lars_bergquist Posted October 26, 2009 Share #1 Posted October 26, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Is there anybody yet out there who has any experience with coding the ZM C-Biogon 4.5/21mm for the M9? I presume the lens can be had nowadays with the new style bayonet without screw heads in the coding area, and with the bayonet face relieved for Sharpie-style coding. The old man from the Age of the Contax Biogon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 26, 2009 Posted October 26, 2009 Hi lars_bergquist, Take a look here Coding the Wild Biogon 4.5. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
carstenw Posted October 26, 2009 Share #2 Posted October 26, 2009 This brings up an interesting point: perhaps I should split the lens coding recommendations in the Leica M8 coding table into M8 recommendations and M9 recommendations? I am beginning to suspect that the useful options are going to multiply here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted October 26, 2009 Share #3 Posted October 26, 2009 Is there anybody yet out there who has any experience with coding the ZM C-Biogon 4.5/21mm for the M9? I presume the lens can be had nowadays with the new style bayonet without screw heads in the coding area, and with the bayonet face relieved for Sharpie-style coding. The old man from the Age of the Contax Biogon Lars, What bayonet does the Biogon C come with now. When I had a Biogon 2.8, it came with a 24/35 bayonet, which even if you coded the Biogon as an Elmarit 21/2.8 type III or WATE as I did, would not pick up on an M8. You had either to hold the frame change lever to the 28/90 position or like me, buy a 28/90 bayonet from Zeiss and change it to get the lens to recognise. I don't know if this will apply to the M9. I would guess that the WATE coding, with 21mm selected, is as close as you would get for the Biogon C. A blob of Tippex worked just fine in the screw countersink. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted October 27, 2009 The standard bayonet of this lens keys in the 50/75 frames, but either a competent dealer or Zeiss themselves can supply it with a 'bayonet for M8/M9' (all is well as long as the dread name of Leica is not heard in Oberkochen). The question remains however how to code it, as there is no directly comparable Leica lens. With the M9, says the September/October issue of LFI, the issue is no longer just the focal length, i.e. the f.o.v., but luminance vignetting, which depends on construction, and also the aperture. If the camera 'thinks' that the maximum aperture of the lens is different from what it actually is, correction may turn out ... hrm ... incorrect. I already have one lens camouflaged as a WATE and would prefer not to have another. The old man from when only spies used codes Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
svenb Posted October 27, 2009 Share #5 Posted October 27, 2009 as there is now the possibility of manual lens recognition with the M9, a bit of experimentation might show you the best coding. sven (old man) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted October 27, 2009 Right. But buying the lens simply in order to do an experiment somebody else has already done, would not be very bright. One of the functions of a forum like this one is exactly that, isn't it? This old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted October 27, 2009 Share #7 Posted October 27, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The new mount allows for hassle-free coding of the ZM lenses as there are no screws in that area. I have one for sale in the classifieds which has had the "proper" mount (which brings up the 28 mm lines on the M8/M9), and which has been permanently coded by John Milich as a Elmarit-M ASPH 21/2.8. Horea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted October 28, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted October 28, 2009 Thanks, Horea. I have no doubts about John Milich's abilities -- he has coded two of my lenses. But was the operation successful, in the sense that vignetting correction and other issues are ok.? The old man from Before Opto-electronics Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
horosu Posted October 28, 2009 Share #9 Posted October 28, 2009 The lens is properly recognized as an Elmarit ASPH 21/2.8 by the M9, however, vignetting still exists on this camera. I haven't tried Cornerfix to see if it helps. Best, Horea Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellfleet Posted March 23, 2010 Share #10 Posted March 23, 2010 As I'm new to this forum and awaiting the arrival of a M9 from B&H, I was wondering if anyone has done follow-up testing with C-Biogon 21/4.5 and the new firmware, or has had successful results with Cornerfix? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biju49 Posted March 23, 2010 Share #11 Posted March 23, 2010 This is an example for the combo M9 / Biogon 4./21mm , without an with Cornerfix. The lens is coded as Elmarit 21mmASPH. No processing, only converted to jpg. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/101598-coding-the-wild-biogon-45/?do=findComment&comment=1270569'>More sharing options...
wellfleet Posted March 23, 2010 Share #12 Posted March 23, 2010 Thanks for the pics. Odd what's happening with the sky, and I wonder if that has to do with being coded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted March 23, 2010 Share #13 Posted March 23, 2010 That is banding: a well known artifact resulting from making small jpgs form large files. Nothing to do with the coding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted March 23, 2010 Share #14 Posted March 23, 2010 Zeiss does not recommend that this lens be used on the M9 as the colour shift is quite marked. Obviously Corner fix can help with that. According to Popflash this is the only ZM lens not recommended (for that reason) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellfleet Posted March 24, 2010 Share #15 Posted March 24, 2010 That is banding: a well known artifact resulting from making small jpgs form large files. Nothing to do with the coding. Thanks for the answer, as I have never noticed that happening from large D700 images to small jpegs... Zeiss does not recommend that this lens be used on the M9 as the colour shift is quite marked. Obviously Corner fix can help with that. According to Popflash this is the only ZM lens not recommended (for that reason) Yes, B&H states that also, but I was curious to see how Cornerfix might resolve the problem. Diglloyd had reviewed the 21/4.5 on the M9, and pointed out the extreme shift, but had not attempted to correct it using Cornerfix at the time of his review. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.