Pop-photo article about M8 problems.

[BrianPhotog]

I'm not a Leica basher and I could see myself buying an M8 down the road, but I am a little put off by their response to Popular Photography.

Where I would have expected to have seen an apology, I see words like "ideal", "creative" and "big advantages". Leica is in a tough spot, but they've done themselves no favors with their comments to PP.

I mentioned the lack of an apology in their public statement here...but I can't find the post.

 

[Kim Coxon]

I have not offered an opion on the M8. I don't have one to comment on and am unlikely to get one. However, I do not think it fair to say that Leica is disconnected from their current customer base. Rather, I think it is more likely that the "enthusiast" end of the market on forums such as RFF is disconnected from Leica.

IMHO, it would be naive to think that Leica's primary consideration is to users such as those on this and other frums. The prime responsibility is to their shareholders as an international company. Putting aside the M8 for the time being, how many members of this forum have brought new Leica items in the last year or so? I suspect only a handful. Is the M8 important to Leica? Of course it is but not to regain a portion of the pro market or to wean enthusiasts off the dSLRs. I don't think there is a bis enough "enthusiast" market to support Leica and as to the pro market, Leica recognised that they had lost the bulk of that when they made the decision to stop production of the M's and the Canada episode began.

Look at some of the recent threads here and other places. The Queen likes Leica as do some other "celebs". I am not privy to Leica's sales figures but I suspect that the largest portion of their sales come from richer people who like the "best". The same sort of people who buy their clothes from the designer houses, Roll Royces etc. The next largest income is from the rich "collector" market especially in the Far East. How many threads are there that talk about shrink wrapped unused special editions. With the shrinkage of the film market, Leica need a high quality digital to maintain the former market and the performance of the M8 will not affect the shrinkwrap part. The "issues" (however you wish to describe them) have created a "firestorm" of internet activity in a very small specialized group of websites. Leica have acknowledged this and are seeking to address it. IMHO, their priority will be to find a solution which is satisfactory to the bulk of their customer base.

I will be interested to find out what is said in the photographic press. I suspect it will not be nearly so critacal as on the forums and as yet I have yet to find the story on CNN, the BBC or on the news items on MSN Google et al

Kim

What I find amazing is how disconnected Leica seems to be from their current customer base. These cameras are being sold to some pretty damn serious photographers (pro and amateur) who are keenly examing every image the new camera makes for nuances of color, sharpness, contrast, etc. This is also a sophisticated crowd that will instantly make their findings known via the Internet. How could Leica be so shortsighted as to not realize the calamity this defect would visit on them?

 

[jaapv]

Colour fidelity is an essential element of file quality, surely? This is true even shooting in b&w, tones will simply be wrong if IR is insufficiently filtered. An individual may like the result, but that's a different question. A camera that cannot produce something close to correct colour has poor file quality, end of story, regardless of any other qualities the files have.

I hope Leica fix it, the last thing I want to see is the M8 failing. Buying additional filiters and mandating the use of coded lenses is a guarantee that nobody apart from existing Leica fans will buy the thing.

Amateur Photographer have a review scheduled for next week's issue. I'll be interested to see if that goes ahead, if it does and AP report the problems I shudder to think what that will do to sales in the UK outside the usual fans.

Ian

Colour fidelity seems to me to be totally subjective in photography. What film has absolute colour fidelity: Sensia or Provia or Ektachrome or Kodachrome? Having said that and considering the spirit of your post, you misread Han's meaning. His point was that the M8 has excellent colour rendering if handled correctly and the magenta cast is only a very occasional occurence which can be managed, and in extreme cases needs a fiter (far less than 5 % of the shots in general photography in my experience). Leica's stupidity was that they did not publicize this before releasing the camera and that a defective C1 profile was supplied. Even with this "problem" the camera still seems to be backordered for months....

 

[iml]

Colour fidelity seems to me to be totally subjective in photography.

Actually it isn't. Colour is very precisely measurable. It's certainly true that accurate colour rendition isn't necessarily the most important thing in photography - creative photography often deviates from accuracy to achieve its effects - but a camera with gross colour deviations is a different question. When a photographer chooses a specific film or post-processing technique to manipulate colour they are making a conscious creative decision, when a camera makes blacks magenta regardless of the photographer's intention, it's a defect in the camera's file quality.

What film has absolute colour fidelity: Sensia or Provia or Ektachrome or Kodachrome?

None of them, I said: "A camera that cannot produce something close to correct colour has poor file quality". I'm not talking about absolute fidelity. But I think most people would agree blacks showing as magenta is too gross a distortion to be routinely acceptable.

Having said that and considering the spirit of your post, you misread Han's meaning. His point was that the M8 has excellent colour rendering if handled correctly and the magenta cast is only a very occasional occurence which can be managed, and in extreme cases needs a fiter (far less than 5 % of the shots in general photography in my experience).

