Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #41 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I went 4 at 16mm than to 18mm the first shot was dark, Than took 5 at 18mm. I did not even pay attention to the frame lines , i was really just watching the LCD with it. I will send a note to Christian and ask about the WATE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 13, 2007 Posted March 13, 2007 Hi Guest guy_mancuso, Take a look here WATE at PMA. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marknorton Posted March 13, 2007 Share #42 Â Posted March 13, 2007 The WATE normally shows the same frames as the 21/28 and 90 lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #43 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Mark I believe that is what came up but was really not paying attention to it, I was talking to people as i was playing so hard to remember and I wanted to try the 135 3.4 whichi wish i did not try , money wise. LOL Â I do need to know more about the IR filter solution for this lens. The hood to me is worthless because they are so small and not sure how effective it would be , my hand would serve better to shade the lens. I'm even considering selling the 15 C/v and 21 2.8 for it . Than get a 24 2.8 again. The speed is not that big a deal with that wide a lens for me Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Englander Posted March 13, 2007 Share #44 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Scott, Like Mark's, I get 28/90 frame lines with the WATE at all focal lengths. As a test, I shot each focal length with each of the three frame selection positions and all return EXIF of 18. I suppose that means that my WATE will be corrected at 18 with a filter and the April firmware but will give me nice cyan corners with the other focal lengths. Â Joe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted March 13, 2007 Share #45  Posted March 13, 2007 Scott, Like Mark's, I get 28/90 frame lines with the WATE at all focal lengths. As a test, I shot each focal length with each of the three frame selection positions and all return EXIF of 18. I suppose that means that my WATE will be corrected at 18 with a filter and the April firmware but will give me nice cyan corners with the other focal lengths.  Joe  Don't worry too much about the vignetting corrections. The WATE is so telecentric that it will need a smaller correction than, say, the CV15 or CV12. Those two will probably require photoshopping. And my guess, from looking at the drawings in the specs, is that the exit pupil distance changes by a smaller ratio than the focal length does when you zoom it. But of course, that affects overall vignetting and the effects of the filter at the sensor, and the red vignetting due to a filter (if you can manage to install one) are going to vary with angle of view, which is directly proportional to 1/focal length.  Guy, sorry about the cross-examination, but did all your 5 shots taken at 16mm with the WATE say 16mm, and then did it jump to 18 mm in the following frame?  scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #46 Â Posted March 13, 2007 It's okay Scott. When I switched to 18mm than it switched but the first frame was dark for some reason. But the first 4 shots were all at 16mm and it showed that, than i looked down to change to 18mm. I wish i paid attention more to what i was doing when I was playing around with it. Jamie will be in Vegas next week at the wedding show and i am sure Leica will be there again for that. Maybe he can give it a run. The folks at leica want to meet him also anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted March 13, 2007 Share #47 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for posting Guy - really useful. I'm in with my discount and amazed by the magenta control. What is going on there?! Â Tim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #48 Â Posted March 13, 2007 I'm wandering the same thing. i should have magenta blacks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted March 13, 2007 Share #49 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Guy, I take your point about the hood - it's a general problem for all hoods in that they are computed for the full frame angle of view and could give more shading; I don't find the WATE especially flare-prone though, the main use of the hood to my mind is to protect that very vulnerable front lens element. Â The use of a non-standard thread is a pain and, as you may know, I'm working to fit an IR cut filter glass inside the WATE hood and move the hood forwards by 8mm to clear the front lens element. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #50 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Mark from what i shot it seemed very sharp but you folks that own them can you give me the lowdown, you folks know how anal i am about this. I'm even thinking of just using a Contax 21mm External on it and call it a day or get the boat to put on it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest magyarman Posted March 13, 2007 Share #51  Posted March 13, 2007 I'm wandering the same thing. i should have magenta blacks  Mabe before nite some Leica work man was clime upon lather and put IR filters front of lamps what was above to Leica table  Ora on serius, mabe Leica start very quite to put IR coated on new ones lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted March 13, 2007 Share #52 Â Posted March 13, 2007 LOL Well i shot a my 50 lux with a filter on and it looks identical. maybe someone did change the lights. LOL Â Actually i think the LV convention center uses sodium vapor Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted March 13, 2007 Share #53  Posted March 13, 2007 Hey folks--  As someone who still shoots regularly without IR filters, remember that you're not going to see magenta blacks from  1) black natural fibers (like those suits, most likely) 2) lights that don't emit much IR (like fluourescent)  I don't know about sodium vapour lights, or exactly what kind of lighting they had at PMA.  Goes to show you how you could take many test shots without seeing magenta, too.  However, I do think, though, from my own testing, that one of the things Leica has tweaked in their new colour matrix in 1.092 is better magenta control (thank heavens).  IOW, from testing with plain ordinary tungsten bulbs and shooting JPEGs (no profile stuff here), the magenta issue is improved.  How much improved I can't say yet, but on shots of photo umbrellas (synthetic black) and my famous polyester black winter coat, under regular light bulbs, the magenta response is only a tick away from neutral, and really easily corrected in PS.  I'll do more when I get time, but I like the look of this so far. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted March 13, 2007 Share #54 Â Posted March 13, 2007 I wonder how many people at Leica changed out their black suits recently? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_l Posted March 13, 2007 Share #55 Â Posted March 13, 2007 Guy/Jamie- When you talk/see the Leica guys it would be worth asking if they would consider an M8-specific hood for the WATE - more coverage, taking into account the crop and having a (probably 55mm) filter thread in it..... Â Not at all as hard as doing M8-specific lenses..... Â Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.