Preparing for the M

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Actually Leica never said the filters were made by Hoya. The official statement was : "made in Japan but not by Hoya". The actual maker was never revealed.

[jonoslack]

I suspect that this might turn out not to be a simple Yes / No answer.

 

I know a man who will make sure that this is properly clarified as soon as possible, and if the clarification is unpalatable, then he'll make a big effort to get it so that the coding works with all the different frameline settings.

 

Of course, Leica will want to sell as many adapters as possible, but they won't want to discourage people who want to use third party lenses, and they probably won't want to be answering lots and lots of questions about this!

[dkCambridgeshire]

This afternoon after several days' deliberation decided to order a Leica M CMOS ... and sell my M8.2 via the dealer to part fund it.

 

After paying the deposit I feel happy and relieved to have made the decision ... just the same as when I bought my first Leica outfit in 1988 ... that was a Leicaflex SL with a Mk I 50mm Summicron and Mk I 90mm Elmarit R. I still have the 50mm Summicron and will be using it on the New M.

 

Now have to decide exactly which R accessories I need.

 

I'll sleep better tonight.

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

[jonoslack]

Congratulations dunk

[01af]

As you say, Leica must have reserved 25-1, 25-2, and 25-3 for the Elmarit-M 24 Asph.

But they haven't. The Elmarit-M 24 mm Asph's code is 25-2, and the codes 25-1 and 25-3 are unused. When your Biogon 25 mm ZM is coded as Elmarit-M 24 mm Asph and brings up the 28/90 pair of framelines then the M9 won't recognise it.

[wlaidlaw]

Olaf,

 

You don't feel that you should be using the user name Thomas - Doubting Thomas?

 

See photos below taken this afternoon.

 

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!

[luigi bertolotti]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This afternoon after several days' deliberation decided to order a Leica M CMOS ... and sell my M8.2 via the dealer to part fund it.

 

After paying the deposit I feel happy and relieved to have made the decision ... just the same as when I bought my first Leica outfit in 1988 ... that was a Leicaflex SL with a Mk I 50mm Summicron and Mk I 90mm Elmarit R. I still have the 50mm Summicron and will be using it on the New M.

 

Now have to decide exactly which R accessories I need.

 

I'll sleep better tonight.

 

Best wishes

 

dunk

 

Congratulations, Dunk... I'll join in some day of 2013... but dunno yet which one...

[k-hawinkler]

I suspect that this might turn out not to be a simple Yes / No answer.

 

I know a man who will make sure that this is properly clarified as soon as possible, and if the clarification is unpalatable, then he'll make a big effort to get it so that the coding works with all the different frameline settings.

 

Of course, Leica will want to sell as many adapters as possible, but they won't want to discourage people who want to use third party lenses, and they probably won't want to be answering lots and lots of questions about this!

 

 

Jono,

 

Many thanks for communicating, as an accomplished photographer, these delicate issues so diplomatically.

I wish you and all of us that you and other like-minded folks are successful.

[wlaidlaw]

Bad news guys - I am afraid following received from Jesko this afternoon.

 

Dear Mr. Laidlaw

 

I checked this with the engineers. The framing lever position does count. So I think it would not work with this mount.

 

Sorry to say, but this is done due to a better reliability with the real adapter.

 

Best Regards, Jesko v. Oeynhausen

 

I will ask David if he will exchange my 35/135 adapter for a 28/90 one.

 

Wilson

[k-hawinkler]

Hi Wilson,

 

Thanks for the info.

I guess, Novoflex and others better get with the program, especially for non-Leica lenses to M adapters to implement the 28/90 frame lines selection.

Good job finding out now.

 

The reason given, to quote Hillary Clinton, requires a willing suspension of disbelief, at least for me.

[jaapv]

Bad news guys - I am afraid following received from Jesko this afternoon.

 

Dear Mr. Laidlaw

 

I checked this with the engineers. The framing lever position does count. So I think it would not work with this mount.

 

Sorry to say, but this is done due to a better reliability with the real adapter.

 

Best Regards, Jesko v. Oeynhausen

 

I will ask David if he will exchange my 35/135 adapter for a 28/90 one.

Wilson

Or shoot your lenses unrecognized. It is not as if any corrections have to be made, the code only triggers the menu; it is simply a matter of Exif. Which must be set in menu anyway so certainly not error-proof.

[01af]

See photos below taken this afternoon.

Weird. Seems you're the only person for whom this set-up actually works. All the other owners of the Biogon 25 mm ZM needed to have their bayonets changed by Zeiss in order to make the 011001 code work ... or use the code for a 21 mm or 28 mm lens instead.

 

Which firmware version are you using? Maybe Leica has changed the behaviour of the M9 so it now accepts 25-1 just as well as 25-2 (which it didn't in the past), to make life easier for Biogon 25 mm ZM users ... however I can still hardly believe it. Can you also post a picture of the back of your 25 mm lens please?

[01af]

It is not as if any corrections have to be made, the code only triggers the menu; it is simply a matter of EXIF.

What makes you think so?

[wlaidlaw]

Weird. Seems you're the only person for whom this set-up actually works. All the other owners of the Biogon 25 mm ZM needed to have their bayonets changed by Zeiss in order to make the 011001 code work ... or use the code for a 21 mm or 28 mm lens instead.