I've read threads from M8 owners where they describe the problem as affecting 50% or more of their pictures. In fact, the precise number is impossible to say, as IR absorption rates vary so much for different materials it's actually impossible to gauge when you're shooting whether you're going to face a noticeable problem.

Leica's stupidity was that they did not publicize this before releasing the camera and that a defective C1 profile was supplied. Even with this "problem" the camera still seems to be backordered for months....

That's because Leica have small production runs and a loyal fan base. The first few months' production was sold out long before the camera was even in production, and long before anyone knew how many problems the camera would have.

Ian

 

[Socke]

There is one problem, if I have a film with a visible colour cast I don't like, I use another film next time. Cost ranging from 0.75 Euro for the cheapest C41 to some 15 Euro for the most expensive E6, add another 3 to 5 Euro for processing.

You can have a faulty film or the lab may make an error, I just got back a roll EB-3 which has, drum roll, a strong magenta cast , the other 9 rolls from the brick are fine and where developed in the same lab but a couple weeks earlier.

Again, not much of a problem, I lost a couple shots which aren't worth to be rescued anyways.

But with a camera which might be used in jpeg without postprocessing just like I use slide film and which has a magenta cast in every picture including synthetic black fabrics, and may be green foliage as some reported, and streaks and ghosting won't tempt me much.

After all, how many people here claim that film is easy to use and does not need any postprocessing? Leica just proofed that those are right, want to use your Leica lenses to the limit? Buy Portra!

 

[Kim Coxon]

Excluding, the problems of faulty film or poor processing, there has always been a slight problem with colour shifts with film. It has been less of a problem with print because of the post processing in the lab (replaced by photoshop) but different light temperatures have always affected slides. Use a daylight balanced film in tungsten and you get a funny colour caste. If you try to take photos at altitude, you can get problems with UV. This has easily been solved by the use of filters. There are a whole list of "warming" and "cooling" filters to get the "right" colour balance. In my younger days, I used to do a fair amount of theatrical lighting. The whole ambience on the stage can be quite markedly altered by the use of very pale straw or steel gels or even by the slight change in the light level as the colour temperature of the bulbs will vary with intensity.

So to get the "right" or "perfect" colour rendition with slide film, photographers have been using filters for many years and using post processing with print film. Is this so much different from using an IR filter with the M8?

Kim

There is one problem, if I have a film with a visible colour cast I don't like, I use another film next time. Cost ranging from 0.75 Euro for the cheapest C41 to some 15 Euro for the most expensive E6, add another 3 to 5 Euro for processing.

You can have a faulty film or the lab may make an error, I just got back a roll EB-3 which has, drum roll, a strong magenta cast , the other 9 rolls from the brick are fine and where developed in the same lab but a couple weeks earlier.

Again, not much of a problem, I lost a couple shots which aren't worth to be rescued anyways.

But with a camera which might be used in jpeg without postprocessing just like I use slide film and which has a magenta cast in every picture including synthetic black fabrics, and may be green foliage as some reported, and streaks and ghosting won't tempt me much.

After all, how many people here claim that film is easy to use and does not need any postprocessing? Leica just proofed that those are right, want to use your Leica lenses to the limit? Buy Portra!

 

[jaapv]

I've read threads from M8 owners where they describe the problem as affecting 50% or more of their pictures. In fact, the precise number is impossible to say, as IR absorption rates vary so much for different materials it's actually impossible to gauge when you're shooting whether you're going to face a noticeable problem.

That may very well be because they are using the faulty C1 profile - it was the same with me until I started using other profiles. The firmware will have to be corrected as well for those that wish to shoot JPG. I feel though, that the average jpg shooter would be well advised to save more than 4000 $ and buy for instance a V-Lux1, that is virtually guaranteed to be more successful for the casual snapshot shooter.

 

[Socke]

That may very well be because they are using the faulty C1 profile - it was the same with me until I started using other profiles. The firmware will have to be corrected as well for those that wish to shoot JPG. I feel though, that the average jpg shooter would be well advised to save more than 4000 $ and buy for instance a V-Lux1, that is virtually guaranteed to be more successful for the casual snapshot shooter.

I know a lot of people who wouldn't consider themselfes snapshooters and wouldn't be too happy with a P&S.
The PJ's I know deliver jpgs to the papers for several reasons, and those are often directly out of the camera to the layouter with any postprocessing.
Probably the reason to use Canon 1d or Nikon D2 cameras with prepared colour profiles for the paper.

 

[Socke]

Excluding, the problems of faulty film or poor processing, there has always been a slight problem with colour shifts with film.
.
.
.
.
.

So to get the "right" or "perfect" colour rendition with slide film, photographers have been using filters for many years and using post processing with print film. Is this so much different from using an IR filter with the M8?

