M8 Magenta Cast

[britboy]

I havn't been entirely happy with digital cameras irrespective of make or model, too many menu's, too many sub menu's and far too many buttons to push. I thought my salvation had come with the M8, so toddled off to my Leica dealer to have a test run. The first test shots were outside in late afternoon, bright but cloudy and the subject was the camera shop owner dressed in a black shirt and jeans. The results on the camera screen showed a pronounced magenta cast that a grape crusher would have been proud of. How on earth could Leica get this so wrong? did they know about the problem? of course they did,( the alternative theory is that their testing is flawed- unthinkable to devoted Leica owners I'm sure) to my mind it's a fundamental design flaw and they obviously couldn't fix it in time for Photokina release. If i'm spending £3000 on a camera body, the basics, ie colour repro need to be state of the art and the M8 in it's present form isn't.
OK, I probably would be able to tweak the files to an acceptable level, but lifes too short!  
I won't be buying one yet and if canon sort out their mirror lock up menu problem maybe never.
What do other members think, fair comment or not?

[michael]

Oh please, not again.

You may have missed the fact that this topic has been discussed ad-mausium on this board as well as every other net forum for the past two weeks. You might wish to look at these earlier discussions.

Every high tech product has its issues. Both Nikon and Canon have shipped numerous cameras with banding, back focus, and other anomolies. Sony today has shipped 750,000 Playstation IIIs that have major compatability problems. These things happen, and then get sorted out.

Leica has stated that they recognize the IR problem and that they will have a solution to announce in short order. In the meantime shipments to dealers have stopped temporarily.

Michael

[jeffok]

Oh please, not again.

Every high tech product has its issues.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85206\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Michael, interesting that you feel that this is just a product that has "its issues". I seem to recall on this site that you stated: " What I can say at the moment is that this camera is outstanding, producing some of the most remarkable image quality that I've ever seen from any camera, film or digital. " Granted that you added the qualifier "at the moment". However, as it turns out, this is more than a "tempest in teapot".
I don't own a Leica so you can write off my comment if you like, but I think many (not necessarily on this site) would agree that it is a major major issue for Leica's first foray into digital and where such a long legacy of brand equity is at stake. Let's be honest Michael, this cameras is a big disappointment at the very least, and until they find a seamless and cost-less fix (unlikely I would guess), a $5,000 investment in it is hardly justifiable.

Too bad, but maybe I'm jsut not very sentimental....

[DarkPenguin]

Michael, interesting that you feel that this is just a product that has "its issues". I seem to recall on this site that you stated: " What I can say at the moment is that this camera is outstanding, producing some of the most remarkable image quality that I've ever seen from any camera, film or digital. " Granted that you added the qualifier "at the moment". However, as it turns out, this is more than a "tempest in teapot".
I don't own a Leica so you can write off my comment if you like, but I think many (not necessarily on this site) would agree that it is a major major issue for Leica's first foray into digital and where such a long legacy of brand equity is at stake. Let's be honest Michael, this cameras is a big disappointment at the very least, and until they find a seamless and cost-less fix (unlikely I would guess), a $5,000 investment in it is hardly justifiable.

Too bad, but maybe I'm jsut not very sentimental....
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85310\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I should think that his use of the sentence "What I can say at the moment is that this camera is outstanding, producing some of the most remarkable image quality that I've ever seen from any camera, film or digital." would rather indicate that it is a "tempest in a teapot."  (That is if the sub one percent bad image rate didn't already convince.)

[dlashier]

... for Leica's first foray into digital and where such a long legacy of brand equity is at stake.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85310\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Where have you been? The Leica DMR has been around for quite a while, and iirc to nothing but stellar reviews and devoted owners.

- DL

[michael]

Look – the M8 is a somewhat flawed product at the moment. I didn't know it then. I do know it now.

But, the flaws do not detract from the fact that it does indeed produce stunning image quality and is a joy to use. Sorry if you don't get it, but if you visit the Leica Digital Forum you'll see that there are quite a few current and potential owners that do.

