Pondria wrote:
I predict that Leica will recall all the M8s to put the IR filter on the sensor as soon as they are ready to do so.
Leica is a bit hard up these days so I don't expect them to recall the M8 for a sensor replacement. However I do expect them to discontinue the M8 as soon as they are ready to produce a sensor that has an effective IR filter. My guess is that such a sensor was already designed as one of the candidates for incorporation into the original M8 so I don't think the original model will be produced much longer.
Does this all mean that the present M8 will not be fixed via hardware by Leica? And does this thread mean that the present owners will continue to use the defective camera without a fight to get it fixed just because it has the Leica name on it? Sorry just trying to catch up on this thread.
Guy Mancuso wrote:
Larry there going in for a hardware fix. There still needs to be another firmware 1.10 or higher for the cyan cast with IR filters and also some color profiles. BTW I won't be giving up getting it to almost perfect working order
Good for you Guy! I hope you guys fight to the end and the Leica group deserves a perfect camera for your collection of great lenses.
There can be only two h/w fixes in this case. IR filter on the sensor or on the lens. Leica owners like neither one. Fix via Firmware and color profile wouldn't be robust ( I guess ).
Larry welcome back And I heard the SD14release was pushed out further. Sorry about that.
Pondria wrote:
I predict that Leica will recall all the M8s to put the IR filter on the sensor as soon as they are ready to do so.
Pondria, I would agree that is very clearly what Leica should do, however, their corporate arrogance is showing with their band-aid filter the lens fix and I doubt they will pony up to do the right thing...
The lens filter they are suggesting is actually made of the same material they should have put over the sensor in the first place! And get this little touch of irony -- the factor of the absorption 770nm IR cut filter is log 1.2... Log factor of 1.2 means there is a 2/3 stop loss. Guess what 2/3rds stop off ISO 160 is? Yep, ISO 100 on the dot!
Maybe this is nothing more than a conspiracy theory on my part, but it sure looks like hte sensor was designed for a 770nm IR cut filter to begin with, and some moron engineer at Solms decided they could get away with the 700nm IR cut filter instead and gain 2/3 stop. And now M8 owners are paying a steep price for that corporate screw up.
Personally, I doubt leica will ever step up to the plate and do the right thing; a total recall to replace the sensor's IR cut filter with the right one. It is simply going to be too expensive and their corporate greed will get in the way...
On the bright side however, I think the M8 in its current trim may be an ideal dedicated B&W camera.
So if I were Leica, I would immediatly re-brand the M8 to the M8-B with a B&W checkerboard logo on the top plate, and just as immediately release the M8-C for color with the the proper IR cut filter and a little RGB color logo on the top plate! But hey, I have ZERO input weight with Leica
Jack,
Interesting theory. I thought they went naked to preserve the sharpness of their lenses. I never thought about ISO part. Interesting.
And I think the decision was probably made by Marketing Engineers are not born to take such risk. That's why they became engineers in the beginning.
But the ideas like using 3D curvature micro-lens array and firmware handling of radius dependent color cast were probably from Engineering.
Pondria wrote:
There can be only two h/w fixes in this case. IR filter on the sensor or on the lens. Leica owners like neither one. Fix via Firmware and color profile wouldn't be robust ( I guess ).
Larry welcome back And I heard the SD14release was pushed out further. Sorry about that.
Thanks Pondria.
It was sad for me but I can wait. I'm glad they found the hardware issue and opted to fix it rather than patching it up with software.
Larry,
Reading their press release, I am speculating that the issue may be similar to what M8 is seeing now - IR or aliasing or somehting similar in nature.
And I think it is responsible that they decide to fix the problem before releasing.
Pondria wrote:
Larry,
Reading their press release, I am speculating that the issue may be similar to what M8 is seeing now - IR or aliasing or somehting similar in nature.
And I think it is responsible that they decide to fix the problem before releasing.
What I heard was that a component was disrupting data at certain conditions in that it was introducing noise and they had to redesign some component or location of a component. I would think a camera with 3 processors may produce more electrical interferences more so than one with one processor. This seems to fit the timeline for the new release date of March. Pure speculation on my part.
Jack Flesher said: Pondria, I would agree that is very clearly what Leica should do, however, their corporate arrogance is showing with their band-aid filter the lens fix and I doubt they will pony up to do the right thing...
I was thinking the same thing Jack.
In the early 60s I was using an M3, later "upgraded" to an M4. Had some shutter related problems with the M4, and had to fight my way through the "It is a user issue" types at Leica to obtain warranty repair. The word "arrogance" crossed my mind back then.
I guess they could have that attitude since at the time their lens performance had no peers, and that pretty much is true today. The norm on there bodies was also excellent quality.
