Goofy Rides Again!

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The picture was taken with my M9 and a borrowed 21mm Summilux, at f:1.4. But the EXIF says this is a v.4 35mm Summicron. Yes, I goofed -- but, I hope, in an instructive way.

 

I had gone to the event (Stockholm Photo Fair, last November) carrying only one lens. You guessed it -- it was my old v.4 35mm Summicron. That lens was not coded, so I identified it via the lens menu. And then, in the excitement, I forgot switching to 'Lens recognition: Auto' after mounting that Summilux.

 

But, strange to say, the roof did not fall in. There's nothing technically wrong with the picture. Now, I agree that the background is quite busy, but the result is nevertheless interesting. Maybe we should do some experimentation to find out just what disasters do occur -- or not -- when we inadvertently leave lens recognition at the wrong setting. (Admittedly, switching from a 90mm to the 21 'lux would probably not be a good idea.) Even so, I do still think mounting a coded lens should override the previous manual setting.

 

The old man with the Flapping Ears and the Silly Grin

[adan]

Actually - I've shot whole sequences with 21, 35, and 75 lenses while the camera stayed at "35mm Summilux" accidentally --- or at "28 Elmarit ASPH" while experimenting intentionally, and seen no horrible edge problems. Just the frustration of "bad" EXIF data, and a bit of extra vignetting from the 21 only. Which probably just goes to show that 28-35 corrections aren't very strong.

 

Additionally, I've always thought the 21/24 'luxes were likely "digitally-friendly" designs - more telecentric - so they may not require as much correction as earlier 21/24 lenses, and the "amount" given for a 28 'rit or 35 'cron may be adequate.

 

Obviously, as you note, Leica badly needs to produce a firmware upgrade to correct for busy backgrounds.