[Leica] Digital Leica M

[ekowaleski at twmi.rr.com (Ed Kowaleski)]

Thanks for the note, Don. but I'm still in disbelief.  Do you think this
might be more than a vignetting issue?  Leica's pdf statement made no
suggestion that the image quality could be improved in software such as PS
or any other.

Leica is not alone in being anal retentive about its quality.  I've shelled
out quite a bit for 21, 28, 35, 50, and 90mm ASPH lenses thinking I was
getting the best stuff made.  Apparently it is not so.

I'm starting to feel screwed, betrayed, etc.

Ed





-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com@leica-users.org
[mailto:lug-bounces+ekowaleski=twmi.rr.com@leica-users.org]On Behalf Of
Don Dory
Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2006 12:35 PM
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] Digital Leica M


Ed,
Leica is a German company.  They are anal retentive about image quality.
They have just spent the last ten or so years bringing out a line of lenses
that are possibly equaled be Zeiss in two cases only(25 and 21).  They
understand their user base and know that most will not want to mess around
in PS fixing images.  So, I suspect that there will be a fair amount of in
camera manipulation on images that get the bar code.

So, first, lets take a wait and see attitude.  Second, I suspect that there
will be only one or two lenses in anybodies stable that will be used enough
to justify the retrofit.  This is not much different than when the M came
out and folks didn't like the fact that they had to buy an adapter to use
the LTM lenses.  This time around at least the lens will mount and fire
without spending any money.  If you don't like the image quality then you
can get it adjusted for a modest fee considering the price to replace.

Deep breath time.  It is far better than what I was told about the anti-lock
brakes on my F150 and the non repairability of them as NO parts were
available.  :)

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 6/15/06, Ed Kowaleski <ekowaleski@twmi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> The software that accompanies the RD-1 has a provision for the correction
> of
> the effects of vignetting.  I assume Epson calculated that a 15mm lens
> would
> vignette so much, a 21 this much, and a 24 that much, etc., and provided
> image correcting software accordingly.  As far as I can see, it works
> quite
> well.
>
> Now, it seems suddenly, Leica says, "Oh, by the way, you might want to
> have
> these bar codes put on the inner face of your M-lenses so you can capture
> data that tells you which lens was used."  There is more than a  veiled
> implication that this will also impact image quality because Leica's
> statement said that these codes would "help optimize image quality".
> Further, they stated that owners of lenses produced after July 1, would
> "benefit from the image optimization" resulting from the retrofit
> application of these bar codes.
>
> So there appears to be more at stake that just adding metadata and there
> seems to be a clear suggestion from Solms that one had better get the bar
> codes put on pre July 1, 2006, lenses or live with some pretty expensive
> junk.  It sounds as if they've invented a Leica M that in fact cannot use
> older lenses without  some lack of image optimization. Or, is this their
> solution to the Vignetting problem and rather than take the Epson route by
> fixing the vignetting in software, they have seen this as a profit
> improvement program? I would think that lots of lenses at 95 Euros each
> results and a significant Euro flow
>
> Please, someone tell me I've misread Leica's statement.
>
> Ed Kowaleski
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information