Kim

Yes, I admit that, but usualy you tried to get a film suitable for the light you could expect, i.E. nobody would have taken a lot of tungsten balanced film to a wintersport resort

 

[jaapv]

I know a lot of people who wouldn't consider themselfes snapshooters and wouldn't be too happy with a P&S.
The PJ's I know deliver jpgs to the papers for several reasons, and those are often directly out of the camera to the layouter with any postprocessing.
Probably the reason to use Canon 1d or Nikon D2 cameras with prepared colour profiles for the paper.

That is correct; and those are the ones Leica needs to update the firmware and/or adapt the hardware for.On the other hand, it takes some doing to make a photograph unsuitable for newspaper printing.
I meant the dentist-status crowd.

 

[Kim Coxon]

No, but you may well have to correct for cloud, morning/evening light etc. One of the reasons for using a colour meter rather than just an exposure meter.

Kim

Yes, I admit that, but usualy you tried to get a film suitable for the light you could expect, i.E. nobody would have taken a lot of tungsten balanced film to a wintersport resort

 

[Maronati]

To me, the only way for Leica to solve this problem is to re-think the sensor design decision and recall all cameras sold, fix it and continue on. I think it's an outrage to expect the consumer to have to go buy a filter for every lens they own after spending 5K on the body alone.
I was under the impression that Leica wanted to get back in to the pro game, but to be able to compete with the likes of Canon or Nikon they are going to have to learn to make better design decisions and make this M8 better than the usual DSLR out there.
In regards to the solution of lens coding, I find it lame at best. I can't believe that they coudn't solve this issue with a in camera programing.
For all the simplicity and precision engeneering Leica is known for, it seems that they are doing just the oposite with this camera development.
I think I'll wait a bit longer.....

 

[madmaxmedia]

If we go along your line of thinking, I guess it was naive to expect Leica to release a $5000 camera that actually shot black correctly. Maybe the Queen actually like that effect!

I'm not sure what the largest target market of Leica owners would be, but it's also tremendously naive to expect that a defective product won't affect your bottom line, and dissatisfy the shareholders.

Celebs like Leica because of image. An image that has been carefully nurtured over many decades. It is naive to think that a problematic digital M won't have a tremendous effect on the company in the long run (if said problems are not adequately resolved.)

You'll not find much news in the popular press, because Leica is a niche company now. Their flagship M line is film (until now), and we know where film has gone. The M8 is Leica's big chance to maintain its relevance in the 21st Century, whether it is among enthusiasts or petty celebrities who are buying a red dot. But again, why are they buying the red dot? Because Leica has a reputation of quality and luxury. A reputation that must be maintained if people are to think they are still 'the best' 5 years from now.

If (and I say this hypothetically since I think Leica will adequately resolve this) they were not to present an adequate solution to the M8 problems, it is inevitable that you will see a trickle-down effect through the years. Who do you think are all the people on the waiting lists now anciously re-considering their orders? Largely enthusiasts is my guess.

You do not seem to have a thorough understanding of marketing and PR, and how it ultimately impacts a company's bottom line. Either that or you seem extremely apologist in your post (which itself may be in response to Leica bashing.) I think it's hard for people to keep an even keel right now.

IMHO, it would be naive to think that Leica's primary consideration is to users such as those on this and other frums. The prime responsibility is to their shareholders as an international company. Putting aside the M8 for the time being, how many members of this forum have brought new Leica items in the last year or so? I suspect only a handful. Is the M8 important to Leica? Of course it is but not to regain a portion of the pro market or to wean enthusiasts off the dSLRs. I don't think there is a bis enough "enthusiast" market to support Leica and as to the pro market, Leica recognised that they had lost the bulk of that when they made the decision to stop production of the M's and the Canada episode began.

Look at some of the recent threads here and other places. The Queen likes Leica as do some other "celebs". I am not privy to Leica's sales figures but I suspect that the largest portion of their sales come from richer people who like the "best". The same sort of people who buy their clothes from the designer houses, Roll Royces etc. The next largest income is from the rich "collector" market especially in the Far East. How many threads are there that talk about shrink wrapped unused special editions. With the shrinkage of the film market, Leica need a high quality digital to maintain the former market and the performance of the M8 will not affect the shrinkwrap part. The "issues" (however you wish to describe them) have created a "firestorm" of internet activity in a very small specialized group of websites. Leica have acknowledged this and are seeking to address it. IMHO, their priority will be to find a solution which is satisfactory to the bulk of their customer base.

I will be interested to find out what is said in the photographic press. I suspect it will not be nearly so critacal as on the forums and as yet I have yet to find the story on CNN, the BBC or on the news items on MSN Google et al

Kim

 

[madmaxmedia]

So to get the "right" or "perfect" colour rendition with slide film, photographers have been using filters for many years and using post processing with print film. Is this so much different from using an IR filter with the M8?