No excuses. Leica screwed up. I missed some obvious defects in my review. But, as I've writen before, no regrets that I got one. If the camera were discontinued today I would still be happy that i bought mine. In fact i just ordered two new lenses for it this week.

I'm now over a thousand frames with it and have only seen serious megenta casts and green blobs in less than 5 frames. The use of the P30 profile even dealt with the worst magenta that I've seen, and if there were no further fix I could live with it as the sole solution.

I have seen no banding. I have seen poor low light auto-white balance which I expect to be fixed in the first firmware rev. I have seen resolution that appears to come from medium format. I've seen a lot of things, and will continue to report what I see, the good and the bad.

Michael

[britboy]

Michael, sorry to trigger your " Oh no not again" it just so happens that this is the very first forum I have joined so hence the reason I havn't seen any other posts or discussions, also the site showed no searches on the topic M8 for me before I posted. One thing I forgot to applaud on my brief use was the user interface on the camera, very slick and much easier than my canons. It seems from the replies that you and other devoted Leica owners are prepared to accept the shortcomings much more than potential owners. That's fine, we all make our choices and write the cheque.

Jeff.

[glennedens]

Micheal,

Just got back from Alain's and Uwe's Digital Summit and had a chance to review the Leica M8 and Hasselblad H2/CFH39 images.  The M8 images are stunning, i am seeing a very strong yellow cast every once in a while on bright sunlight scenes (no changes in exposure), any ideas?  Magenta cast images are rare, shooting fellow photographer's camera bags is amusing.  I am also seeing what to me is a increased ability of the camera to attract dust, have you noticed this?

And if i may ask a really dumb question, where is the Leica Digital Forum?

Finally what lenses have you picked for what reasons?  I sold all of my Leica M6 gear in 1990 so I have to start over ;-)

Thank you,

Glenn

[Sunyata]

Leica digital forum:

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/

unless michael was refering to one at Luminous Landscape, in whick case it does not show up in any searches.

Sunyata

[britboy]

Look – the M8 is a somewhat flawed product at the moment. I didn't know it then. I do know it now.

But, the flaws do not detract from the fact that it does indeed produce stunning image quality and is a joy to use. Sorry if you don't get it, but if you visit the Leica Digital Forum you'll see that there are quite a few current and potential owners that do.

No excuses. Leica screwed up. I missed some obvious defects in my review. But, as I've writen before, no regrets that I got one. If the camera were discontinued today I would still be happy that i bought mine. In fact i just ordered two new lenses for it this week.

I'm now over a thousand frames with it and have only seen serious megenta casts and green blobs in less than 5 frames. The use of the P30 profile even dealt with the worst magenta that I've seen, and if there were no further fix I could live with it as the sole solution.

I have seen no banding. I have seen poor low light auto-white balance which I expect to be fixed in the first firmware rev. I have seen resolution that appears to come from medium format. I've seen a lot of things, and will continue to report what I see, the good and the bad.

Michael
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85337\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

[britboy]

Michael, I'm a bit confused, in your review of the Canon G7 you ended by saying that the prints from this camera were mixed with shots from the M8 and that it took close examination to tell them apart. So I guess this places the image quality from the G7 right along side the M8. It would be very, very interesting for you to do an online post of new images, ( say for one week) shot with both cameras for people to say which picture they think came from which camera. What's the point? well i'd love to see if most people could actually tell the difference between what this should all be about, the final image. Carrying on with the ( oh no not again) M8 Magenta problem and 'Solution' by tweaking the blacks in the image via profiles, Iv'e looked at the images on the thread at the leica-users.com site and yes the magenta cast is much reduced, but to my eyes it's nowhere near a good black and for my line of work, where I photograph a lot of social and commercial 'people' having to do this would be annoying to say the least. I would love to have a 'fixed' M8 to use, and hope Leica can provide a proper answer. Does anyone know if the DMR has experienced any of these issues and if not, will the DMR provide the clues or answer to the M8 fix?

[eronald]

I own one.

