Conversion of lens for digital M body

[Daniel kk]

Hello,
This is the first time I post my point of view here. It is worthwhile to enhance the M lens for digital M body in the period of transition from film to digital by Leica.
A good news for all film users and potential digital users also.
Daniel kk

[grober]

I'm close to sending in two lenses for this conversion. Each to different Leica dealers so I can gauge which is faster in returning the lenses to me.

I suspect that Leice lenses you elect not to convert (for whaterver reason) should work just fine on the M8. Uncoded lenses will just be a mystery to the intelligence running the M8 system. (The shooter might need to do more.)

Anyone have another view on the functionality ofnon-coded Leica lenses on the M8?

[stunsworth]

Daniel, I'd wait and see what the coding is actually going to do. My understanding is that Leica have said it will identify the lens and no more at this stage.

If it was merely going to update the Exif data, then I presonally probably wouldn't bother. If however there was some image processing involved then I might be interested.

Even with the lens identified the camera can't know the aperture involved, so I can't see how the camera can correct for aperture dependent light fall off - anyone who's used a Nocti knows that this is more of an issue at f1 than f8 ;-)

Time will tell as they say.

[Daniel kk]

May Leica insert a micro-chip of lens data into encoded lens for transmittion of focal length and aperture information between M lens and digital M body, I think.
What do you think about it ? Anyone?

[grober]

Originally Posted by Daniel kk

May Leica insert a micro-chip of lens data into encoded lens for transmittion of focal length and aperture information between M lens and digital M body, I think.
What do you think about it ? Anyone?

I doubt they'd do this for only US$125.

Also, I don't know how they'd be able to sense the lens aperture without a major re-design of the lens.

[ed_oneal]

Putting in a chip would require an electrical contact. As I understand it, the coding is only optically read.

[marknorton]

For your $125 or €95, you get a new lens mount, the bayonet ring at the back of the lens. It takes a couple of minutes to swap the mount for the new one with the coding. I've got 8 lens going through this process and they will also run a visual check on the lens. This is good value, and seems to include sales tax and shipping in Europe..

There are no chips, there's no space in the lenses for them. The optical coding is simply a number in the range 1-63 with 0 meaning "no coding". The camera will use this to identify the focal length at a minimum, maybe the actual lens model.

I have the 35mm f1.4 ASPH and the 35mm f2 pre-ASPH in for coding, so it will be interesting to see if they come back with the same coding, in which case it is for "35mm" only, or different codings, in which case the two 35mm lenses are handled differently.

[twom4]

I wonder if the code will also differentiate the "vintage" of the lens, e.g. 35 Cron ASPH vs 35 Cron IV generation.

[earleygallery]

The coding tells the body whether it is a chrome or black lens, so that if they don't match the body will simply not operate.

Seriously though, I can't see the point in upgrading lenses when we don't even know what effect - if any - it's going to have on the resulting images. Not that I have any M lenses but I'd wait and see if it was going to be worth the expense and bother.

Regards

[steed]

The coding is apparently not for nothing.The characteristics of certain lenses have been digitally mapped, and the coding is said to assist the camera in optimizing the image according to the characteristics of the model. Perhaps this is all crap, but that is what we read on the old Leica forum.
Regard
John W (Steed)

[lct]

I don't like cameras doing things i can't control personally so i won't buy those stripes until i'm 100% sure they don't tweak my pics without my consent.
What i want is Summilux, Summicron or Elmar pics, not DxO's or whatever gadget.

[earleygallery]

Also, if you shoot RAW, presumably all the coding will do is tell the camera that such and such lens was used, recorded as data on the file, but no actual image manipulation?

Until the camera is released and we see the actual results, who knows.

[marknorton]

I expect the RAW plug-in will be able to replicate or back out the in-camera processing.

[yuri]

Originally Posted by stunsworth

... Even with the lens identified the camera can't know the aperture involved, so I can't see how the camera can correct for aperture dependent light fall off ...

Please correct me if I am wrong, but as long as M7 runs in semi-automaric aprture-priority mode, there must be a way for a classic non-converted lens to tell the body which aperture it is using?

[marknorton]

No, there is no coupling between lens and the camera to tell the camera what the aperture ring is set to.

The metering is done through the lens, so that the light level the camera measures is a combination of the actual light level and the aperture you have preselected. The camera then sets the shutter speed based on this light level and the ISO being used, in M7 terms, the film speed you have loaded. It can also apply a +/- EV correction if required.

[stunsworth]

Yuri, as Mark says there's no linkage. With a modern SLR the lens stays wide open until you press the shutter, with aperture changes as you select the desired setting.

[yuri]

Originally Posted by marknorton

No, there is no coupling between lens and the camera to tell the camera what the aperture ring is set to.

The metering is done through the lens, so that the light level the camera measures is a combination of the actual light level and the aperture you have preselected. The camera then sets the shutter speed based on this light level and the ISO being used, in M7 terms, the film speed you have loaded. It can also apply a +/- EV correction if required.

Indeed, I should have thought about this. Thanks a lot, Mark.