tony_vezza Posted December 27, 2006 Share #1 Posted December 27, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) My 16-18-21 Tri-Elmar arrived today, ordered in late October. It brings up the 28-90 frame lines on my M8 which don't change when different focal lengths of the lens are selected. It included a shade which is essential for protecting the front element which protudes from the frount of the lens barrel. I don't have the optional filter mount for a 67mm filter. I own a 21-24-28 modern view finder which I intend to use with the lens on an M8. I haven't bought the new universal view finder. Not sure what I'll do when using this lens on my film cameras. I had read here of delays and/or redesign of this lens which, at least for me, didn't happen. Without an IR filter and holder the lens does produce the magenta cast on my M8, so my example have built in compensation. tv Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Hi tony_vezza, Take a look here Late XMas Present, 16-18-21 TE Arrived Today. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
tony_vezza Posted December 27, 2006 Author Share #2 Posted December 27, 2006 ... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
c6gowin Posted December 27, 2006 Share #3 Posted December 27, 2006 Congratulations on the new Wide Tri-Elmar. You gotta be one of the first ones to get it. I hope you can post some photos taken with the lens. I am seriously considering this lens and would love to see some samples. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted December 27, 2006 Share #4 Posted December 27, 2006 Tony-- Congratulations! Those one-day-late arrivals do a lot to cure the post-Xmas blues in any case, and this is a winner!! Now we'll have two sets of gloaters on the forum--those who already have their M8's and those who already have their WATEs. I'm still waiting for both. --HC Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted December 27, 2006 Share #5 Posted December 27, 2006 My 16-18-21 Tri-Elmar arrived today, ordered in late October..... Without an IR filter and holder the lens does produce the magenta cast on my M8, so my example have built in compensation. Congratulations. After you see what it can do in picture-taking, could you find a nice uniformly lit white wall and take some pictures at f/4 and at f/8 at each focal length, so that we can see the strength of the red vignetting that occurs in the present IR cover layer? You don't need to post more than one, but a URL at which the others could be inspected would be very helpful. (I'm keeping a notebook on these, to see how they get fixed in 1.1x.) I will look back at the thread in which Mark Norton decoded the list of supported lenses in 1.09, but I think that the WATE was not yet supported with vignetting and color corrections. Thanks, scott Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #6 Posted December 27, 2006 Tony, you are certainly ahead of the game. Good to know that it displays the 28mm/90mm frame which is the same as the 21mm Elmarit. We'll certainly be interested to see some more pictures of how the lens performs, especially at 16mm and especially with regard to the distortion. The issue for me with this lens, as you may know, is that it does not adjust the frame lines or the coding when you change focal length, so I'd be interested to know what focal length is shown with lens recognition enabled when you take a picture and look at the info screen on image review. Does the reported focal length somehow change as you change it on the lens? If so, how in the world is this working?? Without knowing the angle of view, I don't see how the camera can correct for the different levels of red vignetting when an IR-cut filter is put on the front. The other thing which bugs me is that lens hood. With the filter holder in place and the huge 67mm filter attached, the hood and lens cap are going to be redundant. I've suggested to Leica that produce a filter which screws on the front of the lens with a thread to screw the hood onto it; it would vignette for film but might be OK for use on the M8. How many turns to attach and remove the hood? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted December 27, 2006 Share #7 Posted December 27, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) And one question to add to Mark's: Leica says they've patented the hood-mounting mechanism, so how does it 'snap' finally into the correct place? (Tony, I bet you didn't know your post-Xmas arrival would make you responsible for answering all life's little questions, did you? ) --HC Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted December 27, 2006 Share #8 Posted December 27, 2006 Howard, you can see how it works on the pictures on Erwin Puts' site. It is a screw-on hood with a positive stop. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #9 Posted December 27, 2006 I will look back at the thread in which Mark Norton decoded the list of supported lenses in 1.09, but I think that the WATE was not yet supported with vignetting and color corrections. It was actually Carl (Bretteville) who dug into the firmware update to find the table and he found (I've just confirmed) a reference to the WATE in the list of lenses. Doesn't mean though there's any vignetting correction built in for that lens yet in 1.09. I'm really surprised Tony has got a lens because my dealer has been told they've slipped 3 months, though that would be the first time Leica pressed the "Go" button by accident. