NEW M8 Serie

[andreas_thomsen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

anyone knows how much of the new M8-serie II are delivered. when do we get the update to 1.10?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[carstenw]

I don't know, but the new LFI issue mentions that 1.10 will offer a switch for the IR filter being attached, and then will correct for it with coded lenses. 1.09 does not have this yet.

[scott kirkpatrick]

I don't know, but the new LFI issue mentions that 1.10 will offer a switch for the IR filter being attached, and then will correct for it with coded lenses. 1.09 does not have this yet.

 

I asked info@leica-camera.com if the IR-cut compensation added to 1.10 would be optional when lens encoding is being detected, and got a clear answer that it was not optional. In 1.10, a coded lens is assumed to have an IR-filter in place. Is that also the expectation from the LFI article? (As opposed to offering a "switch:" filter ON/OFF in the menus.)

 

This would not need debate if 1.10 was in the hands of reviewers at the moment, but I understand that it has not yet surfaced.

 

scott

[sean_reid]

I asked info@leica-camera.com if the IR-cut compensation added to 1.10 would be optional when lens encoding is being detected, and got a clear answer that it was not optional. In 1.10, a coded lens is assumed to have an IR-filter in place. Is that also the expectation from the LFI article? (As opposed to offering a "switch:" filter ON/OFF in the menus.)

 

This would not need debate if 1.10 was in the hands of reviewers at the moment, but I understand that it has not yet surfaced.

 

scott

 

This reviewer doesn't have it yet but I'm working on it. One challenge is that it's holiday time for many Germans already.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[elopezso]

Sean,

 

Am not sure what you saying. Are you saying that having an IR filter on a coded lens will be a requirement if one is to get the best performance from the camera?

 

Additionally, what does that say about using noncoded lenses with an IR filter from Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc.?

 

I am asking as I have an M8 on order along with a Voigtlander 28 f/1.9 and was thinking of getting the Voigtlander 50 f/1.5 also. But if you are saying that these lenses will be outperformed by coded Leica lenses withIR filters, due to all the M8s issues, I would change my order to Leica lenses.

 

As always, thanks for your help.

 

Ed

[Patrickxyz]

Hi out there,

 

I have talked to a Leica representative today at a dealer in Germany and I have seen the M8 he had with him. The version of the software was 1.13, and he told me, that the next version for customers after 1.09 will be 1.14.

 

The camera, version 1.13, had definitely an option for infrared-filters. You could chose between

- uncoded lenses

- coded lenses

- coded lenses with IR filters

 

Greetings

Patrick

[elopezso]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I still have the same question: will the coded Leica lenses fitted with IR filters perform better than a non-coded Voigtlander or Zeiss on the new M8?

 

I really think this is important with respect to the decisionswe make when purchasing new lenses.

 

Thanks again,

Ed

[artur5]

For non Leica lenses, as last and only resource, we have the home coding ( black pen marker )

[LJL]

Arturo,

That is generally a possible method, but there are some CV and Zeiss M mounts that do not have enough area in the coding area to accept any markings to be "read" by the M8. So we have to find an alternative mount (if one exists), or keep asking Leica to build the lens selection and filter options into the menu system to accommodate lenses that may not be coded or cannot be coded. I for one would prefer a few extra selections on the menu for when I mount a lens that is not coded or cannot be coded, yet for which I may or may not use a 486 cut filter. The Zeiss 25/2.8 is a good example of a new lens that is great on the M cameras, but cannot be easily "coded" with a black marker pen. It can take a 46mm IR/UV filter and do the job, but you will see cyan corners that the Leica software for their 24/2.8 could correct out. This is the kind of solution we should be asking Leica to provide. I am all for coded lenses, but for folks that do not have coded lenses, and may not be able to get them coded, there should be some reasonable options.

 

LJ

[scott kirkpatrick]

Hi out there,

 

I have talked to a Leica representative today at a dealer in Germany and I have seen the M8 he had with him. The version of the software was 1.13, and he told me, that the next version for customers after 1.09 will be 1.14.

 

The camera, version 1.13, had definitely an option for infrared-filters. You could chose between

- uncoded lenses

- coded lenses

- coded lenses with IR filters

 

Greetings

Patrick

 

That sounds like good news. Keeping the extra IR-cut filter correction optional benefits everyone, not only Leica lenses that choose to leave the filter off. (it's the second of two stages of red-vignetting corrections, the first being in the present firmware and intended to correct the existing green filter that covers the sensor.) There seems to be steady progress in the firmware effort, so I guess my question about 1.10 wasn't the right way to ask.

