steve70 Posted December 3, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Amongst some of my lenses that I want to use with my new M9 is an early 28-35-50 f4 Tri Elmar. (A perfect travel lens) Looking on the menu under the "Lens detection" the lens is listed, but it appears that I would have to switch the setting when switching form 28 to 35 to 50? is this correct? Thanks folks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 3, 2009 Posted December 3, 2009 Hi steve70, Take a look here M9 & the 28-35-50 f 4. Tri Elmar. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
danielt Posted December 3, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 3, 2009 While showing the three focal lengths, the M9 select automatically the focal lenght. If you use UV filters, you must use SLIM filters in order to avoid vignetting at the 28mm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravastar Posted December 3, 2009 Share #3 Posted December 3, 2009 If your lens is six bit coded (which can be done retrospectively) and you have chosen Automatic Lens Detection in the menu you do not have to do anything. There are two components to lens coding. The six black and white depressions on the rear of the lens mount and switches operated by the frame line selection mechanism in the camera. The MATE causes the correct frame lines to be displayed as you change the focal length, so the camera knows which length has been chosen. Appropriate lens corrections are automatically used for each focal length and the focal length appears in the EXIF data. (Use the info button while displaying a picture to see the reported focal length.) What I don't understand is why there are 3 entries for the MATE in the manual selection table for uncoded lenses. I would have thought that one entry "28-35-50 ASPH f4" would have been sufficient since the firmware should be able to determine the focal length from the frame line selection switches. Maybe that simplification could be made in a future firmware release. As the firmware is at the moment for uncoded MATEs you have to manually select the correct focal length from the table. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bentham Posted December 3, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 3, 2009 I have used the tri-elmar with my M9. The results are fantastic.The lens has been upgraded so that it is automatically detected. Each of the focal lengths was automatically detected on my M8. the M9 detects the 28 mm and 35 mm focal length but it sometimes thinks that the 50 mm focal length setting is 35 mm. I have found that flicking the white line lever to 28 mm and allowing it to return results in correct detection of 50 mm. I emailed Leica about this fault but have not had a reply. I don't know whether lack of detection will affect the post exposure electronic processing or not. I await a reply from Leica but meanwhile I can live with this fault and the inconvenience of checking the lens focal length using the 'info' button. 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/105659-m9-the-28-35-50-f-4-tri-elmar/?do=findComment&comment=1139054'>More sharing options...
steve70 Posted December 3, 2009 Author Share #5 Posted December 3, 2009 Hi John, Did you send your Tri Elmar in to leica to have it coded? Mine is not, but when I mount the lens, the bright line finder does shift from the 28-35-50 setting, so you would think that the camera should know what's been selected. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Bentham Posted December 3, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 3, 2009 Hi Steve Yes, I did send my lens to Leica to have it upgraded. The white line frames in the viewfinder do change as they should but the electronics do not always register the 50 mm setting. John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve70 Posted December 3, 2009 Author Share #7 Posted December 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks John, Nice photo by the way, where did you take it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted December 3, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 3, 2009 I have not had the problem John has but I love my 50 asph lux on my m9 so much I decided to sell my tri elmar. I shoot low light a lot . I do love the wa tri elmar on the m9 though David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elopezso Posted December 4, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 4, 2009 I have a 50 f/1.4 lux, a 35 f/1.4 lux and the Tri-Elmar. The Tri-Elmar is on during the day unless I want to shoot a shallow DOF shot! The lens is amazing & takes on a new status with the M9! Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 4, 2009 Share #10 Posted December 4, 2009 HI Steve Which version do you have? I bought one of the very last version 2 lenses with my M8, and sold it (silly silly me) about 2 years ago. Since I've had the M9 I've bought and returned two version 1 lenses because they had a drastic contrast reduction at 50mm (in some shots). Mind you, it isn't just the M9, I tried the lenses on the M8 as well, and they had the same problem. This wasn't shooting directly into the sun, but it did actually ruin the shots. I really wanted one of these lenses . .. so I was deeply disappointed, but it would seem that care is needed when buying (they really are expensive right now too!). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elopezso Posted December 4, 2009 Share #11 Posted December 4, 2009 Jono, You are absolutely correct. I returned 1 for the same reason (bizarre decreased contrast at 50) before getting one that worked properly. Jono, do not give up, when you get a good one it is amazing!!!! I did buy mine, however, when they were not popular and dealers were desperate to rid themselves of them. Mine was still expensive but inexpensive compared to today's prices!!!! Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve70 Posted December 4, 2009 Author Share #12 Posted December 4, 2009 Hi Jono, I know what you mean, I noticed that Tamarkin has a newer used one, no shade, and is asking $4195.00, now that's crazy! KEH has one at $2695.00, no shade as well. And than there was one on eBay coming form Poland! and the guy wanted a tad ovr $5,000.00 go figure! