DYMO: Ultimate 6-bit coding solution!

[ArtZ]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi guys,

 

Home coding can be really easy. No more sharpies, no more templates, no more hard coding!

 

In les than 5 minutes (chrono) you can write a 6-bit code to your uncoded lens: Use your DYMO!

 

As the 6-bit code is written with the Dymo, it's much more solid and reliable than with sharpies (don't need to retouch it) and if after many times of use, it gets dammaged... you just replace it with a new one! Besides, if there's a screw in the coding area (like with the Nokton 35), no problem! It will be hidden under the Dymo tape!

 

I used the letter "I", (size 2 + bold). You will need the "." (dot) for coding white areas.

 

See the exemple hereunder.

 

Cheers!

.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[mustafasoleiman]

Looks like a great solution... bravo.

 

Which model of Dymo did you use? Can I use the cheapest I can find?

[ArtZ]

Looks like a great solution... bravo.

 

Which model of Dymo did you use? Can I use the cheapest I can find?

 

I used the "LabelPOINT 200" with tape 12mm x 7m / 1/2" x 23" code: 45013 (Black on White).

 

I use the second bit (from left to right) to align it. It must be just under the bayonet as in the following image. I recommend to check first on a coded lens the exact position of the second bit.

 

 

[The lens on the photo is the Nokton 35/1.2 Chrome]

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[pklein]

This seems like a great idea.

 

One possible issue: Does the thickness of the tape affect the focusing? DAG told me that some of the shims he uses to adjust lenses are thinner than Scotch tape. I suspect that Dymo tapes are considerably thicker than that.

 

You probably would need to trim the tape so that when the lens is locked into place, it only contacts the plastic lens over the 6-bit sensor, and not the body mount.

 

--Peter

[dougdarter]

That's a brilliant solution. Thanks very much.

 

There's going to be a run on Dymo machines now!!

[ArtZ]

This seems like a great idea.

 

One possible issue: Does the thickness of the tape affect the focusing? DAG told me that some of the shims he uses to adjust lenses are thinner than Scotch tape. I suspect that Dymo tapes are considerably thicker than that.

 

You probably would need to trim the tape so that when the lens is locked into place, it only contacts the plastic lens over the 6-bit sensor, and not the body mount.

 

--Peter

 

The Dymo tape is just slightly thicker than the Scotch tape. You insert the lens WITHOUT any addititional force (like if was no tape). It doesn't affect focus at all.

 

I have removed and inserted the lens more than 20 times to check if the tape gets dammaged and I haven't seen any scratch after that. It just fits perfect.

 

Cheers!

.

[giordano]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As pictured, the thickness of the tape will cock the lens slightly upwards and to the left.

 

The Pearl White Plastic tape in my Dymo LetraTag is about 0.09mm thick including adhesive but not backup tape. With the 40mm lens throat and (for the sake of argument) a lens whose nodal point is 50mm from the sensor when focused at infinity, this gives a Scheimpflug effect with the sensor plane, nodal plane and plane of sharpest focus intersecting about 22m from the camera. I feel this might be enough to add to the problems of those who enjoy photographing test charts and brick walls. ;-)

 

Presumably one could avoid this by using three or four strips of tape spaced around the lens. But that would pull the whole lens mount foward by 0.09mm - which means that correctly adjusted 35mm lens set at infinity would actually be focused on a plane about 14m from the camera (as would the rangefinder).

 

Or maybe I've forgotten all my algebra :-(

[ArtZ]

As pictured, the thickness of the tape will cock the lens slightly upwards and to the left.

 

The Pearl White Plastic tape in my Dymo LetraTag is about 0.09mm thick including adhesive but not backup tape. With the 40mm lens throat and (for the sake of argument) a lens whose nodal point is 50mm from the sensor when focused at infinity, this gives a Scheimpflug effect with the sensor plane, nodal plane and plane of sharpest focus intersecting about 22m from the camera. I feel this might be enough to add to the problems of those who enjoy photographing test charts and brick walls. ;-)

 

Presumably one could avoid this by using three or four strips of tape spaced around the lens. But that would pull the whole lens mount foward by 0.09mm - which means that correctly adjusted 35mm lens set at infinity would actually be focused on a plane about 14m from the camera (as would the rangefinder).

