Zeiss 18 vs Leica 18 and WATE - Coding on M9?

[AGeoJO]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was getting close of getting a Leica 18mm SE when an opportunity to trade a DSLR lens for a used but mint Zeiss 18mm f/4.0 came up. I jumped on it. The Zeiss lens is RF coupled and it has a groove in the flange. So, the ink coding works fine without any smearing. It came coded as a WATE 16mm. I am really impressed with the images this Zeiss lens produces. Since I am planning the keep the lens, now I would like to code the Zeiss lens as a Leica 18mm SE. After wiping the existing WATE code clean, I entered the code for the 18mm SE but my M9 failed to detect the code. As matter of fact, the list of coding on my camera in the manual mode using the current firmware, doesn't list any 18mm SE. I wiped everything cleaned and coded that to the WATE 16mm and my camera recognizes that right away. I did that twice and both times my camera failed to recognize the lens as 18mm SE but the new WATE 16mm code was recognzed right away.

 

My question is more addressed to the Leica 18mm SE and WATE owners. Does your camera actually detect and identify the 18mm SE properly although it is not listed on the manual code menu of the M9? How does the coding on the WATE work? Is the 16mm coding different than the setting for 18 or 21mm? I understood that the camera will give you the option of changing the focal length when using a "genuine" WATE but what does it take for me to get, at least, the Zeiss to detect 18mm instead of the fixed 16mm codes my M9 dictates?

 

Thanks,

Joshua

[Advertisement]

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

[stunsworth]

I can't answer most of your questions, but the reason the 18mm isn't listed in the manual table is because it's never been available in uncoded form, so there's no need for a manual entry.

[meino]

I was getting close of getting a Leica 18mm SE when an opportunity to trade a DSLR lens for a used but mint Zeiss 18mm f/4.0 came up. I jumped on it. The Zeiss lens is RF coupled and it has a groove in the flange. So, the ink coding works fine without any smearing. It came coded as a WATE 16mm. I am really impressed with the images this Zeiss lens produces. Since I am planning the keep the lens, now I would like to code the Zeiss lens as a Leica 18mm SE. After wiping the existing WATE code clean, I entered the code for the 18mm SE but my M9 failed to detect the code. As matter of fact, the list of coding on my camera in the manual mode using the current firmware, doesn't list any 18mm SE. I wiped everything cleaned and coded that to the WATE 16mm and my camera recognizes that right away. I did that twice and both times my camera failed to recognize the lens as 18mm SE but the new WATE 16mm code was recognzed right away.

 

The reason it fails to recognize as an 18mm SE is the mount. The Zeiss 18mm has been sold with 2 different mounts, the original came with a mount that brings up the 28/90mm frame, later ones had a mount that brings up the 50/75 mm framelines.

Your zeiss 18mm brings up the 28/90mm framelines, because that is needed for the coding as a WATE. So you can't use the code for the 18mm SE. However you could code it as the Elmarit 21mm f2.8. code 000001. In my experience that gives you probably the best results. I have a 18mm zeiss coded as an 18mm SE, but when I use hand coding through the menu, the results with the 21mm settings are better, I have even been thinking to change the mount of my zeiss 18mm just for that.

 

regards

Meino de Graaf

[lars_bergquist]

I too have a Zeiss 18mm Distagon with a bayonet that keys in the 29/90 frames. When I bought it, the Leica 18mm Super-Elmar did not exist, so the only way of coding it for the M8 (my main camera then) was to have it masquerade as a WATE.

 

This did not work well with the M9 however, as the wider field of view resulted in the notorious rededge phenomenon. Now, If the original bayonet had not been changed, I would have re-coded it as a Super-Elmar, which was available by then. But rather than switching bayonets, I changed the code to that for the Pre-ASPH 21mm Elmarit. This has worked out very well, thank you.

 

The old man from the Age of the Zeiss Hologon

[AGeoJO]

Steve,

Thank you very much. I understand that and by so doing Leica eliminates the option of other lens(es) to be recognized as the 18mm SE in the manual selection.

