MarkP Posted September 29, 2013 Share #41 Â Posted September 29, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) I would primarily use 28 & 50, and 35 much less. As I do with the primes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 29, 2013 Posted September 29, 2013 Hi MarkP, Take a look here Leica Tri Elmar 28-35-50 and 6 bit coding. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wlaidlaw Posted September 30, 2013 Share #42  Posted September 30, 2013 I would primarily use 28 & 50, and 35 much less.As I do with the primes.  Likewise  Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 20, 2015 Share #43  Posted December 20, 2015 I have a question as I have just ordered an uncoded MATE. I was wondering whether I could purchase a standard after-market bayonet and code it myself. I haven't had it in my hands yet so I'm not quite certain how the kinetics work with regards to the frame line selection. Looking at pictures on the internet, I'm guessing the mounted bayonet is fixed, and there are further mechanics as part of the lens itself. I would venture to guess a 28mm bayonet would be the right one, but obviously if anyone has input, that would be great. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 20, 2015 Share #44  Posted December 20, 2015 I have a question as I have just ordered an uncoded MATE. I was wondering whether I could purchase a standard after-market bayonet and code it myself. I haven't had it in my hands yet so I'm not quite certain how the kinetics work with regards to the frame line selection. Looking at pictures on the internet, I'm guessing the mounted bayonet is fixed, and there are further mechanics as part of the lens itself. I would venture to guess a 28mm bayonet would be the right one, but obviously if anyone has input, that would be great. I don't believe you can with that lens. The mount is pretty exotic and not as easy as Leica prime lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted December 20, 2015 Share #45  Posted December 20, 2015 I have a question as I have just ordered an uncoded MATE. I was wondering whether I could purchase a standard after-market bayonet and code it myself. I haven't had it in my hands yet so I'm not quite certain how the kinetics work with regards to the frame line selection. Looking at pictures on the internet, I'm guessing the mounted bayonet is fixed, and there are further mechanics as part of the lens itself. I would venture to guess a 28mm bayonet would be the right one, but obviously if anyone has input, that would be great. The part of the mount which actually inserts into the camera body is not a solid circle.  There is about a 1/4" cutout where the frame selection mechanism protrudes.  A unique mount is required and I rather suspect the dissemble is rather fiddly compared to other Leica mounts. Either a mount changeout with a genuine Leica part or a machining of the OEM mount is required. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 20, 2015 Share #46 Â Posted December 20, 2015 Thanks for the input. Looks like Will van Manen is getting another one to code from me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 20, 2015 Share #47 Â Posted December 20, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Thanks for the input. Looks like Will van Manen is getting another one to code from me! A wise choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Pope Posted December 20, 2015 Share #48  Posted December 20, 2015 I have just finished a brief lens coding session - coding up a Zeiss Biogon 21mm as a 21mm Elmarit  ASPH.  This was a piece of cake, given that it's just two black dots adjacent to one another.  As an aside, an initial attempt to code the Biogon with a single dot to mimic a pre-ASPH Elmarit made my M9 think I'd mounted a 135mm f2.8! The lens mount is also milled with a groove which takes the ink and prevents it from wearing away when the lens is taken on and off the camera.  To get back on topic, I looked briefly at the code for the MATE, having bought a rather nice example a couple of weeks ago, and thought better of it.  In my view it's far too fiddly and since the lens mount is completely smooth, the ink from a pen will wear away in next to no time. Until I can get around to having the lens coded by Leica, I'll have to make do and use manual lens settings.  It's not a major hardship, but I can see that at some point I'm bound to forget to change the settings.  Still, my Biogon is done, so can't complain! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrödinger's cat Posted December 20, 2015 Share #49  Posted December 20, 2015 I haven't actually tried to verify this myself, although now that I think of it I might do so today, but it's my understanding that no lens correction actually takes place with the Tri Elmar other than at the 28mm position.  So the only thing you would be losing with the uncoded lens is the focal length in the exif data.  Which I personally like, but not sure I like it enough to pay for the coding.  edit: Ok, so I actually tested my assertion and, as usual, found I didn't know what I was talking about.  