Self-coded 35mm Summicron-M Asph

[arthury]

I followed the garage style, self-coding method via a sharpie and got the 35mm Summicron-M Asph coded. However, when I pulled out the shot in PS/CS2, in parts of the EXIF, it says Max Aperture: f 1.4.

Is that what you guys got for your coded 35mm Summicron-M Asph?

[arthury]

I also noticed after the coding, images magenta cast is a lot more under controlled in the AWB mode. The black seems pretty black to me.

[arthury]

Looks like one of the bits might be too close to another and it became a code for the 35mm Summilux. :P


Anyway, I got my 24mm Elmarit-M Asph coded and the MaxAperture = 2.8.

[carstenw]

It should be possible to wipe off the code and try again. It ought to say f/2.0.

[atufte]

Originally Posted by carstenw

It should be possible to wipe off the code and try again. It ought to say f/2.0.

I tried several times self-coding my Summicron 35/2 Pre-Asph, with a transparent template
and everything seem's ok, but mine also show f/1.4 no matter what i do...and i know i got the coding right because i have coded several other lenses with the same template which work perfect...(so i'm sure even 35/2 lenses coded by Leica will show f/1.4)

[carstenw]

Really, how strange! What happens if you code it as a 4th gen 35/2?

[atufte]

Originally Posted by carstenw

Really, how strange! What happens if you code it as a 4th gen 35/2?

Which one is that...?, i've tried the IV (pre-asph) my lens is an old Summicron 35/2 pre-asph, but this should not have anything to do with it, or should it...? It still should show
f/2 in the exif info, since the coding is for the Cron and not the Lux...?

[carstenw]

000110 in my table is the IV (4th gen) 35/2, pre-asph.

Ah sorry! I am mixing up posts. That is already the one you tried. Well, this is even weirder. All 35/2 lenses seem to report f/1.4.

Out of curiousity, do you feel like posting a picture of your coding attempt?

[baloo]

Glad to find this discussion again... I have the new m8 with 1.09 and now the sharpie coding doesn’t work any more and I know it was ok cause I use to have the old m8 1.06 and they worked then any Idea... yes I have turned on the menu for lens detection

Thank, Steve

[truando]

Originally Posted by arthury

I followed the garage style, self-coding method via a sharpie

which Sharpie is best for this?

Thanks for your help.

[blakley]

My M8 hasn't been fixed, but I did update the firmware to 1.09, and the sharpie coding still works for me. You do have to re-apply the sharpie pretty frequently if you change lenses a lot, though - I find the sharpie-coding scrapes off after mounting the lens only about twice. You can remove the sharpie coding with a small spot of nail polish remover on a tissue. I emphasize "small" - you don't want to get any of this on lens elements, I suspect.

[Peter Branch]

It is a known problem. All 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH lenses are identified as being f/1.4. We were originally told this would be corrected in 1.09 but it was not. I'm now told it will be in 1.10 - we shall see.

[arthury]

Originally Posted by truando

which Sharpie is best for this?

Thanks for your help.

Try to get a fine tip version. The black strip you are painting on the lens mount is rather small.

[arthury]

Originally Posted by Peter Branch

It is a known problem. All 35mm f/2 Summicron-M ASPH lenses are identified as being f/1.4. We were originally told this would be corrected in 1.09 but it was not. I'm now told it will be in 1.10 - we shall see.

Thanks, Peter, for bringing this up. What are your sources for this?

I wonder if there are anyone out there who has a Leica-coded 35mm Summicron-M Asph and it says MaxAperture=1.4 ? Anyone ?

[arthury]

One lens that's a real pain to code is the 21mm Zeiss ZM. There's a mount screw right on where the white-dot is supposed to be. I think it is not as reflective as the lens mount. I read that someone else painted the screw with white-out. Anyone else succeeded with 21mm ZM ?

[Peter Branch]

Originally Posted by arthury

Thanks, Peter, for bringing this up. What are your sources for this?

I wonder if there are anyone out there who has a Leica-coded 35mm Summicron-M Asph and it says MaxAperture=1.4 ? Anyone ?

