Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
yanidel
Well-known
Graham, that's a very jaded and cynical view of Leica's motivations. Of course they'll do what's in the best interest of Leica, but that also includes happy customers which otherwise turn into fewer customers. As to your Items 2 & 3, I am not likely to send any lenses to Leica for coding. As you said, there are other convenient sources for this work. Two are shipping today from DAG after coding, while one other (Zeiss) was done earlier by John Milich, and this approach seems preferable to the slower more expensive Jersey Job. 
Last edited:
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
They should follow Nikon's example, who do everything in the best interest of Sony and Zeiss lenses
GrahamWelland
Well-known
Graham, that's a very jaded and cynical view of Leica's motivations. Of course they'll do what's in the best interest of Leica, but that also includes happy customers which otherwise turn into fewer customers. As to your Items 2 & 3, I am not likely to send any lenses to Leica for coding. As you said, there are other convenient sources for this work. Two are shipping today from DAG after coding, while one other (Zeiss) was done earlier by John Milich, and this approach seems preferable to the slower more expensive Jersey Job.
Jaded and cynical? ... yup.
I also absolutely stand by my assertions because technically they could do it tomorrow if they so desired.
The only thing the coding does is provide the current lens model that is used alongside the RF coupling to let the software know what UV/IR correction profile to use. (Just coding a lens isn't enough - the mount must match). You could achieve the same thing with a manual menu selection. The irony is that the 16-18-21 Tri Elmar actually forces you to do this anyway so it's not as if Leica haven't done it already.
BTW, you still shooting the RF 645? Great camera: I used to have one and it's one of the few cameras I miss ... (along with X-Pan & Mamiya 7II).
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Jaded and cynical? ... yup.
I also absolutely stand by my assertions because technically they could do it tomorrow if they so desired.
The only thing the coding does is provide the current lens model that is used alongside the RF coupling to let the software know what UV/IR correction profile to use. (Just coding a lens isn't enough - the mount must match). You could achieve the same thing with a manual menu selection. The irony is that the 16-18-21 Tri Elmar actually forces you to do this anyway so it's not as if Leica haven't done it already.
Why is no one blaming Canon for not fully disclosing their EOS protocol to Sigma free of charge? That way the cheaper-than-Canon Sigma lenses would not produce the occasional Err99 any more.
Cheers,
Uwe
GrahamWelland
Well-known
Uwe,
If I were Leica and had the ability to 'encourage' customers to buy Leica only lenses then I'd also make it difficult for the competition. The price differential between Leica glass and CV/Zeiss is significant and I'm sure that if Leica opened up the camera to make it easy to use other lenses with UV/IR correction then they'd miss out on incremental lens sales. It's common sense not to make it too easy for your competition, let's face it.
Now if the CV & Zeiss lenses were pebbles by comparison to Leica it would be a lot easier ...
I do recall reading a Leica quote about one of the reasons for not making the lens selection available was the concern about user error. That's where I think they really should just 'fess up to the fact that we all know it's got NOTHING to do with that and it's just competitive positioning and control. I don't really have a problem with that so long as they're honest about it. Their tactics have worked with me at least because I have a lot more Leica glass now than I might have done if coding had been easier and less hassle than swapping mounts/marking with (semi)permanent markers or other such inconveniences. (btw, I'm happy to have made the investment actually - I really can't blame my camera/lenses now!)
If I were Leica and had the ability to 'encourage' customers to buy Leica only lenses then I'd also make it difficult for the competition. The price differential between Leica glass and CV/Zeiss is significant and I'm sure that if Leica opened up the camera to make it easy to use other lenses with UV/IR correction then they'd miss out on incremental lens sales. It's common sense not to make it too easy for your competition, let's face it.
Now if the CV & Zeiss lenses were pebbles by comparison to Leica it would be a lot easier ...
I do recall reading a Leica quote about one of the reasons for not making the lens selection available was the concern about user error. That's where I think they really should just 'fess up to the fact that we all know it's got NOTHING to do with that and it's just competitive positioning and control. I don't really have a problem with that so long as they're honest about it. Their tactics have worked with me at least because I have a lot more Leica glass now than I might have done if coding had been easier and less hassle than swapping mounts/marking with (semi)permanent markers or other such inconveniences. (btw, I'm happy to have made the investment actually - I really can't blame my camera/lenses now!)
LeicaMSeattle
Established
That's funny how we're regarding an unaltered M8 already as the "M8 Classic", and M8u for the upgraded classic. Would we refer to the M8.2 as the M8.2.2.04 with the new firmware?
__hh
Well-known
pkreyenhop
Established
Thanks, got it, put it on SD card, switched the camera on and....
Sorry, battery too low for an update :bang:
yanidel
Well-known
Just installed on my M8 Classic, works like a charm .... great !!!
__hh
Well-known
Does the following the deter anyone?
Notes:
a. It is not possible to “downdate” LEICA M8 and M8.2 cameras to previous firmware releases, once the version 2.004 has been installed.
Notes:
a. It is not possible to “downdate” LEICA M8 and M8.2 cameras to previous firmware releases, once the version 2.004 has been installed.
kully
Happy Snapper
hunghang - that is the case for most firmware updates on any hardware.
It shouldn't worry anyone.
It shouldn't worry anyone.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
What a non event ... the clack of the shutter is still very loud on my M8 after the update ... taking away the advance whirr changes little for me!
I just picked up my OM2 and fired the shutter a few times and it's quieter than my M8 in discreet mode!
I just picked up my OM2 and fired the shutter a few times and it's quieter than my M8 in discreet mode!
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
What a non event ... the clack of the shutter is still very loud on my M8 after the update ... taking away the advance whirr changes little for me!
I just picked up my OM2 and fired the shutter a few times and it's quieter than my M8 in discreet mode!
Hmm, interesting. I hold the theory that not all M8s are created equal, and some of them have a shutter louder than most.
I just updated mine, and tried it. The "clank" that you hear first is the actual shutter triggering. If you had the shutter upgrade, that "clank" would go away (I know, I've tried the M8.2 myself, both with normal and "discreet" advance on)
Where I can see this upgrade being most advantageous for me is when taking photos of performing musicians (quartets, recitals, soloists). It's the shutter recocking that is the most distracting and annoying. This too is evidently "fixed" with the shutter upgrade (I don't know why or how, but I know so).
With the original shutter, you can feel it on the M8 body; in the M8.2, you don't feel it at all.
I'm still wrestling with the idea of upgrading (specially, since I don't have the money right now), but I think that if I had the money now I'd do it.
I'm going to give this new firmware a spin and test it in real life, not on the Intertubes
_goodtimez
Well-known
I find it's nice for a free of charge update. For sure it does not transform the original shutter into the new one but there's a distinctive improvement.
I may now just start re-using the M8 after months of inactivity with this camera. Once Leica issues their M9 I may look for a used M8-2 if I can find the money.
I may now just start re-using the M8 after months of inactivity with this camera. Once Leica issues their M9 I may look for a used M8-2 if I can find the money.
boy_lah
Discovering RF
Mine works and I for one am grateful I get 'free' firmware upgrades. Canon would expect you to buy a new camera for any feature upgrades.