 

Or maybe I've forgotten all my algebra :-(

 

In theory you're right, but you forgot the tolerance. As I said, I insert the lens WITHOUT any additional force (like when the tape wasn't there). That means there's enough place for the the Dymo tape.

 

I have tested infinite focus and I don't have any problem. I have also tested close focus (0.7m) and I have no problem either.

 

Voilà!

.

[Samir Jahjah]

This is very neat. However the LabelPOINT 200 has been discontinued...

[cme4brain]

Hi guys,

 

Home coding can be really easy. No more sharpies, no more templates, no more hard coding!

 

In les than 5 minutes (chrono) you can write a 6-bit code to your uncoded lens: Use your DYMO!

 

Hello there, and thanks for your elegant solution. How did you align the coded tape to the proper location on the back of the lens? Was there some flange or screw that you could use for reference? Without such, one would have to mount the non-leica lens on the camera and mark on the lens barrel with a sharpie where the black stripe should be. Thanks for any help!

[ArtZ]

This is very neat. However the LabelPOINT 200 has been discontinued...

 

Yes, it's an old model. I bought it two or three years ago.

 

You can use any other model, like the LabelPOINT 150, which uses the tape 12mm x 7m (1/2" x 23'), code: 45013 (Black on White)

 

DYMO | LabelPOINT 150

 

Cheers!

.

[ArtZ]

Hello there, and thanks for your elegant solution. How did you align the coded tape to the proper location on the back of the lens? Was there some flange or screw that you could use for reference? Without such, one would have to mount the non-leica lens on the camera and mark on the lens barrel with a sharpie where the black stripe should be. Thanks for any help!

 

Yes, as explained here http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/33289-dymo-ultimate-6-bit-coding-solution.html#post349283

 

"I use the second bit (from left to right) to align it. It must be just under the bayonet as in the following image. I recommend to check first on a coded lens the exact position of the second bit."

 

As simple as that

.

[giordano]

In theory you're right, but you forgot the tolerance. As I said, I insert the lens WITHOUT any additional force (like when the tape wasn't there). That means there's enough place for the the Dymo tape.

 

The reason you have no problem mounting the lens is that the springs in the lens mount have enough 'give' to accommodate the thickness of the tape. But this doesn't alter the fact that the thickness of the tape is changing the position and angle of the lens relative to the sensor plane - and by an amount that I suspect is significant to critical work.

 

I have tested infinite focus and I don't have any problem. I have also tested close focus (0.7m) and I have no problem either.

 

With a single piece of tape over the bar-code sensor, the position of the rangefinder cam on the lens will scarcely be affected, so I wouldn't expect any focusing problem in the centre of the field except near infinity and at wide apertures. Off axis, the Scheimpflug effect comes into play but again seems unlikely to be significant in practice except at wide apertures.

 

The single piece of tape will mean the centre of lens is about 0.04mm further from the film plane, half the thickness of the tape. If a lens is correctly adjusted (i.e. when the focusing scale is set to infinity the lens is focused on infinity) and set at infinity, a 0.04mm extension results in the following (assuming a 1/60mm circle of confusion):

 

| Plane of |Furthest distance in focus

Focal length|sharpest focus| at f/1.4 | at f/2 |

35mm | 30m | 74m | 185m |

51.6mm | 67m | 150m | 377m |

75mm | 141m | 338m | 846m |

 

As for tolerances, Dante Stella says (Dante Stella) that the tolerance for the distance from the lens flange to the pressure plate rails on film Ms is 0.01mm, and I'd be surprised if the tolerance for the equivalent distance on the M8 (sensor to flange) is any greater. The depth of focus at f/1.4 with a 1/60mm circle of confusion is less than 0.05mm. In this context the thickness of the tape is IMHO not insignificant.

 

On the other hand if you accept a 1/30mm circle of confusion the depth of focus at f/1.4 is more than 0.09mm and sharp focus extends to infinity in all six cases plotted in the table above.

[giordano]

Earlier I said

But that would pull the whole lens mount foward by 0.09mm - which means that correctly adjusted 35mm lens set at infinity would actually be focused on a plane about 14m from the camera (as would the rangefinder).

