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

[ray .]

What brand doesn't have issues? I drive a Toyota Camry that at 10,000 miles

needed the seat track replaced. Cost for a new part? 1400 bucks. Yet Toyota has a

reputation for building some of the most reliable cars in the world. You sprung for a

new model before it was out the door, so it's at least in part your own responsibility.

And from the sound of it you can barely afford the cam in the first place.

[eliot_rosen1]

"A special Leica Valet Service option"

 

Nels, perhaps the same service can drive you to another forum and park your car there. :-)

[nels]

Eliot, I keep coming back to this forum just to read your insightful comments on photography in general, and more importantly, to see your inspiring pictures. No other forum is blessed by a talented individual such as yourself.

[eliot_rosen1]

Bob, the aspherical elements inthe 50/1.2 Noctilux were han ground and polished as distinguished from the modern ASPH elements, where Leica has utilized glass moulding, a CNC lathe, or related processes to produce the non-spherical surfaces. These processes did not exist when the Noctilux was issued. As far as the 50/1 Nocti, this lens does not have any aspherical elements, so the issue is moot.

[ronald_moravec1]

Canon 5D with color fringing ! M8 coded lenses and flters ! Who is going to code my 12, 15. and 25 CV, Summarit, Summitar, 3.5 Elmars, Summar, and others I can`t even remember.

 

And filters are $200, and who wants to swap filters with every lens change and they do not exist for lots of sizes. No I won`t use adapter rings and give up shades. Rings are for view cameras where they work just fine.

 

A $5000 purchase is going to become $10000. Pretty much count me OUT.

[astral]

Well, at best I'm gonna wait for the M9 ... maybe it will have better hardware, firmware & software; third-party lens encoding services should by then be widely available; it should have a better specification, such as more modern metering (and a few of the other base-line features that were commonplace on good digital cameras of the 20th Century). The M8 is just not what I wanted: the filter kludge is annoying - even if fixable - and has stopped me even wanting to look at an M8. I'll let Leica's new key customers ("the football mums" according to Leica's C.E.) have mine - they'll just love a 50 year of camera that takes digital pictures, with or without magenta tints!

 

However, once the $5k price tag is compared to the cost of an M7 the price of an M8 is not (to me) really scandalous, but the possible limitations, and the cost of filters and coding old lenses all are hard to accept. So, my most likely course (given that a Leica M9 could be many years away) is to buy a new scanner & printer and continue using film - at the very least I will then have the real benefits of a 15mm or 21mm lens without further expense ....

 

I now know my future path, and it definately, categorically, isn't the M8. AC

[astral]

Oops "50 year of camera" above should be "50 year old camera". That slipped through the Spooling Chocker! AC

[blakley]

The best evidence I've seen indicates that while the ASPH elements in the 50/1.2 were not produced using CNC machinery, they were machine ground with intensive hand inspection and lots of rejects.

[Spearhead]

<i>What brand doesn't have issues? I drive a Toyota Camry that at 10,000 miles needed the seat track replaced. Cost for a new part? 1400 bucks. Yet Toyota has a reputation for building some of the most reliable cars in the world. </i><p>

 

Ray, there's a fundamental problem in your analogy. Quality/reliability is statistical - it is based on averages. On average, Toyota probably does build the most reliable vehicles. That does not mean, as you found out, that every Toyota has a reliability problem, in fact, the opposite is obviously true.<p>

 

The problem with the M8 is a design flaw. That is not statistical, even if not all devices exhibit the problem. It's obvious from Leica's response that this is not just a couple units that fell at the perimeter of the qc metrics, it's a design error that they haven't figured out how to solve. If it was simply a qc problem, it would be easy to take back the flawed units and repair them, not tell people to fix it themselves.

[rj]

"And filters are $200, and who wants to swap filters with every lens change and they do not exist for lots of sizes."

 

I don't like the idea of using a filter in front of the lens when I don't have to and I still think that Leica will address this issue with future M8 cameras, but I have to argue with your price of the filters. The 39mm and 46mm B+W 489 filter costs 59.95 each, not 200.

 

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=Search&A=details&Q=&sku=8371&is=REG&addedTroughType=search

[rj]

"there's a fundamental problem in your analogy. Quality/reliability is statistical "

 

Ray just picked the wrong vehicle to base his analogy on. There is a fundamental design problem with Chevy full sized trucks and has been one for years. Their idler arms go bad quickly and must be constantly replaced to keep your front wheels steering correctly. Go out in any parking lot and look at a few chevy truck tires. If they are at all a bit old I will bet you they are showing alignment wear. Chevy knows it and hasn't fixed the design.

 

This is not limited to Chevy trucks either. Ford trucks have a gigantic problem with their coil packs going bad. The vehicle starts to miss badly showing a check engine light and freaking the owner out. I replaced two out today on two separate vehicles. We keep 30 of the things in stock at all times because we replace them out so much. Don't even ask about Chrysler automatic transmissions and their problems. There is a company that can sell swamp land in Florida to anybody.

