DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #41 Posted January 17, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm not sure that you needed to send your M9 back because there was an asymmetric "Italian flag"pattern with the very deep-set CV15 lens. Lots of people have seen this. It's interesting that the pattern is red on one side, greenish on the other, strongest in the corners, but it is not a sign of sensor misalignment. It is apparently some interaction between the demosaicing algorithm in the M9 which contributes the asymmetry, and the glancing angle at which light rays from the CV15 strike the edges of the picture. It may be fixable in firmware, but sounds like major changes are required. Look for threads involving the CV15 and Cornerfix on this forum to see other examples. scott You are probably right but last time I had and issue with my first M8 I ended up having to send both. Since I have no time to shoot properly and no imminent trips plus I have my M8.2 I just decided to spare some time just in case. The result of both the CV15mm and CV12mm is indeed awful on the M9. I doubt it will be ever aded to the M9 firmware. Too bad, the CV 15 took really great pictures for the money on my M8.2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 17, 2010 Posted January 17, 2010 Hi DFV, Take a look here Voigtlander 15mm or WATE on M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Jerry_R Posted January 17, 2010 Share #42 Posted January 17, 2010 The result of both the CV15mm and CV12mm is indeed awful on the M9. After treating with CornerFix? Or you mean not sharp enough? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 23, 2010 Share #43 Posted January 23, 2010 I hope this helps; Both pictures taken with an M8.2 at f5,6 and 1/500. AWB on and not correction except conversion to JPEG from DNG in LightRoom. Excuse the poor weather and UGLY motif but it is great to test wide angles at a distance... CV 15mm WATE at 16mm The result on the M8.2. is very close as you can see. Once I get my M9 back I will do the same test but you will see a considerable difference between both lenses. If you plan on using the CV15 with the M9 you will need to retouch the pictures with software recommended in other post on this thread. Or shoot your wide angles B&W... Hope this helps. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted January 23, 2010 Share #44 Posted January 23, 2010 oops.. I just had an accident with my credit card and bought a WATE. Please nobody tell my wife how much it was Don't you just hate it when that happens? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 23, 2010 Share #45 Posted January 23, 2010 I hope this helps; Both pictures taken with an M8.2 at f5,6 and 1/500. AWB on and not correction except conversion to JPEG from DNG in LightRoom. Excuse the poor weather and UGLY motif but it is great to test wide angles at a distance... CV 15mm WATE at 16mm The result on the M8.2. is very close as you can see. Once I get my M9 back I will do the same test but you will see a considerable difference between both lenses. If you plan on using the CV15 with the M9 you will need to retouch the pictures with software recommended in other post on this thread. Or shoot your wide angles B&W... Hope this helps. Forgot to say that the CV15 is the new model with the M-mount... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piero Posted January 23, 2010 Share #46 Posted January 23, 2010 hi there! on my website http://web.me.com/dims.mac/dims/home.html at the page "M9" there are samples taken with Wate @ 18/21. On my flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/space4/ set M9, some more samples and more to come in the future. I am now using the Tri-Elmar a lot, also @ 16mm. With the newest firmware I don't see color or sharpness problems at corners. I like the lens and for my current field of application I find it very very useful. The viewfinder is indeed a bit bulky, and makes the camera heavier, and fiddling with Fl selection on both menu and finder, plus focus distance, then focus in RF then composing again in viewfinder... less immediate than using the old beloved 50 Wetzlar. But it is indeed a fantastic lens for serious landscape/architecture/interior photography. Personally, having tested the 18 Super Elmar sufficiently, I found the difference between WATE @ 18 and the Super Elmar only lies in color contrast, a bit punchier and Ektachrome like in the Super Elmar, but for my style of shooting not a must have. So the advantage of three lenses in one is still a major one. I had the CV15 and I found the lens a jewel for the price it costs. But the WATE is a different lens, with inherent qualities that made me prefer the latter to the former. At the moment I am using a sample lent by Leica's distributor in Italy, for extensive testing on M9, also lent. And I like it a lot. Hope that helps! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibanes Posted February 3, 2010 Share #47 Posted February 3, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Does one has some CV 15mm (the new one, that's M-mount with RF focus) shots on either the M8 or M9? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
35mmSummicron Posted February 3, 2010 Share #48 Posted February 3, 2010 Does one has some CV 15mm (the new one, that's M-mount with RF focus) shots on either the M8 or M9? This is a quick test shot M9 and the new CV15mm, manually set as 16mm Tri-Elmar, stopped down to F8. Notice the vignetting and red left side. Image is VERY sharp though...... 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/107451-voigtlander-15mm-or-wate-on-m9/?do=findComment&comment=1211044'>More sharing options...