On an M240 M-P I used an Expodisc outside pointed at a cloudy gray sky and set a custom white balance and manual exposure at ISO 200, 1/250, and f4. Vignetting is due to the lens/UV filter but no hood rather than the Expodisc, which was much larger than the lens diameter. If you are interested in such trivia, the results are at www.nightstreets.com.  Select restricted access and enter the code trielmarcoding. One shot at each focal length with auto and one at off.  This is what one does when the weather sux and you can't make actual photographs  In any case, I certainly hope you enjoy your new lens as much as I like mine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 20, 2015 Share #50  Posted December 20, 2015 Thanks everyone. Another question I may have is, if I select the correct lens in the M240 menu, would the focal length be accurate in the EXIF data? Cant wait to play with it. Should be here before Xmas hopefully. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 20, 2015 Share #51 Â Posted December 20, 2015 Yes. It will show whatever focal length is set and record it in the Exif. The WATE 16-18-21 will not as there are no corresponding frame lines for those focal lengths. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 21, 2015 Share #52 Â Posted December 21, 2015 Thanks for all the clarification. That all makes perfect sense to me for the WATE, given that there are no framelines for 16, 18 or 21. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 21, 2015 Share #53 Â Posted December 21, 2015 Thanks for all the clarification. That all makes perfect sense to me for the WATE, given that there are no framelines for 16, 18 or 21. When you look at the mount you will see a little moveable lever with a spring attached. That is the lever that changes the frame lines and in turn the Exif. It is a tad fragile. If the lens seems to hang a little when changing focal lengths just point the lens down towards the ground and it changes smoothly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 23, 2015 Share #54  Posted December 23, 2015 MATE arrived. Great piece of work, 1st version E55. Flare doesn't seem an issue as I've taken shots into the sun on both 35 and 50 FL, and have seen no loss of contrast, but I'll keep an eye on it. Outside is used, scratched and bumped as advertised, but optically very clean. The one pleasant surprise is that it is 6-bit coded and it looks like a Solms job rather than a Dremel one. Mechanically it all looks like it's working great. Frame lines are selected no matter what position. But oddly it seems the exif data doesn't always reflect the focal length exactly on my M240. Anyone else with this problem? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 23, 2015 Share #55  Posted December 23, 2015 MATE arrived. Great piece of work, 1st version E55. Flare doesn't seem an issue as I've taken shots into the sun on both 35 and 50 FL, and have seen no loss of contrast, but I'll keep an eye on it. Outside is used, scratched and bumped as advertised, but optically very clean. The one pleasant surprise is that it is 6-bit coded and it looks like a Solms job rather than a Dremel one. Mechanically it all looks like it's working great. Frame lines are selected no matter what position. But oddly it seems the exif data doesn't always reflect the focal length exactly on my M240. Anyone else with this problem? Try cleaning the six bit pit paint with a little alcohol and then the little window on the mount. The M-240 is fussy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 23, 2015 Share #56  Posted December 23, 2015 funny thing is that the lens is recognised and shows up correctly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 23, 2015 Share #57  Posted December 23, 2015 funny thing is that the lens is recognised and shows up correctly. Does everything look intact on the mount with that little spring lever? Do the focal length changes click into place firmly? Just some things to check.  While viewing the LCD.........go thru the focal lengths and see if they show up on the top of the screen when they click into place or just before or after the click. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted December 23, 2015 Share #58  Posted December 23, 2015 Everything looks intact, frame lines come up correctly 9/10 times. But the focal length doesn't change on the screen... Weird. Not a huge issue. But weird. Im picking up a MM1 next week. Will see then if it's the camera or the lens. Thanks a lot for all the precious advice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted December 23, 2015 Share #59  Posted December 23, 2015 Everything looks intact, frame lines come up correctly 9/10 times. But the focal length doesn't change on the screen... Weird. Not a huge issue. But weird. Im picking up a MM1 next week. Will see then if it's the camera or the lens. Thanks a lot for all the precious advice. You're welcome. Best of luck with it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBHewee Posted January 3, 2016 Share #60  Posted January 3, 2016 So everything shows up accurately on the MM1. Go figure what's going on with the M240. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.