 

This is wrong. 0.09mm thickness of tape all round would leave a 35mm lens (set at infinity) actually focused on about 14m, but the resulting 0.09mm displacement of the rangefinder roller from its infinity position would leave the rangefinder focused on about 30m.

[ArtZ]

The reason you have no problem mounting the lens is that the springs in the lens mount have enough 'give' to accommodate the thickness of the tape. But this doesn't alter the fact that the thickness of the tape is changing the position and angle of the lens relative to the sensor plane - and by an amount that I suspect is significant to critical work.

 

 

 

With a single piece of tape over the bar-code sensor, the position of the rangefinder cam on the lens will scarcely be affected, so I wouldn't expect any focusing problem in the centre of the field except near infinity and at wide apertures. Off axis, the Scheimpflug effect comes into play but again seems unlikely to be significant in practice except at wide apertures.

 

The single piece of tape will mean the centre of lens is about 0.04mm further from the film plane, half the thickness of the tape. If a lens is correctly adjusted (i.e. when the focusing scale is set to infinity the lens is focused on infinity) and set at infinity, a 0.04mm extension results in the following (assuming a 1/60mm circle of confusion):

 

| Plane of |Furthest distance in focus

Focal length|sharpest focus| at f/1.4 | at f/2 |

35mm | 30m | 74m | 185m |

51.6mm | 67m | 150m | 377m |

75mm | 141m | 338m | 846m |

 

As for tolerances, Dante Stella says (Dante Stella) that the tolerance for the distance from the lens flange to the pressure plate rails on film Ms is 0.01mm, and I'd be surprised if the tolerance for the equivalent distance on the M8 (sensor to flange) is any greater. The depth of focus at f/1.4 with a 1/60mm circle of confusion is less than 0.05mm. In this context the thickness of the tape is IMHO not insignificant.

 

On the other hand if you accept a 1/30mm circle of confusion the depth of focus at f/1.4 is more than 0.09mm and sharp focus extends to infinity in all six cases plotted in the table above.

 

I'm not going to discuss your figures. I can only say two things:

 

1.- You said that the thickness of the Dymo tape is 0.09mm (which is probably true), but I have no clue.

 

2.- From a practical point of view, I can tell you I can see no differences:

 

2.1.- After your first post, I went out and I pointed to the moon to check infinite focus. No problem.

 

2.2.-At home, I pointed to the left TV speaker (see pictures) at 0.7m and took the picture with the Nokton @ f1.2. The camera is hand helded and the picture is taken under low light conditions. Please note that the speaker is not a flat surface. The right side is slightly (4-5mm) closer to the camera because of the TV shape (design). If you find the picture is OOF, I'd like to know. See the pictures below (full frame / 100% croped)

 

As I said, one thing is theory an another thing is what I really get out og the camera.

 

IMHO, I will leave the Dymo tape on my Nokton because I think it works really fine.

 

Cheers!

.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[giordano]

2.2.-At home, I pointed to the left TV speaker (see pictures) at 0.7m and took the picture with the Nokton @ f1.2. The camera is hand helded and the picture is taken under low light conditions. Please note that the speaker is not a flat surface. The right side is slightly (4-5mm) closer to the camera because of the TV shape (design). If you find the picture is OOF, I'd like to know. See the pictures below (full frame / 100% croped)

 

As I said, one thing is theory an another thing is what I really get out og the camera.

 

IMHO, I will leave the Dymo tape on my Nokton because I think it works really fine

 

The photo doesn't look Leica-sharp to me, but I don't know what's typical performance from the 35mm Nokton. I do know that depth of field with a 35mm lens at 0.7m and f/1.2 and a 1/60mm circle of confusion is less than 15mm. Speaking for myself, if I was hand-holding it would be entirely a matter of luck whether I got the speaker critically sharp in the centre, never mind from top to bottom of the image.

 

But I'm not trying to get at you. Dymo-coding is a neat idea, and if you are happy with the results that's what matters. All I wanted to do is draw attention to the fact that the effect of the thickness of the tape appears to be enough to make a difference in critical work, and is enough to affect critical focus testing. (And I quite enjoyed brushing up my algebra ;-)

 

Now let's get back to real photography!

[photoarne]

Thank you Manuel fot this excellent idea. I see a further use for this, namely as a template for permanent coding. When (by some trial and error probably) one has coded the lens using the Dymo, I will leave the tape on as a template and drill permanent depressions in the flange. Then code with black paint.

