately (that the problems were not detected before release seems had to believe) and now undertake some bold moves to gain back confidence, such as voucher for a couple of filters with any new M8 and selling new lenses with filters. If the rumors are wrong, the should stop them, if necessary by posting official statements in threads like the present. Leica (like many other companies) may hate the power of the internet, but they cannot ignore.

 

Well, I?m now going to shut up for another 6 months and wait what happens and then decide whether to go for the M8 or buy a Canon D5 (but I shall NOT sell my M7!).

M3 through M7 starting to look pretty good eh?<div></div>

Well, introducing another required lens surface essentially negates the superiority of Leica optics and thus kills that argument for using a digital M system.

 

What a lame excuse for a fix. My sense, cynical though it is, is that leica decided to take the cheap and easy route out b/c they think most of their clientele are kool-aid drinking snobs more interested in status than in a working camera. In any event, this speaks volumes about how Leica views its client base.

 

Brad has a good point: Do you seriously think Canon or Nikon would try to get away with this, of that any self-respecting pro would drag around lenses with IR filters permanently attached? NHever. Wouldnt happen.

 

If i was an M8 owner i'd be looking into a class action lawsuit against Leica for misrepresentation, fraud etc.

Nope, Paul; they started to look good a long time ago. They haven't stopped, though....

<i>Well, introducing another required lens surface essentially negates the superiority of Leica optics and thus kills that argument for using a digital M system.</i>

<p>

Yeah, those filters just <i>killed</i> Galen Rowell's Nikon lenses; nothing but crap there. Ansel Adams' large-format lenses too - you can barely see any detail in his prints through all the flare, reflections & what have you. And if you look in <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=005QD9&tag=">this thread</a>, you'll see the filter that spoiled so many of HCB's pictures with the collapsible Summicron.

<p>

Such a tragic waste of good lenses.

"2. The lens coding issue has been around for a long time and seems not to have bothered people so much until the IR issue came up. Leica always said that to get the best of the M8 and the lenses, they have to coded."

 

It didn't bother people because it was proven to be nothing more than marketing baloney by everyone who tried an M8 with uncoded lenses and found the images no worse than film.

 

"I recall a conversation I had with a sales man in a photo shop who told me that while I could use the lenses I bought for my Canon 50 in the mid 90s on a Canon DSLR, in order to make full use of the camera?s capability, I would have to buy new lenses."

 

I'm sure most of us have heard similar horsepucky from salesmen in photo shops :-)

 

 

"Coding seems better than buying new."

 

That's assuming the lenses you own can be coded. Which rules out all screw mount lenses, all 3rd-party lenses, and a large number of Leitz M lenses including the E43 50 Summilux and the rigid and DR Summicron, two lenses of extreme popularity amongst other than collectors. It also rules out the 15mm CV and Zeiss lenses, which are the only alternatives in that focal length area other than the $3000+ f/4 16-21-28 Tri Elmar.

"Here are the keys to your brand new Rolls Royce Uberstallion, the finest car on the market

today. Before you drive it away sir, I must advise you that the tyres that it comes with

mean that it cannot be driven on tarmac and you will have to go to TYRES R US and buy

yourself a set of IR Tyres for $30,000 each. You also may wish to leave the car with us so

that we may re-tune the engine for you, otherwise you will find that you will be unable to

drive this gleaming piece of hand-crafted machinery at more than 6 miles per hour. This

re-tune we can perform for you at our special rate of $15,000, but I am sure that you will

be very pleased with the results. May we also suggest that to maximise your Rolls-Royce

driving experience you don't attempt to drive the car at night, just yet, sir. We have a small

problem with teh headlights that we are working on as we speak, sir, and will be advising

all customers as soon as we have worked around the glitvh."

If an IR filter will not effect color when used with film bodies and Leica will provide them at cost or less, their solution may not be so bad. I always keep a UV filter over my lenses for protection so a filter swap won't be a real biggie if I ever get an M8.

Well, Robert, if you look <a href="http://www.automallusa.net/01/rolls-royce/recalls.html">here</a> you'll see that the 2006 Rolls-Royce Phantom has been recalled for a problem with the rear shock absorbers which could "increase the chances of a crash".

<p>

I'm having a hard time coming up with a way Leica could introduce a defect that could kill you into the M8.

I don't really understand the big deal about putting filters on your lenses to avoid the IR magenta problem. Is it an optical issue? Quality filters in most situations cause little or no image degradation, and many photographers use UV filters or the like constantly. Is it a cost issue? I cannot believe that someone willing to invest in an M8 and Leica lenses is going to howl about having to pay an extra $100 or so per lens for an IR filter. The additional cost is simply insignificant. My basic understanding of this situation is that Leica deliberately under-filtered the M8's sensor to achieve maximum image quality, and M8 users indeed report a very high-quality file, except with respect to the IR issue. So there's a trade-off. Doesn't every camera have trade-offs?

If Leica underspecified the IR filter on the sensor in order to increase image quality, but for all intents and purposes an IR filter has to be over the lens most if not all the time to avoid the purple colour cast, what's the point (not to mention the issue of reflections or ghosts or loss of contrast due to another piece of glass)? It's like they sell you a car without a muffler because it has more power, but then in order to drive it anywhere in civilization they sell you a muffler.

