Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/06/15

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Digital Leica M
From: henningw at (Henning Wulff)
Date: Thu Jun 15 10:05:22 2006
References: <060620062013.19183.4485E1D10002C35700004AEF216046664809020790019D0D030E04> <> <> <>

At 2:43 PM +0100 6/15/06, Peter Dzwig wrote:
>I can't help feeling that these dots and in-camera s/w adjustments 
>smack more than a little of a job not done properly. An attempt to 
>be "better" than the RD-1/1s that hasn't come off? Does the need for 
>adjustment hint at some basic incompatibility between Leica's design 
>and the M lenses? If Epson can build the RD-1 without this "dotting" 
>why do Leica need it and a new mount.
>Sorry to say that I have this feeling that the "M-8" may only be a 
>half-way house to something else.
>Peter Dzwig

If the 8 bits can trigger certain software (or firmware) algorithms 
to correct for falloff due to the angle of incidence on the sensor, 
and possibly also to correct CA and other lens issues, then Leica has 
done something useful. With the RD-1, you do this in post processing 
by manually selecting options in the Epson software (which is poor 
like most of the camera manufacturer's efforts) or Photoshop.

Epson didn't do a 'better' job; they just avoided the issues, as you 
can do with the Leica by not getting the dots put on. No big deal.

Note that my assumptions about correcting for fall-off and CA are 
just that; there could be other things that the dots are for but 
those two are two of the most obvious. In any case, just because 
Leica does this and Epson did not doesn't imply a failing on Leica's 
part, it just implies that Leica is trying to make this same 
correction issue more convenient. It also doesn't mean that shooting 
will be slower; image processing has come a long way since the RD-1 
came out, and that camera certainly wasn't at the sharp end of 
development with respect to processing speed.

Maybe the Leica won't be better than the Epson; most likely it will. 
The dots or lack thereof imply neither.

Justifiying the price is another matter and has little to do with the above.

    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  |[ ]|

Replies: Reply from michael.francis at (Francis, Michael) ([Leica] Digital Leica M)
In reply to: Message from clive.moss at (Clive Moss) ([Leica] Digital Leica M)
Message from rangefinder at (Didier Ludwig) ([Leica] Digital Leica M)
Message from pdzwig at (Peter Dzwig) ([Leica] Digital Leica M)