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted December 27, 2006 Share #10 Posted December 27, 2006 One thing that had me puzzled was that there is no moving cam on the WATE like there is on the old TE. Check out the shots of the mount in Puts' review. How will they know which focallength you've selected to apply the appropriate corrections? It isn't really like Leica to select a middle-of-the-road/one size fits nobody correction. - Carl Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #11 Posted December 27, 2006 Carl, yes that's the issue that has us all (ok, a few of us) wondering. We know the lens code and position of the frame selection lever in combination is used to identifiy the lens, but with a single code and no way to change the lever, the camera will only know it's a WATE and not what focal length is selected. Scott's suggested that "one size fits all" might work for the basic vignetting correction but that was before IR-cut filters appeared on the scene and we know that they filter out red light at oblique angles before the light ever get into the lens so it will depend on focal length. It's a bit of a mystery. Seems to me they took two design decisions - single lens code and occasional filter use only - to keep costs down which are now proving to be a problem. With the actual M8, it's a case of the camera needing to know the selected focal length and the 62mm filter always being needed. Tony has confirmed the lens does not adjust the finder and needs an IR filter, so it will be interesting to see what, if any, response there is from Leica. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted December 27, 2006 Share #12 Posted December 27, 2006 Leica's design specs for the WATE give some information that is relevant for predicting vignetting and color vignetting with this lens. The lens gets longer as the focal lengths get shorter, from about 6 cm at 21 mm to 7 cm at 16 mm, but the exit pupil height (guessed by looking at the distance from the aperture to the image plane, which may not be the right thing to do) gets shorter. But not by much. It looks like 42 mm in the 21 mm configuration dropping to 37 mm in the 16 mm configuration. If that is really the exit pupil height, this lens will vignette at f/8 about the same as the 28mm Summicron f/2.0 that Sean Reid shows in his "28mm lenses" article, or the CV28/1.9 Ultron, which is a bit bigger and vignettes even less. If you look at the predicted overall vignetting in the three configurations of this lens at a diameter of 15mm (the corners of the M8's imager) the values are in fact slightly less than predicted for the 28mm Summicron. But the overall vignetting depends upon aperture even more strongly than occurs in the 28mm Summicron, and the correction in the worst case, the 21 mm configuration at f/4.0, affects all radii, not just the outer fringes. There is no direct information available to the M8 to know the lens aperture, so this variation is not likely to be fixed in firmware. This is why the "one correction fits all WATE configurations" ought to be a good starting point. Until you put an IR-cut filter in front. Then the difference between a 45 degree angle of view (AOV) in the 16 mm configuration on the M8 and a 36 degree AOV in the 21 mm configuration could be quite dramatic. scott Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #13 Posted December 27, 2006 They do have a fall back position and that is to let the user specify the focal length manually. One way would be to add an extra entry to the set menu "on-the-fly" when the WATE is detected from which the user would select the focal length being used. Not at neat as having the lens do it automatically but if the option is $10k to add some firmware changes or $250k and 3 months to re-design and re-tool the lens to incorporate the same mechanism as the current TE, the choice may be down to cost. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted December 27, 2006 Share #14 Posted December 27, 2006 Can you use with the M8 the 21-24-28 viewfinder instead of the new bulky viewfinder which was developed together with the WATE? Having to use the new bulky viewfinder is what I don't like about the WATE. Are there any plans on how to solve the IR issue via a vis the WATE? Thanks, Giulio Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted December 27, 2006 Share #15 Posted December 27, 2006 Can you use with the M8 the 21-24-28 viewfinder instead of the new bulky viewfinder which was developed together with the WATE? Having to use the new bulky viewfinder is what I don't like about the WATE. Are there any plans on how to solve the IR issue via a vis the WATE? Thanks, Giulio Yes, one certainly can. Cheers, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #16 Posted December 27, 2006 Giulio The 21/24/28 finder works fine on the M8 when a 21mm lens is mounted and the finder is set to 28. It's a neater solution, but the new finder has frames so that you can see outside them. There is also a spirit level which is useful for architectural work, but I agree, it's really bulky. As for the IR issue, the current solution seems to be to use the step up ring and a 67mm filter. It's one of the sizes listed and this is the only lens which uses it. The Noctilux and 75m/1.4 use 60mm filters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicabug Posted December 27, 2006 Share #17 Posted December 27, 2006 How much is 16-18-21 TE selling is US? How much is the viewfinder? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted December 27, 2006 Share #18 Posted December 27, 2006 The lens is €3100 without finder, the finder is €700, combined €3500. To convert to tax exclusive USD, divide by 1.16 and multiply by 1.32, so €3500 is $3995, say. €3100 is $3500, €700 is $795. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giulio Zanni Posted December 27, 2006 Share #19 Posted December 27, 2006 Thanks Mark! Giulio Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.