<i>"Coding seems better than buying new." <p>

 

That's assuming the lenses you own can be coded. Which rules out all screw mount lenses </i><p>

 

Why is that? You leave the screw-to-m adapter on the lens. It's trivial to mark the adapter (or lens) so that the camera can read the code. It really ain't rocket science! 'course, obsessive collectors won't want their uncoded lenses coded anyway, but they can buy brand new 6-bit lenses.<p>

 

Pico (a member of SPUL since 1971)

It's a possibility but I hardly call it trivial. Painting on the adaptor would wear off, someone would need to engrave small depressions and fill them with paint. They would have to be lined up exactly. Someone with the skills could do it, and probably will. A pity though, that it takes added filters AND aftermarket modifications to make a $5000 camera work.

Vinay, my understanding is that an IR lens filter does not negate the image-quality advantages that led Leica to use a thinner filter on the M8 sensor. I believe to a certain extent Leica may have had no choice given the short lens-to-sensor distance.

M8=Microsoft XP Home Edition

 

M8+encoded lens+IR fitler+(further surprises soon to be announced)=Microsoft XP

Professional Edition

 

just wonder what would the MS XP Server Edition like.....

Seems like folks should have waited to order until early reports were in to avoid all these hassles. Most people use Ms for film and Canon or Nikon for digital anyway, since the M8 is really years late in entering the market.

Unfortunately, the M8 introduction is going to be the stuff of MBA case studies. Wonder if they'll be around to introduce the M9.

 

I never intended to buy one, I shoot mostly black and white and still love the darkroom. When shooting color, I scan color negatives with a Minolta 5400. The dynamic range is phenominal. The output is much superior to the results of my wife's DSLR. I think people have forgotten what shadow detail looks like.

Like I said, Vinay, you keep distorting the meaning of what people say just to make a

point.

 

When I said (your quote of my exact words):

 

" As fot getting a refund, forget it. My dealer confirmed it. As he confirmed that he still

does not know what Leica's policy will be concerning the already sold cameras..."

 

you know very well that it means AFTER THE SALE IS COMPLETED, and I have taken delivery

of the M8. It has nothing to do with

CANCELLING AN

ORDER, which, in case you didn't know it, comes BEFORE the sale is completed.

 

What do you care, anyway, what my dealer does or does not do? If you don't have more

important matters to attend to, I pity you.

 

You pretend to understand only what suits you, and what suits you is what lets you have

the last

word. Well, be my guest, my friend. I wish you all the best wasting your time contradicting

people for the sheer pleasure of it.

 

Merry Christmas to you. 2007, that is :-)

As long as you remember to use your Leica M8 with Leica M coded lenses, Leica branded IR cut filters to preserve the maximum glow, and carry everything in a Leica bag to make sure your M8 doesn't get rubbed the wrong way, there is no problem. BTW, just make sure you only use Leica recommended software to process your files.

 

A paradigm shift is in order here. You need to stop thinking about individual pictures, and start thinking in terms of a comprehensive solution. It's about an end-to-end seamlessly integrated workflow, folks.

 

M users - Welcome to the digital age. You have arrived!

 

Coming soon - A special Leica Valet Service option (to be sold with M8 as part of Luxury Edition) to pick up your SD cards from home and deliver them back with prints to your doorstep before you can say "Coded Summicron ASPH". For a small extra fee, you can have the prints delivered matted and framed to match the decor of your home or office.

I don't know much about the M8, but the CCD sensor is made by Kodak, and the software writted by a "German firm" (source for both: Erwin Puts review of M8). Why doesn't anyone mention these two entities, and don't they have anything to do with the solution?

The "German firm" is Jenoptik.

"you know very well that it means AFTER THE SALE IS COMPLETED, and I have taken delivery of the M8. It has nothing to do with CANCELLING AN ORDER, which, in case you didn't know it, comes BEFORE the sale is completed."

 

I would like to apologize to you Bernard. And I will, if you would only show me where in anything you wrote on that or this thread previously that you were speaking of 'AFTER THE SALE IS COMPLETED'. I can't find that statment anywhere other than right here preceding your uncalled-for personal attack. If I missed it I will apologize as I said.

Bob, I'm with you, and this photo is great.

 

Now, somebody post a photo made at f/1.2, at 1/30th. HANDHELD, with a film camera,

640 ISO film (or pushed at 640) whith the same absence of grain, the same great tonality

range, glow, soft bokeh and sharpness. And that's only a Web picture.

 

Funny how the people who say "You can do that with a P&S", or "You don't need a $5,000

camera to do that", or "My xxx lens is as good, if not better, than that" almost never post

pictures to prove their point.

 

What I'm saying is that even if the M8 produces images only as good as what the best

DSLR does, as some have suggested, you still have the bonus of it being a Leica

rangefinder, ie stealthy, silent, custom-made for low-light photography, simple to use,

extremely well built, and with access to a range of some of the best lenses ever produced.

The best of both worlds.