[ArtZ]

The photo doesn't look Leica-sharp to me, but I don't know what's typical performance from the 35mm Nokton. I do know that depth of field with a 35mm lens at 0.7m and f/1.2 and a 1/60mm circle of confusion is less than 15mm. Speaking for myself, if I was hand-holding it would be entirely a matter of luck whether I got the speaker critically sharp in the centre, never mind from top to bottom of the image.

 

John, as I said before this picture was taken quickly, hand held, in low light and in a very inconfortable position. If it doesn't look Leica-sharp to you is probably for these reasons. I took some other pics with and without Dymo tape while encoding the lens (I wanted to check the tape didn't modify the focus) and the results were the same.

 

It's true I forgot to check infinite focus. After you first post, as I could see from my window moonlight, I went out with magnifiers to check it. In my viewer infinite focus was still perfect with this lens. I took two pictures with a tripod and they look fine.

 

When I spoke of "tolerance" it didn't mean only mathematic tolerance, there's also general system tolerance and visual tolerance.

 

A friend of mine had focus problems with his M8 body clearly visible with my APO 2/90 ASPH. We were trying to correct this last Sunday. For some tests, we used the same speaker because the shape is slightly bent (4-5mm from the middle to the right side) and we got very similar results with Leica glass and our both M8s on that speaker.

 

I could also tell you that moving the wheel on his M8 with a 2mm allen wrech to get proper focus on the viewer, you cannot get as low as 0.09mm tolerance! Even Leica couldn't do it!

 

I didn't take you were triying to get at me. I thought your post was interesting and I should consider your comments.

 

Let's go back then to real photo! It a sunny day today and I'm meeting some friends for shooting in Paris.

 

Regards

 

 

Thank you Manuel fot this excellent idea. I see a further use for this, namely as a template for permanent coding. When (by some trial and error probably) one has coded the lens using the Dymo, I will leave the tape on as a template and drill permanent depressions in the flange. Then code with black paint.

 

You're welcome! I though of that but for other lenses, not the Nokton. Concerning the Nokton (my only non-Leica lens) it will be difficult (or even impossible) because there's a screw in bit 5 (white). Bits 4 and 6 are also slightly touched by this screw.

 

I tried first "Sharpie" coding. It works fine but I had to cover the screw with a metallic tape (filling just inside the hole, on the screw head). I didn't like this very much for cosmetic reasons. At the end, I put some Scotch tape to protect the code and the code reader. I noticed I had no focus problems with the tape so I thought I could probably do the same with my Dymo. It will be cleaner and a neat solution.

 

Cheers mate!

.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wlaidlaw]

Manuel,

 

Just tried it to code the only lens I have failed to hand code - my T-E 135. I wanted to code it 001001 (an Elmarit 135). Coding looked about the right spacing on a Dymo Letra-Tag with size 3 on that machine (compared with an officially coded lens) and I used the thinest white paper tape. This made the lens a very tight fit and also did not code, so I think it is back to playing with the sharpie for that one. Interestingly although this is a 21 year old lens, it was actually brand new, unused and has only been on and off my M8 about 6 times, so no wear.

 

Wilson

[ArtZ]

Manuel,

 

Just tried it to code the only lens I have failed to hand code - my T-E 135. I wanted to code it 001001 (an Elmarit 135). Coding looked about the right spacing on a Dymo Letra-Tag with size 3 on that machine (compared with an officially coded lens) and I used the thinest white paper tape. This made the lens a very tight fit and also did not code, so I think it is back to playing with the sharpie for that one. Interestingly although this is a 21 year old lens, it was actually brand new, unused and has only been on and off my M8 about 6 times, so no wear.

 

Wilson

 

Wilson,

 

As I said on the phone, I've just printed the code and I put it on my Nokton. The M8 recognized a Elmarit 135mm lens at the the first try.

 

Concerning the tightness, the only thing I can think is my CV Nokton bayonet mount is not as precise as your T-E 135. I have printed 6 codes -5 left. If you want them, I can send them by mail to Tourtour.

 

It will be interesting to see the results other people get on this.

 

Have a nice weekend!

 

Cheers Viscount

.