Kim

I agree that a filter is not the end of the world, but I think the main contention is why it should be needed at all? It's not needed with just about any other decent digital camera.

Of course, this is all hindsight (for us.) So now an M8 owner can at least make do and get some filters. But it seems to me that this problem was probably discovered late during the development process, when it might have been too late to try to correct. That is the most unfortunate thing. All the teeth-gnashing in the world cannot change that. I think Leica more than anyone knows what is riding on the M8, and would not have developed the camera knowing about the magenta issue the entire time.

The only question is whether it would have been better for Leica to be upfront about the issue when the camera was released, rather than wait a few days and let the users discover the problem. I'm assuming that Leica knew, it would be hard for me to imagine they didn't (but could still be the case.)

It's shortsighted to think you can bury something under the rug, especially a product so anticipated as the M8. Doing that only makes you look worse after the problem is exposed. But again, we don't know for sure what Leica knew and when.

I don't own an M8 right now, so it's no big deal to me anyways. I'll wait and see what Leica does...

 

[Maronati]

I think that, with all new technology there is always a period of adjustments to work out the kinks and I'm sure this will all be sorted out.
Whatever Leica does now is going to be key for the success of the M8.

 

[jlw]

Did everyone read the two papers from Sunex that were linked to the Pop Photo article? There's some excellent info in there about anti-aliasing filters and the problems presented by a steep "chief ray angle" (the optically official way of describing the problem of putting a digital sensor into a shallow-bodied RF camera.)

I learned quite a bit from these two brief papers, including the fact that anti-aliasing filters do NOT just soften the image overall (they're actually precise sandwiches of birefringent crystals that pass coarse details unimpaired while blocking out fine details via interference) and how and why excess chief ray angle causes not only vignetting, but color shifts.


Meanwhile, on the M8 rumor front, a poster on the Leica User Group board said today he talked directly to a product rep at Solms about his problems with his M8, and was told that Leica has determined that the bleeding and ghosting problems are being caused by a defective sensor circuit board (as several technically-minded posters had suspected) and that an announcement will be made, possibly as soon as Monday, about a recall to replace these defective boards. This should be good news for anxious M8 owners, as it means the problem is NOT the sensor itself (which would take a major effort to redesign) and shouldn't cost the company too much to fix.

No new gossip on the unrelated issue of the magenta cast, which in my view is less serious than the bleeding and ghosting (it doesn't bother b&w photographers, and can be controlled in color via addition of a filter, although admittedly a hella expensive filter.)

The consensus best guess at this stage is that Leica is going to recommend IR-cut filters to anyone who's concerned about the issue, so that people who don't do kinds of photography where the magenta cast tends to occur can opt out of the solution. (Leica already has said that a thicker over-the-sensor IR filter would cause color fringing, and at least some Leica shooters would rather risk the occasional purple cow than deal with that.)

Me? Well, I'm sure that eventually the M8 will mature into a terrific RF camera that I'll want to buy someday. For now, I'm glad that a couple of years ago I did NOT listen to all those people who said the Epson R-D 1 was an unreliable turkey and anybody who would buy one must be an idiot or be crazy. (Yes, it's been shown that the R-D 1 produces some IR effects under some conditions, but the results are a lot less obtrusive than those of the M8, and seem to show up only in a much narrower range of situations.)

Unrelated thought: I wonder if some day "unfixed," first-series M8s will be wildly valuable collectors' items, much the same way that the few remaining "non-standardized" Leica I Cs are today. (N.B. -- The I C, which did not yet have a rangefinder, was the first Leica to take interchangeable lenses -- but on the first run of cameras, the lenses weren't freely interchangeable; a specific set of lenses had to be matched to a specific body. Later, Leica got smart and introduced a standardized lensmount which did allow free interchangeability, and of course most sensible photographers sent in their non-standardized 1 C cameras to have them converted to the standardized mount. This makes the few remaining non-standardized cameras extra-rare...)

 

[dcsang]

They said, "no recall" but that does not rule out sending cameras back for repair. .

That is my understandging based on threads I've read elsewhere.

There is rumour of a sensor switch as well.

Apparently official word could come on Monday.


Dave (late to the party)

 

[Nachkebia]

I had a very strange dream, as if I woke up and I found Leica M8.5 on my table, I asked my wife and se said leica delivered it

 

[ywenz]

I just threw down $4800 for a 5D and 85mm 1.2L. I guess I put my money where my mouth is. I bought into the more capable camera.

 

[willie_901]

I just threw down $4800 for a 5D and 85mm 1.2L. I guess I put my money where my mouth is. I bought into the more capable camera.

Good call!

If image quality is the first priority, this is the best digital bang for the $$$$.

willie