[LRflex] SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: "Tim Bedsted" <Tim.Bedsted@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 12:22:50 +0100
David,
Thanks for a very illuminating reply:)
I am glad to hear that there is such a thing as v1.3. I would be over the moon
if someone could tell me abouts its features.
I am sure you are right about Imacon - a bit embarassing being Danish myself:( -
________________________________
Fra: leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx på vegne af David Young
Sendt: lø 27-01-2007 12:22
Til: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Emne: [LRflex] Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
Tim wrote:
>Colin,
>
>Before you do anything in software land you have a design spec. I am
>not asking for internal project status reports, but if Leica was
>working on the bug-fix, they should be able to say what it will fix.
>Bear in mind Mr. Eckhardt isn't giving any ETA or glimpse of the content
>
>The run around we are getting is indicative if you aren't actually
>doing anything on it, which I suspect is the case:(
Good Morning, Tim!
You are right. Leica are not doing anything about it. Imacon
are. And that is the reason that Leica cannot give an ETA. Now, it's
true that Mr. Erhardt said that Imacon are "working very hard" on
it, and that's the bit that might, or might not be true. Nobody
outside Imacon knows exactly how hard they are working on it.
However, before you get your Toga in a knot, you might want to
consider a couple of things.
My reply to tjis would be that any software contract has a deadline built into
it! However, I take your point short of a long legal battle, Leica is
constrained in what it can do to Imacon.
[1] when v1.2 was first put out, it had been delivered to Leica, with
Imacon assuring Leica that all was well. All was not well. Photos
had an orange cast, and there were some other problems. Leica
withdrew the software within 24 hours, and sent it back to Imacon for
a re-write. Eventually, v1.2 was released and it is a big
improvement over v1.1.
That is not the general view, a lot of people have gone back to the previous
version
[2] v1.3 was delivered to Leica early last fall, with Imacon assuring
Leica that all was well. Having learned a lesson, last time, Leica
wisely put it out to a few, trusted testers (I was not one of them.
I was busy testing the pre-production M8.) They found some problems
and the software was returned to Imacon. That v1.3 exists, and has
been tested, I know for a fact. When it will be debugged, I do not know.
You say that Leica should be able to tell us when it's coming. They
did. The end of '06, they said. I was there when Steven Lee made a
public pronouncement on that. And that deadline has been missed. If
you were Mr. Lee, or Leica, would you commit to a new date, with the
risk of having egg on your face, once more? Especially when another
firm is in control of that date? I think not.
Yet, you "suspect" that the lack of an ETA to be a "run around" and
evidence that it does not exist.
Interesting.
I would recommend to Leica that it approach its communications from a
different point of view. Saying nothing is not a good strategy in this
globalized age. Leica has very loyal customers/fans, so what would be the
downside of coming clean. Nobody is going to blame Leica for something Imacon
doesn't do! We have just seen another example of the dangers of not saying
things up front with the problems concerning the IR and M8, again what would
have been lost by being forthright about the technical choice, i.e. we choose
to have a extra thin IR filter, however it means you need to apply IR filters
to your lenses (please note my phrasing, Leica had a choice they could have
made the filter thicker, they chose not to, so they must have known about the
problems before launch of the camera, otherwise they come away looking like
complete fools).
In addition, the users without privilieged access could feel assured that Leica
is doing something to address our concerns. Please don't misunderstand me, but
the crux of your argument is that you and nobody else have seen something i.e.
the version 1.3 in action. In Journalism it not acceptable to use an unofficial
source which can not be independently corroborated. Now I have no reason not to
trust your statements, but I am sure you see my point.
On a related note... there are sound reasons why Leica is saying
nothing about the R10. They don't want you to wait for it. They want
you to buy an R9+DMR, now. That is not a devious thing... it is the
way every company operates. Their business will not survive if you
wait. Should they tell you about the R11, even before the R10 is
out. Would you want to buy and R10 or wait for the next, better, R11?
Do you hear Canon making public announcements about the cameras that
will replace the 30D or the D1sMkII in a year or two? Nope! Same reasons.
I have held mockups of the R10 (or at least of some of their ideas
for it) in my hand. Never assume that because they didn't tell *you*,
that it does not exist or is not coming.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. One hopes they are listening to the lists and
will try to incorporate as much of our suggestions as possible. My point was
simply that the lack of communication regarding the v1.3 leads us -the
customers- to think that the R-series as such is in jeopardy.
>I have been looking at the DMR, but I am not committing my money
>before I can rest assured that I am not going to be stuck with a
>white elephant.
Of course you'll be stuck with a white elephant. No matter what you
buy! The R7 is a white elephant. So is the R8. They're
obsolete! Long live the R9! Just because a model is superceded,
does not mean it is suddenly useless, despite what Bill Gates or
Steve Jobs might like us to think! I know a lot of guys and gals
using R3s, through R8's - even a few (myself included) who use
SLs! And those white elephants seem to work just fine!
The DMR is, for my money, the finest imaging device I've ever used.
Like the M8, the DMR has no AA filter, which makes for inherently
more detailed photos than any camera of comparable, or even
significantly more pixels. It's true, it has it's foibles... no
camera is perfect. Not the ones from Canon, Nikon, Pentax or
Leica. But, so far, I've found nothing to beat the results I get
from the DMR with v1.2 firmware, and so I use it and work around it's foibles.
The DMR has put a joy back in my photography that has not existed for
many years. If it's a "white elephant", that's just fine with me.
I know David, I have watched your work as well as Doug's work with much
interest and I am getting there. Kodak dropping Kodachrome 200 isn't making the
decision to switch to digital more difficult. Talk about a company with an
ability to alienate its customers...
Cheers!
---
David Young,
Logan Lake, CANADA
Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/
Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt
BEst regards,
Tim
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Type: application/ms-tnef
-- File: winmail.dat
------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
http://www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/
- References:
- [LRflex] IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Dave Saalsaa
- [LRflex] SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Tim Bedsted
- [LRflex] Re: SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] SV: Re: SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Tim Bedsted
- [LRflex] Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: David Young
Other related posts:
- » [LRflex] SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- » [LRflex] Re: SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- » [LRflex] SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- [LRflex] IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: David Young
- [LRflex] Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Dave Saalsaa
- [LRflex] SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Tim Bedsted
- [LRflex] Re: SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Colin Howarth
- [LRflex] SV: Re: SV: Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: Tim Bedsted
- [LRflex] Re: IMPORTANT: Re: DMR Support
- From: David Young