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry joeng Posted December 12, 2009 Share #13 Posted December 12, 2009 If your lens is six bit coded (which can be done retrospectively) and you have chosen Automatic Lens Detection in the menu you do not have to do anything. There are two components to lens coding. The six black and white depressions on the rear of the lens mount and switches operated by the frame line selection mechanism in the camera. The MATE causes the correct frame lines to be displayed as you change the focal length, so the camera knows which length has been chosen. Appropriate lens corrections are automatically used for each focal length and the focal length appears in the EXIF data. (Use the info button while displaying a picture to see the reported focal length.) What I don't understand is why there are 3 entries for the MATE in the manual selection table for uncoded lenses. I would have thought that one entry "28-35-50 ASPH f4" would have been sufficient since the firmware should be able to determine the focal length from the frame line selection switches. Maybe that simplification could be made in a future firmware release. As the firmware is at the moment for uncoded MATEs you have to manually select the correct focal length from the table. Bob. I have tried my uncoded E49 version of tri elmar 28-35-50 on M9. The frame line in view finder changes accurately with the switching of different focal lengthes. But the focal length needs to be set manually in order for the correct focal length to be displayed in the photo info, hence the image optimization. I guess the automatic focal length recording in the photo Info is only available with the 6 bit coded lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 12, 2009 Share #14 Posted December 12, 2009 I have used the tri-elmar with my M9. The results are fantastic.The lens has been upgraded so that it is automatically detected. Each of the focal lengths was automatically detected on my M8. the M9 detects the 28 mm and 35 mm focal length but it sometimes thinks that the 50 mm focal length setting is 35 mm. I have found that flicking the white line lever to 28 mm and allowing it to return results in correct detection of 50 mm. I emailed Leica about this fault but have not had a reply. I don't know whether lack of detection will affect the post exposure electronic processing or not. I await a reply from Leica but meanwhile I can live with this fault and the inconvenience of checking the lens focal length using the 'info' button. John, I am afraid that is a fault in the way the mount talks to your M9. I had this with my MATE on the M8 but the other way around. Unless you held the lens focal length change ring in the 28mm position, the EXIF would show 50mm, even though the framelines were right. As my MATE had just come back from Solms for a different focus issue and my M8 had just been upgraded, service arranged a UPS pick up for both from my UK house and adjusted. They said they needed both, as the EXIF switch in the M8 framelines change might have been at fault but in the end it proved to be the MATE. It still needs to be moved in quite a definite way to 28mm to show the EXIF correctly on the M8. On my M9, it works better with 28mm on the EXIF showing up however you move the focal length ring. Someone in Solms, who better remain nameless, told me that they were notorious for going out of adjustment and needed to have a very gentle life to remain correct. I am guessing that is one of the reasons they are no longer in the catalogue. If they could price them around the cost of a 21 or 24 Lux, I think they could sell quite well. The price of a good second hand one has doubled in the last 3 years. Wilson PS Mine is very definitely NOT for sale. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
furcafe Posted April 14, 2010 Share #15 Posted April 14, 2010 I've wondered about this, too, particularly since the instruction manual (English version anyway) implies that the camera is able to pick up on the focal length information via the frameline mechanism even when the MATE is "detected" manually. Perhaps that was the intent when the manual was printed, but it wasn't implemented in the firmware. What I don't understand is why there are 3 entries for the MATE in the manual selection table for uncoded lenses. I would have thought that one entry "28-35-50 ASPH f4" would have been sufficient since the firmware should be able to determine the focal length from the frame line selection switches. Maybe that simplification could be made in a future firmware release. As the firmware is at the moment for uncoded MATEs you have to manually select the correct focal length from the table. Bob. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashwinrao1 Posted April 14, 2010 Share #16 Posted April 14, 2010 Wow, had no idea prices were sky high. is this the case just for version 2's of the MATE? I got a version 1 MATE with caps (no box, no coding) in excellent condition for $1,750 USD in January via a local sale. The seller did not wish to go online with her sale, and I was happy to oblige at that price Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonymonnick Posted April 15, 2010 Share #17 Posted April 15, 2010 Amongst some of my lenses that I want to use with my new M9 is an early 28-35-50 f4 Tri Elmar. (A perfect travel lens)Looking on the menu under the "Lens detection" the lens is listed, but it appears that I would have to switch the setting when switching form 28 to 35 to 50? is this correct? Thanks folks. I have a Tri elamar and sent it off to Leica to be 6 bitted. It cost £184 and works perfectly. No problems with lens detection or frames and gives perfect, sharp results. Given how useful this lens is (and what they are now worth) it is good value getting it 6 bitted. Results are superb. Tony Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted April 15, 2010 Share #18 Posted April 15, 2010 Got mine (a v2) 8 months ago from eBay at 2,700$, with box, caps, etc. Sent it to Solms for coding and CLA. Never had an issue with automatic focal length selection. A great walk around lens for street photography in good light conditions - else you may find f/4 to be too limiting. Only tricky issue, as others have stated, is flare in some conditions. Also, I find the default contrast rendering of this lens to be somewhat flat - it typically requires a bigger boost in post-processing than some of my other lenses. But that may be only a matter of taste. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted April 15, 2010 Share #19 Posted April 15, 2010 I got a recent V2 in mint condition, but without the box, pouch or papers back in early January for $2500 off eBay. I found a new hood still in stock for pretty cheap, and am waiting for Leica to deliver a leather pouch they said they had in stock. The last thing I will do is get it coded. It does look like prices have risen a little in the last few months, likely driven by the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted April 15, 2010 Share #20 Posted April 15, 2010 My guess is that unless Leica makes a V3, as they should, MATE prices will continue to climb. If you want to travel light, it is first class. The only thing that very slightly lets it down, is the 28mm length, which is not absolutely the world's crispest 28mm but is acceptable. If Leica make a new version, I would guess this is the area likely to be targeted for improvement. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.