New M and old super-wide

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sensor design of a flatter nature? I fear I cannot place that, what could be flatter than flat?

As I understand it,the shape of the microlenses has been altered to be more torpedo-shaped than spherical and the distance between the microlens layer and the receptors has been shortened, resulting in a wider acceptance angle, so the shifted microlenses of the M8/9 era have disappeared.

[Advertisement]

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

[menos I M6]

What makes you think that this might be the case? :roll eyes:

See posts earlier in this thread.

 

Sensor design of a flatter nature? I fear I cannot place that, what could be flatter than flat?

As I understand it,the shape of the microlenses has been altered to be more torpedo-shaped than spherical and the distance between the microlens layer and the receptors has been shortened, resulting in a wider acceptance angle, so the shifted microlenses of the M8/9 era have disappeared.

Ah, come on Jaap, you know what I meant.

To rephrase it more correctly: "a thinner sensor design".

[mjh]

To rephrase it more correctly: "a thinner sensor design".

What would that be? A sensor without microlenses?

[pgk]

The M's new MAX sensor from CMOSIS is said to be much flatter than the M9's CCD sensor, hence less sensitive to oblique rays near the frame's borders with wide-angle lenses. Many are wondering how the new M (Type 240) will fare with old-style super-wide-angle lenses, such as the Super-Angulon 21 mm or the first version of the Elmarit 28 mm, i. e. those with particularly short exit-pupil distances.

Symmetric lenses such as the Super-Angulon (which I own) and similar (such as the Hologon), have never been supported by Leica M-digitals. The known problems with oblique rays are I suspect, more complex to adjust for than it may first appear because when the lens is focused this oblique angle is likely to shift more than with other lenses, and will consequently change the correction required. Since there is no data transfer between the camera and such lenses (no coding availability) such variations cannot be compensated for.

 

Vignetting is also an inherent characteristic of such lenses and is significant and this may lead to excessive noise in the corners if compensated for. So it should come as no surprise that the latest M-digital cannot deal with such lenses - there are simply too many variables operating which prevent a 'global' correction dealing with them. Since software 'solutions' exist (with varying degrees of success) I don't see this as a big issue given the relatively low number of symmetric lenses supplied by Leica.

[01af]

What makes you think that this might be the case?

See posts earlier in this thread.

I don't see any posts in this thread which would suggest that.

 

 

Sensor design of a flatter nature? I fear I cannot place that, what could be flatter than flat?

Ah, come on Jaap, you know what I meant. To rephrase it more correctly: "a thinner sensor design".

Exactly. Maybe "flat" was not the proper word to use—I also used it, and I guess "thin" or "shallow" would have been better.

 

 

[Near-]symmetric [wide-angle] lenses such as the Super-Angulon (which I own) and similar (such as the Hologon), have never been supported by digital Leica M cameras.

That's right. And the question that arises with the advent of the Leica M (Typ 240) is: Does this new camera now support those previously unsupported super-wide-angle lenses? And the answer is: No, it still doesn't (at least not yet; maybe after another firmware update or two ... or maybe not). And you're right—this is absolutely no problem at all.

[wlaidlaw]

Had a lot of fun out shooting with the 80-200 f4 today - under-rated lens, and manageable size too - snap 'em up whilst they're still cheap!

 

all the best

 

Jono,

 

I don't think they are cheap any more

 

I got a lovely one back in November for £600. I don't think I would get that any more.

 

Wilson

[N_B]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

... I'll try the CV21 (a known offender on the M9) next.

 

@Ecar: Could you already try the CV21 on the M? I'm very interested in pictures from this combination. I own one too and would like to see how it performs on the M. The performance on the M9 was one reason not to buy not to buy the camera.

 

Thanks alot!

[wlaidlaw]

I will post some comparative shots tomorrow with CV15 M9 v M. I use the 21/2.8 correction on the M9 for the CV15 and that seemed to work pretty well. Since others are having issues with the Elmarit 21, I wonder if Leica have just not got round to writing the final version of correction for this lens yet and it will be coming in later FW updates.

 

As Jaap says, it would be very easy to correct in C1, if only they had an M profile. From corresponding with Phase One over the last couple of days, this does not look imminent. They have not even got an MM profile yet and that has been out for months. Given the healthy sums Phase One charge for updates, this is not particularly clever. They seem to be putting all their efforts into profiles for what I regard as upmarket P&S (Olympus, Samsung, Pentax, Canon, Nikon, etc mirrorless system cameras).

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

I quite agree, however for the M C1 at least recognizes the DNG, so it should be not too hard to make your own profile. Maybe some will be posted on the forum (wink, wink, you know who you are;))

With the Monochrom the case is different. C1 still doesn't support the DNG, so it cannot even read the file...:mad:

[Ecar]

@Ecar: Could you already try the CV21 on the M? I'm very interested in pictures from this combination. I own one too and would like to see how it performs on the M. The performance on the M9 was one reason not to buy not to buy the camera.

 

Thanks alot!

 

I did (see post #20 in this thread). Far from ideal, but may be manageable.

I won't post pictures (yet), as I fear they may be misleading and I haven't been in front of my editing computer (with a properly calibrated monitor) for a while.

Also, I'd like to give LR and CornerFix a try before making up my mind regarding the CV 15 and 21.

[douglasf13]

I did (see post #20 in this thread). Far from ideal, but may be manageable.