 

scott

[marknorton]

I still have the same question: will the coded Leica lenses fitted with IR filters perform better than a non-coded Voigtlander or Zeiss on the new M8?

 

I think the answer is likely to be "yes". Leica's effort are geared towards using an infra-red filter (to tame the magenta but create the cyan problem as a consequence) and a coded lens (to identify it to the camera and so sort out the cyan problem).

 

If you don't have an IR filter, you'll get the magenta, weak greens from vegitation and IR induced haze. If you don't have a coded lens, unless Leica let you select the lens type manually, you won't have in-camera correction for sensor and red vignetting.

[sean_reid]

Sean,

 

Am not sure what you saying. Are you saying that having an IR filter on a coded lens will be a requirement if one is to get the best performance from the camera?

 

Additionally, what does that say about using noncoded lenses with an IR filter from Zeiss, Voigtlander, etc.?

 

I am asking as I have an M8 on order along with a Voigtlander 28 f/1.9 and was thinking of getting the Voigtlander 50 f/1.5 also. But if you are saying that these lenses will be outperformed by coded Leica lenses withIR filters, due to all the M8s issues, I would change my order to Leica lenses.

 

As always, thanks for your help.

 

Ed

 

Hi Ed,

 

Which post are you thinking of? I wrote: "This reviewer doesn't have it yet but I'm working on it. One challenge is that it's holiday time for many Germans already." Could you be thinking of someone else's post?

 

I'm sorry if this sounds like a commercial but you'd likely find my current review of the 28s on the M8 to be very useful. I'd say the same if someone else wrote that article and it was free.

 

Black and White M8 photographers can ignore both the filters and the coding if desired.

 

Let's look at your question in stages as it relates to color work.

 

1st: All lenses require 486 filters to "correctly" reproduce color on the M8.

 

2nd: 35 mm and wider lenses show a cyan drift (red vignetting) in the outer zones that most people will want corrected. Leica's new firmware will have this correction built in, as an option, when one is using coded lenses.

 

I've worked with the Nokton 50 and a 486 on the M8 and they do beautifully together. For 50 mm and longer lenses, coding is certainly optional and a wide range of lenses (with filters) should work well on the M8, including CV, Zeiss, uncoded Leica lenses, etc.

 

At 35 mm and wider, there certainly are advantages to using coded Leica lenses because theses lense can be automatically corrected for the cyan drift in-camera. They're a fairly hassle-free choice. Other 35 mm and wider lenses can be used for color work with the 486 filters but one would need to one of the following:

 

A) accept the cyan drift

hand-code the lens to trigger the M8's in-camera corrections

C) manually select the in-camera corrections (if Leica adds this feature)

D) Use a post-processing workflow to correct for the cyan drift

 

Basically, one who chooses to use anything other than a coded Leica lens, for color work at 35 mm and wider, will need to do his or her homework in order to get good results. I've only tested the hand-coded 28s so far but there are, indeed, non-coded lenses that respond very well to the in-camera corrections when hand-coded.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[elopezso]

Thanks Mark, that's what I feared.

 

Guess I will call my dealer on Monday and have him order me a 28 f/2.0 Sumicron instead of the 28 f/1.9 Ultron.

 

Ed

[hammam]

Gee, I wish I could switch from an order for a CV 28/1.9 Ultron to a five times more expensive Summicron 28/2 that easily

 

But, let me sum it up:

 

- We learn that to get correct color, at least blacks, we need to buy and use an IR-cut filter,

 

- Then, we learn that using the filter will yield cyan corners in wide-angle photos,

 

- Then, we learn that coded lenses will tell the in-camera image processing to correct for the cyan shift via the focal length,

 

- Then, we learn that non-Leica lenses won't be coded by Leica,

 

- And now, we learn that future firmware will provide three menu choices: uncoded lens, coded lens with IR filter, coded lenses without IR filter. But no «uncoded lens WITH IR filter».

 

Does that mean that uncoded lenses with IR filters - cyan corners notwithstanding - will produce lesser images?

 

Is it only me, or it sounds like a Leica attack on CV and Zeiss?