 

These are design defect that shows up model year to model year and isn't fixed by the engineering teams. Most of the time these issues are fixed at the owners expense. I hope and have faith that Leica fixes these sensor issues in the future M8 cameras mostly because I am going to get one, but partly because it will end these numerous lame threads.

[Spearhead]

Is that why we see so many Toyota trucks on the road now? Is that the solution to Leica's problems?

 

BTW, I couldn't find any results on "Chevy idler arm problems" on a google search.

[rj]

Toyota can certainly make a good vehicle.

 

There is no doubt about it, Leica needs to fix the sensor issues in the M8, making users buy a filter to get a decent black is lame. I think they will fix cameras that are now being produced, but I am still undecided as to what they will do for current owners. Will they retrofit the sensor for the first buyers or just tell them to get the filters? It seems a good question for owners to ask their reps, not a very good question for internet forums because it seems to highten the level of hysteria and conjecture for people who don't even have the camera.

[jtdnyc]

<The problem with the M8 is a design flaw.>

 

Jeff, are you sure of this?

 

It's obviously a design compromise, since it isn't perfect. But before calling it a flaw, wouldn't you want to identify a better solution given the design parameters: rangefinder lenses, expected image quality and USD5000 price point?

 

So far, the calls on this forum for a proper internal IR filter all ignore the point that Leica seems to think that stronger internal filtration would lead to other optical aberrations that would be even harder to correct.

 

I'm not arguing that Leica's solution is ideal (it isn't) or that it's the best possible solution. Lacking a personal optical design department, I don't know what the best solution is. But before I accept that Leica's solution is the wrong one, I would like to hear the critics present a much more specific alternative.

[bobatkins]

The problem isn't that Leica chose a particular "solution" to the "problem", it's more that they didn't bother to tell people. If they knew all along that under some circumstances you might need to use an external IR blocking filter, you'd perhaps have thought they might have mentioned it. It's not like every other camera needs the same thing. In fact it's not like ANY other camera needs the same thing. If that was their solution to the problem of a limited thickness filter in front of the sensor, why did they keep it to themselves. They knew about it because beta testers told them. Why wait and see if any customers notice. 20 years ago they'd probably have gotten away with it. They clearly didn't count on the "new fangled" internet as an information distrubution channel.

 

If a $499 Nikon D40 did this, you could say, OK, what do you expect for $499. However the M8 is far from $499.

 

Leica aren't alone in releasing products with known defects of course, they've just joined the "get it out of the door before it's obsolete" club. Microsoft do it all the time and even Canon and Nikon have been known to play the game.

[ilkka]

Epson RD-1 does not seem to have any of these serious problems. Surely something could be learned from there. Sure, it is 1.5 crop and sure the image quality is not quite as good. But overall, it seems like the better camera. And it works well with uncoded Zeiss or even Cosina lenses that cost about as much as the Leica charger. Without any additional filters. I have an M6. I wanted to buy the M8. I am starting to get interested in the RD-1.

[jtdnyc]

Bob, I'm not sure they were trying to "get it out the door before it's obsolete," but they may have been trying to get it out the door for under $5000, as previously indicated. Trying to make sense of this chain of events, I suspect they knew about the problem and realized the "solution" would push the package price over the pre-announced price point.

 

Is another solution possible? Searching for one might have caused them to blow their pre-announced deadline.

 

In any event, I'd be interested to know your opinion of the files that the camera, with IR-block filter in place, is capable of producing. Isn't that what really counts?

[StuartMoxham]

In all fairness the Nikon D70 is sensitive to IR. I have had purple tuxes and have had to correct them. I does not happen all the time. May be dependent on the amount or IR the material reflects and also on the light source to.

[Brad_]

<I>So far, the calls on this forum for a proper internal IR filter all ignore the point that

Leica seems to think that stronger internal filtration would lead to other optical

aberrations that would be even harder to correct.</I><P>

 

How do you <i>know</I> what leica <i>thinks</i>? More likely, with little digital

experience (compared to nikon/canon), they simply made a bad technical trade; ie a

mistake.<P>

 

As far as asking what "solution" people here would offer, that's silly. Most people here do

not have the specialized knowledge and technical background to comment competantly on

the subject. What's sad, it seems leica doesn't either.<P>

 

IMO, Bob A has nailed the likely scenario of events.

[vinay_patel]

"In all fairness the Nikon D70 is sensitive to IR. I have had purple tuxes and have had to correct them. I does not happen all the time. May be dependent on the amount or IR the material reflects and also on the light source to."

 

I've taken hundreds of shots with my D70 at charity galas where the men were in tuxes and the women in black evening gowns and never saw any magenta shift. Of course I'm just an amateur hack, so maybe I'm doing something wrong :-)

[jtdnyc]

Vinay, is it possible you are using a color profile that simply takes the magenta out, which would correct the rendition of the blacks in the tuxedos while perhaps not being noticeable elsewhere in the shot? In fact, such a profile might actually improve the skin tone of some of those charity gala habitues. ;-)

[._._z]

<small><i><blockquote>

 

I have an M7. Bought it cheap

 

</blockquote> </i> </small><p>

 

Haha. Good one.