A major problem with M9?

[spike]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have no idea what this issue is about.

 

Is it a pervasive issue with all M9's?

 

If so, which lenses?

 

Is this a major issue?

 

Please direct me so I can do so more reading on this issue.

 

Thanks so much.

Spike

 

Thom Hogan comments as follows:

 

"Too many M mount lenses still provoke red/blue shifts across the frame due to the thickness of the infrared block filter. That keeps too many people from stepping over to the M9, I think. For example, I might consider an M9 with an 18mm or 21mm lens for landscapes, especially those I have to do long hikes to. But these lenses absolutely seem to provoke the side-to-side color issues, so my interest is immediately weakened."

 

2010 Predictions by Thom Hogan

[hoppyman]

Spike, no it is not a pervasive, major issue that keeps too many people from stepping over to the M9.

You can search the forum for 'red shift' if you would like to read a lot of discussion on this. Members including Sandymc have contributed some very helpful discussion

[adan]

1. Note that Tom Hogan's article was published last November, when the M9 had been on the market 2 months.

 

2. It is true that some wideangles (< 35mm) produced images with red edges (which were really only noticed once the snowy season arrived - the white sheets of snow highlighted the problem). It is a complete non-issue with lenses 35mm and longer.

 

3. Leica issued revised firmware in late winter that modified the corrections the M9 applies to corners of images - for the currently made wideangles (18, 21, 24, 28) that showed the problem. Apparently Leica's really recent designs (21/24 Summilux, 24 Elmar) did not show the problem much anyway - presumably because they were designed with "digital" use in mind.

________________________________________________________

(The really long version is that:

 

> Leica M cameras do not have mirrors like SLRs

> Therefore, traditionally, Leica wideangles have taken advantage of that fact and sit very close to the image surface (film or sensor) - which keeps the camera/lens package very small compared to a similar wide lens on an SLR

> Unfortunately, those traditional designs are not "friendly" to the way silicon sensors work

> In particular, in this case, the sheet of glass covering the sensor that blocks infrared light to keep the colors "pure", ends up taking out too much visible red light in the corners with those older Leica wides and superwides.

> Leica corrects for the missing red light with in-camera processing of the image - but overshot the mark in the first firmware version, adding back TOO MUCH red and creating red edges with those lenses. Over-correction of vignetting also contributed to the problem.

> The new firmware changed the math for the in-camera corrections to reduce the excess red (in theory).

________________________________________________________

 

4. Lenses that still show the problem to some extent or another - non-Leica lenses such as the Cosina 12, 15, 21, 25 lenses, Zeiss ZM 21 f/4.5, maybe other wides. The extremely old (pre-1980) Leitz 21 f/4 and f/3.4 lenses also are not supported by Leica on the M8/M9 and thus show a lot of red edge.

 

My 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH, dating from 1983, still shows a hint of red edge in some conditions. It was not among the lenses Leica listed as "improved" by the new firmware, but still showed some improvement with the upgrade.

 

Search "red edge" as well as "red drift" - both terms were used in the discussions. Not much has been heard on the subject (until your post ) since Leica issued the firmware improvements.

 

For the record, this is what it looked like - NOTE: image made before the firmware upgrade, and with the saturation turned way up in post-processing to exaggerate the effect. 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH.

[elansprint72]

M9 has it's own forum, for the likes of you.

[vanhulsenbeek]

I agree with all above: this issue is history. Forget about it!