My source is Leica UK at Milton Keynes. As some people on this forum know it was while taking some very mundane pictures to check if the 6-bit coding was actually being read correctly by the camera - after all the exercise of getting them coded was not cheap - that the "Image faults" revealed themselves in their full glory together with the lens recognition error . That was on the 2nd November '06. I discussed all the problems with Leica UK on Monday 6th when they opened after the weekend and sent sample DNG files. When Leica asked for the camera to be returned at the end of November I again discussed this lens recognition problem with them and was told it was well known, if not actually of any great consequence, and was being corrected in 1.09. Now I'm told it will be 1.10.

[artur5]

Originally Posted by arthury

One lens that's a real pain to code is the 21mm Zeiss ZM. There's a mount screw right on where the white-dot is supposed to be. I think it is not as reflective as the lens mount. I read that someone else painted the screw with white-out. Anyone else succeeded with 21mm ZM ?

The trouble with this lens, that I have too- is also with the frame lines. It brings the 50/75 pair instead of the 28/90 as the Leica Elmarit 21/.28 does. So, unless you replace the bayonet ring of the ZM 21 with another one that brings 28/90 lines, you won't get the lens properly recognized as a Leica 21/2.8, even if the screw issue is fixed with white paint or something.
As I've already written on the forum, I tried to buy from Zeiss a bayonet ring for the ZM 28/.2.8. That ring mounted on a ZM 21/2.8, would bring 28/90 lines, but Zeiss didn't answer my request at all. And before someone asks, yes, all Cosina-buil ZM share the same bayonet ring, only change is the keying flange of course.
If you want to know if the self pàinted code works on the ZM21, try to paint the code for a 50 or 75 Leica lens, just for testing purposes, and see if the M8 recognizes the lens.
I would do it myself but I haven't the camera yet..

[arthury]

Originally Posted by Peter Branch

My source is Leica UK at Milton Keynes. As some people on this forum know it was while taking some very mundane pictures to check if the 6-bit coding was actually being read correctly by the camera - after all the exercise of getting them coded was not cheap - that the "Image faults" revealed themselves in their full glory together with the lens recognition error . That was on the 2nd November '06. I discussed all the problems with Leica UK on Monday 6th when they opened after the weekend and sent sample DNG files. When Leica asked for the camera to be returned at the end of November I again discussed this lens recognition problem with them and was told it was well known, if not actually of any great consequence, and was being corrected in 1.09. Now I'm told it will be 1.10.

Thanks, Peter. I appreciate your info and I'm sure other readers, too.

[arthury]

Originally Posted by artur5

The trouble with this lens, that I have too- is also with the frame lines. It brings the 50/75 pair instead of the 28/90 as the Leica Elmarit 21/.28 does. So, unless you replace the bayonet ring of the ZM 21 with another one that brings 28/90 lines, you won't get the lens properly recognized as a Leica 21/2.8, even if the screw issue is fixed with white paint or something.
As I've already written on the forum, I tried to buy from Zeiss a bayonet ring for the ZM 28/.2.8. That ring mounted on a ZM 21/2.8, would bring 28/90 lines, but Zeiss didn't answer my request at all. And before someone asks, yes, all Cosina-buil ZM share the same bayonet ring, only change is the keying flange of course.
If you want to know if the self pàinted code works on the ZM21, try to paint the code for a 50 or 75 Leica lens, just for testing purposes, and see if the M8 recognizes the lens.
I would do it myself but I haven't the camera yet..

Well, it's going to be a chewy problem if that's the case. Even if Zeiss sells us the mount, I would not be so enterprizing as to unscrew the mount of the lens. Have you done this before without affecting the precision of the lens mount?

[atufte]

Originally Posted by carstenw

000110 in my table is the IV (4th gen) 35/2, pre-asph.

Ah sorry! I am mixing up posts. That is already the one you tried. Well, this is even weirder. All 35/2 lenses seem to report f/1.4.

Out of curiousity, do you feel like posting a picture of your coding attempt?

I will take a picture of it tomorrow because i only have my M8 with that lens mounted on it at home at the moment, my other camera's is in my studio...