 

 

Meino,

Thank you very much. Now, I know why it doesn't work like I thought it should. I wasn't aware of the role the frame line dictated by the mount would play in the coding aspect. I thought the coding would be independent from the mount aspect. I heard that indeed coding an UWA lens to the 21mm Elmarit would bring the best results. With the WATE 16mm code, I noticed a slight reddish edge to the left of the frame but when I put in the profile as Zeiss 18mm ZE on Lightroom 3.3, the red edge is practically gone. I am happy with that but I will look into coding that Zeiss lens as 21mm Elmarit and if it is indeed better then I will keep the code.

 

Lars,

Thank you very much. I will definitely explore that 21mm Elmarit coding for the Zeiss.

 

Thank you again,

Joshua

[01af]

A 'WATE 16 mm' code doesn't exist. Instead, the code 01000 means just 'WATE', period. When the M9 is set to automatic lens recognition then the EXIF data always will record a focal length of 16 mm but the lens corrections applied to the images will be those for the WATE at 21 mm. If you want the EXIF data to record the proper focal length then you must manually select 'Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 mm at 18 mm' from the lens selection menu ... but that won't change anything with the lens corrections applied.

[hoppyman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Joshua, Leica camera didn't eliminate anything. What they added was the ability to use non-coded Leica lenses but apply the corrections for them without the coding. The frame line agreement was always been a requirement and you can still turn lens detection off all together of course. For other brands there are coding workarounds as you know.

 

That's an interesting one you've mentioned regarding a profile for the Zeiss lens in Lightroom. I took a look and the Zeiss profiles available are for their range of SLR lenses. I guess those are out there is sufficient quantities to warrant some attention.

As a suggestion if you take a sample shot from whatever lens you like and manually adjust for distortion, chromatic aberration and vignetting then save as a default.

That will not directly address any red edge effect though. Sandy's Cornerfix is the solution.

cornerfix

Steve, thank you very much. I understand that and by so doing Leica eliminates the option of other lens(es) to be recognized as the 18mm SE in the manual selection.

.....Joshua

[flyalf]

If you want the EXIF data to record the proper focal length then you must manually select 'Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 mm at 18 mm' from the lens selection menu ... but that won't change anything with the lens corrections applied.

 

Thanks, do you or others happen to know if this is the same for latest FW 1.176?

[algrove]

Interesting thread. I bought my new Zeiss 18 about the same I bought my new M9 in October 2010. When I first started using it, the camera showed the Zeiss as an 18mm. After my FIRST firmware update (I have not done the last one out a few months ago, since I often wait to see what is problematic with firmware updates), the camera then began recognizing my Zeiss 18 as a 16mm, i.e., it assumes it is a WATE.

 

I just accepted it and for me neither coding seems to have affected the look of my DNG files. So what does this say about my setup? I seem to feel changing anything just for the sake of changing it is useless. Any comments?

[01af]

The M9 camera will never recognise a Zeiss lens all by itself. So what are you talking about? Are you playing around with various manual lens recognition settings? Or do you have got your Zeiss lens 6-bit-coded? If so, which code?

[flyalf]

Please see this where I briefly discuss and compare profiles for the Zeiss 18mm f/4 T* ZM Distagon Lens on a Leica M9 (including WATE):

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/digital-post-processing-forum/210155-tag-photos-lens-metadata.html

 

And my conclusions:

I conclude that Cornerfix handles white-out conditions like snow landscapes best. The Leica built-in profile 21/2,8 (Lens detection – Manual) is only slightly less effective than Cornerfix. This is the best built-in profile for fixing color shifts on right and left hand side, and should be suitable for most motives except white-out.

 

Please see a couple of sample photos:

Cornerfix versus 21/2,8 profile for Zeiss 18mm on M9

 

Edit: and:

The code is b-b-w-b-w-w

[@bumac]

21/2.8 that's ok, for me.

[algrove]

The M9 camera will never recognise a Zeiss lens all by itself. So what are you talking about? Are you playing around with various manual lens recognition settings? Or do you have got your Zeiss lens 6-bit-coded? If so, which code?

 

Sorry for confusing the discussion. I checked and I manually coded it as an 18 SEM before getting my coder kit. After that it has been coded 010000-WATE. Why that code?Because the coder kit did not have the SEM 18 listed and at the time I did not know there was a list of the Leica lens coded available. Either way I do not see vignetting.