M lens codes

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

50 minutes ago, catacore said:

Am I missing something?

If the code you're after is that of the Summilux 50/1.4 asph, the black bit has to look like this. Yours is too thick i suspect. Better use a template to avoid errors anyway.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[catacore]

Yes, that's the lens I was trying to emulate for my Nokton 50mm f1.5 II. Gave it another few tries using this method: https://www.google.com/search?q=leica+lens+coding+template&oq=leica+lens+coding+template&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i60l2.12632j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:f386e587,vid:F5OhMRw64wA

But no joy. Being about just one "dot", and a "marginal" dot, I assume I couldn't be that much off, but still did not manage, so I gave up. Also because, out of the three M lenses that I own, this Voigtlander is the only one with that recesed part within its mount, so even if this coding was succesfull, I would still need to dive into the menu each time I swap the lenses (to chose between lens detection "automatic" and "manual") since the other two lenses would not be that easy to code without changing their mount.

Or maybe my M240 needs the white dots to be painted white, who knows......(I think I read this sort of issue somewhere).

 

[lct]

17 minutes ago, catacore said:

[...] Also because, out of the three M lenses that I own, this Voigtlander is the only one with that recesed part within its mount, so even if this coding was succesfull, I would still need to dive into the menu each time I swap the lenses (to chose between lens detection "automatic" and "manual") since the other two lenses would not be that easy to code without changing their mount.

Or maybe my M240 needs the white dots to be painted white, who knows......(I think I read this sort of issue somewhere).

I don't need white bits personally. I just paint black ones the way i said above and my CV and ZM lenses are recognized on both M11 and M240 automatically. As for uncoded lenses, you can setup user profiles if needed. This way you won't have to dive into the main menu each time you use them. Just a tip.

[catacore]

Thanks Ict, I did set up profiles for my three lenses, but sometimes I forgot to select the proper one when I swap the lenses. It's just another thing to keep in mind when using the M system 😁

Do you have "proper" coding mounts for your ZM lenses (I mean mounts with pits). If not, do the markings (coding) wear pretty easy?

[lct]

28 minutes ago, catacore said:

[...] Do you have "proper" coding mounts for your ZM lenses (I mean mounts with pits). If not, do the markings (coding) wear pretty easy?

The native flange of my ZM lenses has a recessed area for 6-bit coding too so i hand code them the same way as my CV lenses with the same wear or lack thereof.

Edited January 26 by lct

[rsolomon]

8 hours ago, lct said:

The native flange of my ZM lenses has a recessed area for 6-bit coding too so i hand code them the same way as my CV lenses with the same wear or lack thereof.

I didn’t realize ZM provides recessed areas in the flange, that’s a game changer!

[catacore]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My 25mm ZM Biogon does not have the recessed area, unfortunately. It's the (old?) version that brings up the 28/90 framelines.

[lct]

1 hour ago, catacore said:

My 25mm ZM Biogon does not have the recessed area, unfortunately. It's the (old?) version that brings up the 28/90 framelines.

Must be an earlier version than my old ZM 21/4.5 and 85/4 that have both a recessed area. Same for ZM 35/2.8, 50/1.5 and 50/2. i have no experience with other ZM lenses.

Edited January 27 by lct

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wlaidlaw]

1 hour ago, catacore said:

My 25mm ZM Biogon does not have the recessed area, unfortunately. It's the (old?) version that brings up the 28/90 framelines.

You can swap the mount but the problem is that one of the screws is right where you want to put a code pit. You can get round this - see my 25 Biogon. This was done for me by a Leica Repairer, who I am not sure if he is taking on fresh work, due to age and illness. I used to use this lens quite a bit for super yacht interior photos, because it is very flare resistant, important when you have lots of halogen snoot lights for illumination. It is also somewhat more rectilinear than the 24/2.8 Elmarit-M, which was the alternative lens, when I bought this. I don't do yacht interiors any more, as trying to get paid by the yacht brokers, a very slippery bunch of folk, was a nightmare. 

Wilson

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited January 27 by wlaidlaw

[catacore]

I don't think I am going to go that extra mile and replace the lens mount on any of my lenses (just to get them recognized by my camera). I might, actually, end-up not even switching between my 3 lenses' profiles.

[jimmielx]

An alternative to the 3d printed or purchased template is just to print one out, cut out the relevant holes where you need the black bits and then fill them in on the lens mount. Doesn’t take long at all. I have just used a thin black sharpie and gone over the marks a few times. The newer Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses have a recess in the mount where the marks can be applied, so they won’t rub off in general use, but at the same time could be removed easily if desired. 

I have done this to most of my Zeiss lenses, but found on the Distagon 35mm that I preferred the results with the lens uncoded. So it would be worth doing some tests manually coding the lens first to check that you’re happy with the results, before adding the 6 bit code. 

In any case, it can be quickly and easily done. There is a link to a downloadable template here. https://lavidaleica.com/content/leica-lens-codes

[catacore]

I have downloaded the 3D printed template, the problem is to find somebody who can print 3D in my home town.

Then again, the funny thing is that I have just gave my Nokton another try few minutes ago. I have just put a black small line where I remembered, from yesterday, where my 3-4 try-outs (relative to the "C" from Cosina) - and now I have a big smile on my face. Really funny! But again, this will not save me from diving into my camera menu each time I swap lenses.

@jimmielx not sure I got you right: you meant "drill" holes (actually pits) into the lens mount and fill those with paint. Otherwise, given no recessed area on my other two lenses, the paint will rub off sooner than latter.

 

Edited January 27 by catacore

[jaapv]

21 hours ago, catacore said:

Tried myself last night to copy the setup from this picture (by not using a template, instead I tried to approximate the distance between the black mark and the "C" from Cosina), but it did not work on my M240. Picture below.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Am I missing something?