tom in mpls Posted February 3, 2010 Share #49 Posted February 3, 2010 This is a quick test shot M9 and the new CV15mm, manually set as 16mm Tri-Elmar, stopped down to F8. Great shot from the standpoint of highlighting the lack of distortion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henkv Posted February 3, 2010 Share #50 Posted February 3, 2010 oops.. I just had an accident with my credit card and bought a WATE. Please nobody tell my wife how much it was How's your marriage? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted February 3, 2010 Share #51 Posted February 3, 2010 I am now using the Tri-Elmar a lot, also @ 16mm. With the newest firmware I don't see color or sharpness problems at corners. I like the lens and for my current field of application I find it very very useful. The viewfinder is indeed a bit bulky, and makes the camera heavier, and fiddling with Fl selection on both menu and finder, plus focus distance, then focus in RF then composing again in viewfinder... less immediate than using the old beloved 50 Wetzlar. This is important and useful - When you are using the WATE, changing the lens selection in the selection menu does NOTHING except for putting the focal length in the exif information. There is no difference to the lens correction. So, if you can live with the exif saying 16mm all the time, then you can set lens selection to auto - this means you only have to change the focal length in the finder. This isn't a guess - it was confirmed on a trip to Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted February 3, 2010 Share #52 Posted February 3, 2010 Jono, I assume this applies to the M9 only; with the M8 and an IR filter, the in-camera correction must compensate for the changing angle of view and the changing level of red vignetting from the filter. This suggests, doesn't it, that the WATE exit pupil doesn't move as you change focal length, only the entrance pupil. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted February 3, 2010 Share #53 Posted February 3, 2010 Forgot to say that the CV15 is the new model with the M-mount... OK thanks but what you're showing are M8 pics here. How does the CV 15 behave on M9? Doesn't it vignette a lot? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted February 3, 2010 Share #54 Posted February 3, 2010 Jono, I assume this applies to the M9 only; with the M8 and an IR filter, the in-camera correction must compensate for the changing angle of view and the changing level of red vignetting from the filter. This suggests, doesn't it, that the WATE exit pupil doesn't move as you change focal length, only the entrance pupil. HI Mark I assume so too. . but I didn't ask about that. I just thought it worth mentioning that many people talk about fiddling around in the lens menus when it isn't actually necessary. I hope you're well all the best Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted February 3, 2010 Share #55 Posted February 3, 2010 OK thanks but what you're showing are M8 pics here. How does the CV 15 behave on M9? Doesn't it vignette a lot? Hi There It vignettes a lot, and you will get a red tint down the left hand side. The only sensible way to use the CV15 on the M9 is using cornerfix - really not worth bothering otherwise, but excellent if you DO use it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted February 3, 2010 Share #56 Posted February 3, 2010 Even with this:match Technical Services - Thumbs Up CSEP-4 ? If not, it is shame from my perspective and needs... Any idea why we can't connect flash to M9 using flash SOCKET, and ONLY hot shoe? No reason at all. But Leica won't do it ... for inscrutable reasons of their own. Now there is a way. It is called the Nissin SC-01. It is a 'system flash cable' just like the Nikon SC cables, but (a) useable with Canon flashes too, and ( with an extra hot shoe on top of the connector that goes into the camera shoe. You can stick a viewfinder in that cable shoe. I must say that it would look pretty absurd with a Frankenfinder in it, but a single-length finder works OK. That's what I bought it for. You cannot find a flash that covers 15mm as far as I know, but bounce flash does work just fine. I use this technique with my Zeiss 18mm Distagon. The old man from the Age of Flash Powder Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted February 3, 2010 Share #57 Posted February 3, 2010 Thanks Lars! Is SC-01 TTL compliant with Leica flashes? Regarding covering 15mm - I used 14mm with flash directed to the ceiling and STOFEN on it. Worked good Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henkv Posted February 3, 2010 Share #58 Posted February 3, 2010 This is a shot with the Voigtlander 15mm, manual set as 16mm Tri-Elmar. The red edges are removed with Cornerfix (very simple). Bigger size (and more images with the CV) here: 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/107451-voigtlander-15mm-or-wate-on-m9/?do=findComment&comment=1211815'>More sharing options...
lct Posted February 3, 2010 Share #59 Posted February 3, 2010 Nice but M8 or M9? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jibanes Posted February 3, 2010 Share #60 Posted February 3, 2010 Nice but M8 or M9? You asked: "Nice but M8 or M9?" He said: "This is a shot with the Voigtlander 15mm, manual set as 16mm Tri-Elmar. The red edges are removed with Cornerfix (very simple)." The M8 doesn't allow user setting of lenses (except by doing physical lens coding). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.