 

Which firmware version are you using? Maybe Leica has changed the behaviour of the M9 so it now accepts 25-1 just as well as 25-2 (which it didn't in the past), to make life easier for Biogon 25 mm ZM users ... however I can still hardly believe it. Can you also post a picture of the back of your 25 mm lens please?

 

Olaf,

 

I am still using the 1.196 beta. I never updated to the final FW, as it all seemed to be working fine. Whether this was a weird anomaly/error on the beta firmware I cannot say. I am very tempted to leave it as it is in case this gets corrected in the final FW. I do actually have a spare 35/135 Zeiss lens mount, which I could fit, if this strange feature disappears and starts to behave "normally" on a future FW update.

 

Wilson

[jonoslack]

What makes you think so?

 

Well, two points really.

Firstly, if Leica are providing support for, for instance, the 28-90 zoom, and the 21-35 zoom, there is no way for the camera to know what the actual focal length is.

Secondly, the R lenses are much more "telecentric" than M lenses with an equivalent focal length. So that adjustments are much less likely to be needed

 

That's what makes me think so. But of course, it's just a guess.

[robsteve]

Or shoot your lenses unrecognized. It is not as if any corrections have to be made, the code only triggers the menu; it is simply a matter of Exif. Which must be set in menu anyway so certainly not error-proof.

 

It would be highly unlikely that Leica does no lens corrections on Leica R lenses it can identify and would benefit from correction. Case in point, DMR, M8, M8.2, M9 and M9P.

[robsteve]

Just putting this all in one post so you know we have to wait for production firmware. As Jono posted above, perhaps Leica can be convinced to allow any R to M adapter to work. Just to show I have a self interest in the outcome, I am the owner of a Novoflex LEM/LER, though I have owned it for years.

 

If the Leica adapter is 6 bit coded, it will also have to bring up the correct frame lines for the code to be read as the proper accessory or lens. That is how the codes work for the lenses, 6 bits plus the frame line selected.

 

Bad news guys - I am afraid following received from Jesko this afternoon.

 

Dear Mr. Laidlaw

 

I checked this with the engineers. The framing lever position does count. So I think it would not work with this mount.

 

Sorry to say, but this is done due to a better reliability with the real adapter.

 

Best Regards, Jesko v. Oeynhausen

 

Wilson

 

Anyway, just using the UV-IR filter miscommunications as an example, you take a risk buying third party products before the camera is introduced. It only requires a very small change in the firmware code for Leica to require a certain frameline for the M to R adapter to work. We will only know once we see production cameras with production firmware.

 

Olaf,

 

I am still using the 1.196 beta. I never updated to the final FW, as it all seemed to be working fine. Whether this was a weird anomaly/error on the beta firmware I cannot say. I am very tempted to leave it as it is in case this gets corrected in the final FW. I do actually have a spare 35/135 Zeiss lens mount, which I could fit, if this strange feature disappears and starts to behave "normally" on a future FW update.

 

Wilson

[01af]

Firstly, if Leica are providing support for, for instance, the 28-90 zoom, and the 21-35 zoom, there is no way for the camera to know what the actual focal length is.

Secondly, the R lenses are much more "telecentric" than M lenses with an equivalent focal length. So that adjustments are much less likely to be needed.

Two good points indeed. On the other hand, there are two M zoom lenses. One of them—the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 mm Asph—cannot tell the camera what the actual focal length is, and yet there's some in-camera correction for it. Furthermore, the distances of the exit pupils of the Leica 90 mm and 135 mm M lenses are no shorter than those for the respective R lenses, and yet there's some in-camera corrections for them. Well, the M's new CMOSIS sensor allegedly will require less vignetting correction than the M9's CCD sensor. Still, "less" is not the same as "none at all."

 

So I'd rather not be so fast with bold statements about whether or not the new M will apply some in-camera corrections to R lenses. Maybe it will, or maybe not. Or maybe it will for some but not for others. We simply don't know yet. The simple fact that the list of supported R lenses is pretty short right now and announced to become expanded with future firmware updates is, in my opinion, strong evidence that adding R lenses to the list means more than just including a few character strings with lens names to the firmware.

[01af]

I am still using the 1.196 beta. I never updated to the final FW ...

There is no difference between "1.196 beta" and "the final firmware." These two are the very same thing.

 

I still believe there is something strange going on. Could you please check what lens code and frameline code actually are recorded in the MakerNotes section of the metadata of the image files taken with your automagically recognised Biogon 25 mm ZM lens?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[thighslapper]

 

So I'd rather not be so fast with bold statements about whether or not the new M will apply some in-camera corrections to R lenses. Maybe it will, or maybe not. Or maybe it will for some but not for others. We simply don't know yet. The simple fact that the list of supported R lenses is pretty short right now and announced to become expanded with future firmware updates is, in my opinion, strong evidence that adding R lenses to the list means more than just including a few character strings with lens names to the firmware.

 

Hear, hear..... some sanity......

 

If I was Leica I would ensure the M works perfectly with M series lenses.....

 

..... is able to use the commoner R series lenses with manually set correction for wide angle problems and vignetting.......

 

...... and couldn't care less about what other daft things the general public want to bolt onto it......

 

It would be nice if they included some in camera variable user settings for vignetting or other issues but I don't see it happening ....