 

 

 

It is too wide and will overlap another "eye" of the reader.

[catacore]

Yes, sorted this out, somehow.

Regarding the mount replacements with the one with pits, so suitable to coding, are those lens specific? So if I want to replace the mount on my Tele-Elmar 135/4 lens (11851), do I need to look for a specific replacement? Or, for a Leica lens, any mount which brings the 35/135 framelines will work (e.g. are there differences in regards to, say, screws position for each Leica lens?)?

Asking this because I read somewhere that, if one has only one uncoded lens, all the others being coded, then there is a "trick" (a.k.a. setting) so that one does not need to dive into the menu for lens choosing purposes because the lens detection set to "automatic" plus other setting (don't remember which) will tell the camera to switch to the uncoded lens each time it can't detect a coded lens. So, in my case, having 2 lens coded out of three should save me from menu diving (so I need to code one more lens, either the Biogon 25mm or the said Tele-Elmar 11851 lens).

Edited January 27 by catacore

[jimmielx]

2 hours ago, catacore said:

@jimmielx not sure I got you right: you meant "drill" holes (actually pits) into the lens mount and fill those with paint. Otherwise, given no recessed area on my other two lenses, the paint will rub off sooner than latter.

 

Apologies, I see that your lenses do not have the recessed groove. That does indeed make it harder and as you say any marking will come off sooner quickly. 
The point was more generally that if one just wanted to try making markings on a lens (particularly with the recessed groove on the mount) you can download a free template and give it a go - I haven’t felt the need to purchase a template. 
I actually did drill or route pits into the mount of an old lens once, using a small pillar drill and carefully masking off. Worked fine and pretty straight forward, but I wouldn’t recommend that unless you are very confident with what you are doing…! 

Edited January 27 by jimmielx

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

22 minutes ago, catacore said:

Regarding the mount replacements with the one with pits, so suitable to coding, are those lens specific? So if I want to replace the mount on my Tele-Elmar 135/4 lens (11851), do I need to look for a specific replacement? Or, for a Leica lens, any mount which brings the 35/135 framelines will work (e.g. are there differences in regards to, say, screws position for each Leica lens?)?

The Tele-Elmar 135/4 # 11851 has a thick flange that cannot be coded by Leica AFAIK. If you find a replacement for that flange please be kind enough to report it here as i will be glad to order a copy. More generally, 135mm lenses are at the limit of the rangefinder's accuracy so the least difference in thickness of the flange car lead to out of focus photos. I mean in RF mode as in LV mode it is not a problem at all.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

52 minutes ago, catacore said:

I read somewhere that, if one has only one uncoded lens, all the others being coded, then there is a "trick" (a.k.a. setting) so that one does not need to dive into the menu for lens choosing purposes because the lens detection set to "automatic" plus other setting (don't remember which) will tell the camera to switch to the uncoded lens each time it can't detect a coded lens. So, in my case, having 2 lens coded out of three should save me from menu diving (so I need to code one more lens, either the Biogon 25mm or the said Tele-Elmar 11851 lens).

The camera keeps the profile of the last manually coded uncoded lens () in memory. So if you have only one uncoded lens and you code it manually as a 135/4, in your example, the camera will apply that same 135/4 profile to each uncoded lens you will put on it afterwards. Is is true for your Tele-Elmar but it would be true also for, say, an uncoded Rokkor 28/2.8 as long as you don't choose a 28mm profile manually. But if you choose that 28mm profile and you put again your 135/4 on the camera, the latter will still apply the 28mm profile it has in memory. Crystal clear no?

[catacore]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

The camera keeps the profile of the last manually coded uncoded lens () in memory. So if you have only one uncoded lens and you code it manually as a 135/4, in your example, the camera will apply that same 135/4 profile to each uncoded lens you will put on it afterwards. Is is true for your Tele-Elmar but it would be true also for, say, an uncoded Rokkor 28/2.8 as long as you don't choose a 28mm profile manually. But if you choose that 28mm profile and you put again your 135/4 on the camera, the latter will still apply the 28mm profile it has in memory. Crystal clear no?

Yes, this is the info I was talking about, but did not remember where I saw it. So if I manage, somehow, to code my Zeiss Biogon or the Tele-Elmar, then I will not have to dive into menus anymore (for lens changing purposes). This is the advantage of having less lenses 😁, coinciding, actually, with the advantage of using Leica M: less settings, less options, simpler menu, leading, hopefully, to more focus on photography....

About Tele-Elmar 4/135, I understand there is no official code for that, only for the APO-Telyt. Being very new to rangefinder focusing, I am still amazed I am able to nail focus with the Tele-Elmar quite often. Thinking to aquire a 1.25 or 1.4 magnifier, though (as it should help with focusing my CV 50mm 1.5 II as well, and, for the Zeiss, ideally, I should use the EVF - which I have but don't, actually, use).

[lct]

3 minutes ago, catacore said:

[...] Thinking to aquire a 1.25 or 1.4 magnifier, though (as it should help with focusing my CV 50mm 1.5 II as well [...]

You don't need a magnifier for the 50/1.5, which is less demanding than the 135/4 in RF mode, but it may help if your visual acuity is not perfect. 

[lct]

1 hour ago, catacore said:

About Tele-Elmar 4/135, I understand there is no official code for that, only for the APO-Telyt.

I'm not aware of a code number for Elmar or Tele-Elmar 135/4 but there is one not only for the Apo-Telyt 135/3.4 (110101) but also for the Elmarit 135/2.8 (001001).

Edited January 27 by lct