I won't post pictures (yet), as I fear they may be misleading and I haven't been in front of my editing computer (with a properly calibrated monitor) for a while.

Also, I'd like to give LR and CornerFix a try before making up my mind regarding the CV 15 and 21.

 

Once you install the LR plug in, all you need to do is throw a white tissue over the lens, and shoot into a clear sky at infinity with the lens wide open, and expose around +1 or so EV. Then, put that DNG file into any folder that you wish.

 

From that point, you can select one or several photos and then choose the plug in from a drop down menu. It'll ask you if you want to correct color or both vignetting and color, and then it runs a quick batch process. It is super easy.

 

BTW, I only do color correction, because the vignetting correction is much more dependent on the aperture used, so I do any vignetting correction manually, if need be.

[N_B]

I did (see post #20 in this thread). Far from ideal, but may be manageable.

I won't post pictures (yet), as I fear they may be misleading and I haven't been in front of my editing computer (with a properly calibrated monitor) for a while.

Also, I'd like to give LR and CornerFix a try before making up my mind regarding the CV 15 and 21.

 

 

Ok, i did not see this post. But is there still such a significant resololution loss to the corners how it was on the M9?

[Ecar]

Ok, i did not see this post. But is there still such a significant resololution loss to the corners how it was on the M9?

 

It doesn't look as bad, but to be entirely honest, I don't know yet. Sorry for not being more helpful.

I'd trust the crappy laptop monitor I have with me only to judge red edge or vignetting - not resolution. Should be back in front of my editing computer in a couple of days.

[wlaidlaw]

Once you install the LR plug in, all you need to do is throw a white tissue over the lens, and shoot into a clear sky at infinity with the lens wide open, and expose around +1 or so EV. Then, put that DNG file into any folder that you wish.

 

From that point, you can select one or several photos and then choose the plug in from a drop down menu. It'll ask you if you want to correct color or both vignetting and color, and then it runs a quick batch process. It is super easy.

 

BTW, I only do color correction, because the vignetting correction is much more dependent on the aperture used, so I do any vignetting correction manually, if need be.

 

I used to use an Expodisc but I have found a dead white wall works better for colour cast correction. Easy when I am in the UK but I don't have a white wall in France. If the sun comes out tomorrow (not expected in Sussex) we will see how bad the red edges are on the M with a CV15. I am not going to go out and do it in the rain, weatherproofing on the M notwithstanding.

 

Wilson

[douglasf13]

I used to use an Expodisc but I have found a dead white wall works better for colour cast correction. Easy when I am in the UK but I don't have a white wall in France. If the sun comes out tomorrow (not expected in Sussex) we will see how bad the red edges are on the M with a CV15. I am not going to go out and do it in the rain, weatherproofing on the M notwithstanding.

 

Wilson

 

Yeah, a white wall works, but you have to make sure it is evenly lit from all sides, which is difficult. A white tissue over the lens works great.

[wlaidlaw]

I am not even going to bother posting shots with a CV15 on the M. Pretty it is not (unless you like the RHS of every image tinted red)! I have my CV15 coded as 000001 Elmarit 21/2.8, which works pretty well on the M9. I tried on the M, coded, lens detection off and manual coded as a 11804 Elmarit 28/2.8. Turning coding on makes less of a difference than you would hope although it does seem to make a small (very small) improvement. There is little if any detectable difference between coded as a 21/2.8 and manually selected as a 28/2.8.

 

I sincerely hope that this is work in progress and not the finished article on firmware.

 

Wilson

[pgk]

And the question that arises with the advent of the Leica M (Typ 240) is: Does this new camera now support those previously unsupported super-wide-angle lenses? And the answer is: No, it still doesn't (at least not yet; maybe after another firmware update or two ... or maybe not). And you're right—this is absolutely no problem at all.

I wonder at what point Leica would consider that firmware loaded adjustments would result in an unacceptable drop in image quality? Software adjustments significantly increase noise in the corners if I use them with the Super-Angulon, and I assume that in-camera adjustments will do the same with images which suffer from both colour edges and substantial inherent vignetting. Perhaps we will simply have to accept that some old, legacy lenses are simply not usable with digital sensors and may never be (if high image 'quality' is to be retained throughout the image).

[wlaidlaw]

I wonder at what point Leica would consider that firmware loaded adjustments would result in an unacceptable drop in image quality? Software adjustments significantly increase noise in the corners if I use them with the Super-Angulon, and I assume that in-camera adjustments will do the same with images which suffer from both colour edges and substantial inherent vignetting. Perhaps we will simply have to accept that some old, legacy lenses are simply not usable with digital sensors and may never be (if high image 'quality' is to be retained throughout the image).

 

Paul,

 

Or at least we have to use manual correction templates in our RAW developer, rather than expecting all the correction to be done in camera.

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[luigi bertolotti]

Yes, he has the converted G, but JeffoJeffo has the 15/8, and is also posting in 'the view through older glass' thread. Here's a colour shot with the M9 for an example of how bad the colour shift is.

 

UGH !! Thanks for the link: I understand why they STATE is uncompatible... how can one adjust that impressive shift is really a challenging exercise... The CV15 is a jewel in comparision... (but.. had JeffoJeffo the graduated filter of the Hologon mounted on ?)

[rscheffler]

The solution for the bad Hologon color shift is to convert to or shoot in B&W.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/263929-old-lenses-monochrom-post-examples-here-6.html