gpleica Posted November 29, 2009 Share #1 Posted November 29, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Can anyone tell me what happens if you're interchanging lenses on the M9, going from a non-coded manual profile lens to a coded lens, but you forget to change the profile from the manual setting to the auto setting? I've done this a couple of times now, the light was changing fast and it's a step you have to consciously remember to do. Thanks for the input. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 29, 2009 Posted November 29, 2009 Hi gpleica, Take a look here Coded vs non-coded lens change on the M9 question. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
ho_co Posted November 29, 2009 Share #2 Posted November 29, 2009 My understanding is that the camera will still use the manually set focal length in such a case. (That's actually one reason Leica originally gave for not putting a manual setting on the M8, IIRC.) You can check this in the camera by reviewing the image and pressing the "info" button to see how the camera recorded details of the lens used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_Yoon Posted November 29, 2009 Share #3 Posted November 29, 2009 It won't automatically detect a coded lens if set on manual or none. With the M9, pressing the info button in shooting mode will give you battery, card and lens status - focal length and max aperture. You don't have to take a shot and go into review mode to check the lens setting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 29, 2009 Share #4 Posted November 29, 2009 Thanks for the correction, Nick. As you can see, I'm not yet among the M9 owners. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted November 29, 2009 Share #5 Posted November 29, 2009 Recntly I took my v.4 35mm Summicron out of semi-retirement and put it on my M9 for some 'street photography' at the Stockholm Photo Fair. It is not coded, so I identified it by the manual menu. At the Leica stand I got the opportunity to try out some exotic lenses -- the new Nocti, and the 21mm Summilux. I took the attached picture with the 'lux (the Summicron rests on the desk, guarded by the Danish Leica rep man to the right). I forgot completely to change over to auto identification; that 'lux is an exciting lens! But as you can see, using it while the camera thought it was a 35mm Summicron, as the EXIF data confirm, had no dire conseqiences. None at all, in fact. The same with the Nocti. However that may be, the performance of the old (1993) Summicron was so stellar that it is now in Solms for coding. But the M9 is definitely less finicky about lens identification than thw M8, which is of course because of the departure of the UV/IR filters. The old man from the Age of the 21mm Biogon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted November 29, 2009 Share #6 Posted November 29, 2009 Recently I took my v.4 35mm Summicron out of semi-retirement and put it on my M9 for some 'street photography' at the Stockholm Photo Fair. It is not coded, so I identified it by the manual menu. At the Leica stand I got the opportunity to try out some exotic lenses -- the new Nocti, and the 21mm Summilux. I took the attached picture with the 'lux (the Summicron rests on the desk, guarded by the Danish Leica rep man to the right). I forgot completely to change over to auto identification; that 'lux is an exciting lens! But as you can see, using it while the camera thought it was a 35mm Summicron, as the EXIF data confirm, had no dire conseqiences. None at all, in fact. The same with the Nocti. However that may be, the performance of the old (1993) Summicron was so stellar that it is now in Solms for coding. But the M9 is definitely less finicky about lens identification than thw M8, which is of course because of the departure of the UV/IR filters. The old man from the Age of the 21mm Biogon Sorry, the pic did not materialize after two tries! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted November 29, 2009 Share #7 Posted November 29, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) But as you can see, using it while the camera thought it was a 35mm Summicron, as the EXIF data confirm, had no dire conseqiences. None at all, in fact. The same with the Nocti. Sorry, the pic did not materialize after two tries! Hmm. "No dire consequences," the man says. But no picture to prove it, eh, Lars? Might not that in itself be said dire consequence? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpleica Posted November 29, 2009 Author Share #8 Posted November 29, 2009 Lars, I have had the same experience in that my 35 cron is uncoded and my 28 is, so switching the two out without changing the setting from manual (for the 35) and auto (for the 28) does not seem to have much in the way of a dire effect. But the coding must tell the camera's sensor something in terms of what to expect .... but I have not done my homework yet in post to see what, if any, are the differences. Technically, I would still like to know what's going on in the exchange between the coding (or manual profiling) of the lens and the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimF Posted November 29, 2009 Share #9 Posted November 29, 2009 Hmm. "No dire consequences," the man says. But no picture to prove it, eh, Lars? Might not that in itself be said dire consequence? Maybe he forgot to take the lens cap off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
microview Posted November 29, 2009 Share #10 Posted November 29, 2009 Maybe he forgot to take the lens cap off. So Lars's M9 is probably still grumbling away with a long exposure and noise reduction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.