elvispreasley Posted January 14, 2013 Share #1 Â Posted January 14, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have a lovely portrait lens for my M8 - Voigtlander Color Heliar 75mm. I'm using it with B+W 43mm UV-IR filter (as all my lenses), but I'm also curious about one thing: does it make any sense to code it like "Elmarit 75mm"? I heard that coding is actually for the lenses with FL 50mm and less and all the lenses with FL higher that 50mm could be used not coded, without any affect for picture, but still not sure about it. Any ideas? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 14, 2013 Posted January 14, 2013 Hi elvispreasley, Take a look here Does it make any sense to code 75mm lens?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
earleygallery Posted January 14, 2013 Share #2 Â Posted January 14, 2013 AFAIK the only benefit in coding the lens will be to have the FL noted in EXIF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvispreasley Posted January 14, 2013 Author Share #3 Â Posted January 14, 2013 AFAIK the only benefit in coding the lens will be to have the FL noted in EXIF. Â Appreciate for you answer! If it's like this - I don't see any reason to code it. Probably somebody have another opinion? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestMichigan Posted March 2, 2013 Share #4 Â Posted March 2, 2013 While there isn't an image quality benefit to be gained from coding a lens of this focal length, don't over look the other benefits of coding the lens. The further one gets from the moment of exposure the more difficult it becomes to precisely know exactly which lens any given image was taken with. Having it recorded in the exif is an excellent solution for the inevitable fallability of the human memory. Further, I've come to see the joy of being able to search in Lightroom for the Images taken with my 28mm Color Ultron or Nikkor 13.5cm etc and having them all come together on one screen. Â These aren't all going to be useful things for every photographer, but this fellow is sure appreciative of them. Â YMMV, Not Valid in Cali, LSFMT Â Richard in Michigan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted March 3, 2013 Share #5 Â Posted March 3, 2013 While I like to have the 6-bit coding on all lenses used with the M8 and M9, not all of these lenses are Leica. The coding then records a different lens in the EXIF than was used. Â Marc Rochkind's ExifChanger can batch-modify EXIF information, including lens identification. Thus you end up with accurate lens info embedded in each DNG, of course carrying through to post-processing output. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted March 3, 2013 Share #6 Â Posted March 3, 2013 Appreciate for you answer! If it's like this - I don't see any reason to code it. Probably somebody have another opinion? It is surprising how useful it is to have lenses coded when analysing pictures in Lightroom (or other similar processors). I can filter such pictures with ease. Also when processing, a most modern coded lenses are recognized giving the option of applying preset Lens Corrections by lens in the Develop module. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satya Posted September 10, 2013 Share #7 Â Posted September 10, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I also have a question on coding. I know on the M9 it helps the camera adjust to the lenses etc. Apart from the lens detection on setting- there is no way to manually select lens on the M8 right? Because i havent found the option. I know you can do that on the M240 and maybe the M9? Â Getting the hang of the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted September 10, 2013 Share #8 Â Posted September 10, 2013 You are right: The M8 does not have the manual lens-setting menu, while the M9 and M (240) do. So on the M8, coding is more desirable just to keep it straight which focal length was used, for a pretty good idea of which actual lens was used even if non-Leica. I'm detail-oriented, and some users won't care as much, so it's an individual preference. So even for longer lenses where it's less important for the camera's algorithm to fiddle the file's corners, I prefer to have the lens coded. Â It's been my practice to send my uncoded lenses to DAG for two actions... First, get the lens machined to my preferred coding. Second, to check the lens for focusing to spec and adjustment as needed. Some have been off a ways, and it's good to know they're now on-spec. Â Being very pleased with the Voigtlander 75mm f/1.8 on the M9, using it more than anticipated, I'm about to send it off to DAG for coding and a focus check. Â Enjoy your "new" M8! Â Doug Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satya Posted September 10, 2013 Share #9  Posted September 10, 2013 Guess also in the long run a lot many may want the coded lenses. So good investment for later if you want to sell the lens? And it makes your exif complete  I was using old vintage leica lenses on a Sony nex 7 and I was wishing it would show which lens i was using i using. Unfortunately the nex viewfinder spoilt me a bit. Getting used to the simplicity of the RF viewfinder. (unfortunately still have to remember its a RF- as took a few shots at the cafe downstairs of the girl from the next building...and afterwards realized the lens cap was on! )  On that note- is the 1.2 viewfinder magnifier worth getting? Will it make the box larger to quicken focusing? I heard it moves the frame lines? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.