[bnelson]

I for one and glad I have waited. I'm just going to use my R9/DMR until Leica gets all this sorted out.

 

 

Bill

[artur5]

Arturo,

That is generally a possible method, but there are some CV and Zeiss M mounts that do not have enough area in the coding area to accept any markings to be "read" by the M8. So we have to find an alternative mount (if one exists), or keep asking Leica to build the lens selection and filter options into the menu system to accommodate lenses that may not be coded or cannot be coded. I for one would prefer a few extra selections on the menu for when I mount a lens that is not coded or cannot be coded, yet for which I may or may not use a 486 cut filter. The Zeiss 25/2.8 is a good example of a new lens that is great on the M cameras, but cannot be easily "coded" with a black marker pen. It can take a 46mm IR/UV filter and do the job, but you will see cyan corners that the Leica software for their 24/2.8 could correct out. This is the kind of solution we should be asking Leica to provide. I am all for coded lenses, but for folks that do not have coded lenses, and may not be able to get them coded, there should be some reasonable options.

 

LJ

 

I agree with you that there must be some option for all the non Leica lenses, but I think it's very unlikely that Leica will release a firmware with manual lens selection. As we say here, sit down and wait..

What you say about some CV and Zeiss mounts not having enough space for marking is new to me. I'm just looking at the back of my two Zeiss lenses and the only possible issue is with a screw situated on the code zone. Anyway, Sean Reid -correct me if I'm wrong -coded several ZM lenses without problems. It's true that two of them -ZM21 and ZM25- bring the wrong viewfinder frames and fool the camera's detection system

[sean_reid]

The hand coding does, of course, wear off over time so it isn't a permanent solution. I've been able to code the following:

 

CV 21/4

CV 25/4

CV 28/3.5

CV 28/1.9

Zeiss 21/2.8

Zeiss 28/2.8

Zeiss 35/2.0

Canon 28/2.8

 

I've only had trouble with two lenses so far (because of the screw locations relative to the coding): Hexanon 28/2.8 and Zeiss 25/2.8

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[rvaubel]

The hand coding does, of course, wear off over time so it isn't a permanent solution. I've been able to code the following:

 

CV 21/4

CV 25/4

CV 28/3.5

CV 28/1.9

Zeiss 21/2.8

Zeiss 28/2.8

Zeiss 35/2.0

Canon 28/2.8

 

I've only had trouble with two lenses so far (because of the screw locations relative to the coding): Hexanon 28/2.8 and Zeiss 25/2.8

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Sean

You have noted that the VC 28/1.9 if self-coded as a Leica 21/2.0 might overcorrect the cyan shading. If that is true, why can't the enterprising photographer simply code the non-leica lens with whatever leica lens has the appropriate amount of cyan correction? I know it has something to do with the frameline selector but I don't get it.

I assume when self-coding screw mount adapters that "fooling" the camera is 100% successful.

 

Rex

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[carstenw]

- Then, we learn that non-Leica lenses won't be coded by Leica,

<...>

Is it only me, or it sounds like a Leica attack on CV and Zeiss?

 

I severely doubt it. Leica knows it won't make friends by invalidating the lenses which many customers already own. They are stuck between a rock and a hard place. There are no codes for non-Leica lenses. They can simply code what they sell, or have sold recently. We can code the rest. It ought to be possible to use the m8 lens code table and the template to get "foreign" lenses coded permanently. Does anyone know a machinist who would take on the project of providing accurate milling for paint holes in some random lens, like a Zeiss or Voigtländer? All we need is accurately milled holes in the lens bayonet with a depth of less than 1mm, and then we can paint the holes ourselves. In fact, we only need the black holes...

[rvaubel]

I .......... Does anyone know a machinist who would take on the project of providing accurate milling for paint holes in some random lens, like a Zeiss or Voigtländer? All we need is accurately milled holes in the lens bayonet with a depth of less than 1mm, and then we can paint the holes ourselves. In fact, we only need the black holes...

 

Some people are working on the machining problem. But let the dust settle a little bit with regards to just what needs to be done. Let me just say that techncally there is nothing difficult about permanently coding non-leica lenses. Whatever solutions that benifit leica lenses will be available to those that are willing to pay to have their non-leica lenses machined.

BTW, all six holes should be machined as then the coding can be changed or adapted at will....just color the appropriate dots with a black marker!.

 

Rex