If you shoot oudoors daytime nature or landscape you'll never see an issue.
If you do black and white the daytime, the camera is beautiful.
If you shoot people daytime, there will be some, minor IR problems in which black clothes turn plum-colored.
If you shoot in artificial light and/or night and evening, then you can expect every second shot to get messed up.

This explains why some people never see the problems and others get so upset.

Edmund

[dlashier]

I own one.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85831\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Edmund, are you referring to DMR or M8?

- DL

[eronald]

Edmund, are you referring to DMR or M8?

- DL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85837\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I refer to the defective M8; the DMR has no such issues. Which makes the whole story of how this design got past the in-house testers even more puzzling.

And let me be clear: I own a M8. The conversion of Leica mechanical to Leica digital is very good, but the sensor lets the product down. With a sensor re-engineered to deal with the IR and banding this would be an unbeatable product. As it stands I can unreservedly recommend it to landscape and urban daytime shooters, in particular to those who like black and white. Anyone  who needs a color-accurate camera for use in artifical light should either use filters or wait for the sensor to be fixed.

Edmund

[jani]

It would be very, very interesting for you to do an online post of new images, ( say for one week) shot with both cameras for people to say which picture they think came from which camera. What's the point? well i'd love to see if most people could actually tell the difference between what this should all be about, the final image.

The images we see on the web page are resized to so small a size that you'd have a hard time telling the difference between a successful shot from a Canon PowerShot S30, an OM-2 with 200 ASA Superia and a Contax 645 with the P45 back.

You can use almost anything for a successful web image.

Such a test would therefore be completely uninteresting to me, and I suspect that most others feel the same way.

[britboy]

The images we see on the web page are resized to so small a size that you'd have a hard time telling the difference between a successful shot from a Canon PowerShot S30, an OM-2 with 200 ASA Superia and a Contax 645 with the P45 back.

You can use almost anything for a successful web image.

Such a test would therefore be completely uninteresting to me, and I suspect that most others feel the same way.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85867\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Jani, I have to disagree, otherwise michael is wasting his time posting pictures on the LL website.
I'm obviously not referring to thumbnails ( where you would be correct) but to the enlarged image on a new page, created when clicking on a picture, I for one can certainly see the increased quality created by a Medium format digital back on a good quality high res monitor screen.

Jeff

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

Jani, I have to disagree, otherwise michael is wasting his time posting pictures on the LL website.
I'm obviously not referring to thumbnails ( where you would be correct) but to the enlarged image on a new page, created when clicking on a picture, I for one can certainly see the increased quality created by a Medium format digital back on a good quality high res monitor screen.

Jeff
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85911\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The enlarged current homepage image is a 792x500 jpeg. At that size, I can't imagine how you could tell what camera or sensor size took it. Surely the web isn't the ultimate destination for Michael's best work; if it were, why does he spend so much time and money on printers? IMHO, any picture on the web (even with a good monitor) is effectively a thumbnail.

I have to agree with Jan.

Eric

[Stephen Best]

The enlarged current homepage image is a 792x500 jpeg. At that size, I can't imagine how you could tell what camera or sensor size took it. Surely the web isn't the ultimate destination for Michael's best work; if it were, why does he spend so much time and money on printers? IMHO, any picture on the web (even with a good monitor) is effectively a thumbnail.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85946\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Look around. There are thousands of people that daily make decisions on which new camera to lust after or lens to purchase based on web-sized images. You can't be suggesting that all these people are totally misguided? :-)

[dlashier]

Look around. There are thousands of people that daily make decisions on which new camera to lust after or lens to purchase based on web-sized images. You can't be suggesting that all these people are totally misguided? :-)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85973\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

If that's all they base their judgement on, the imo they are misguided. Certainly web sized images are adequate for a general impression of IQ but I've always sought out full size examples, preferably raw, for critical evaluation.

- DL

[Eric Myrvaagnes]

If that's all they base their judgement on, the imo they are misguided. Certainly web sized images are adequate for a general impression of IQ but I've always sought out full size examples, preferably raw, for critical evaluation.

- DL
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=85975\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Ditto!

I can't imagine spending more than a hundred bucks based only on web images.

Eric