Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hankg

Sign a petition for menu selectable lens profiles

Recommended Posts

When the camera was announced it's main feature was compatibility with the entire universe of M mount lenses. One of the most impressive collections of glass in the photographic world. The IR/6-bit coding business has thrown a monkey wrench into that primary benifit. Leica should restore the full promise of what it sold with the original M8 announcement.

 

I think all Leica said is it is compatible with all their lenses except the few they listed as not compatible. I don't think they ever made any claims regarding third party lenses.

 

I would rather not have the lens selection menu if it slowed down the use of the M8 or introduced other bugs.

 

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

My thoughts on this whole subject have not changed and still think if you can code the lenses than your better off coding them to Leica's comparable lens this way the coding come up automatically and the cyan cast can be applied to that focal length in the next firmware upgrade. Now i still agree that we should have a optional menu item because some cannot be coded and we should have that option to set that in the menu. But i still say you want to code what you can because even if Leica does do this as a option like we have asked for the question is when. Than the issue is you have a 3800 dollar Zeiss 15mm that sits around and does nothing for you, you guysknow me well enough that i live by the i want it today method and don't want to wait for anything. But we will have to wait for Leica to make this decision and also implement it. Now do we wait , no we find a way to get the use out of the glass you have and try and code it somehow, this way at least you can use it with the IR filters and get the benefit of the cyan cast correction in the next firmware.

 

No beating around the bush here folks it looks wonderful the correction, so try as you may to get yourself working when this hits the streets with the new firmware. If you can't get them all to work at least you can get some until the menu option becomes a reality and all of you know Sean , Myself and others are in there asking for this but the request for it is good. Not crazy about the word petition but that's just me . But Sean or myself will be happy to pass along the results of this. Were all trying to get everyone working or shooting is the better word.

 

Let me add something here is what i hope they do. If a lens has the coding than the option menu goes away ( unless it is a certain lens that needs to be set) and it automatically codes for that lens that it sees. Now if the camera see's no coding than the option becomes available to select it. This way anyone using a coded lens does not have to do anything but mount the lens and go to town shooting and the corrections will be applied. But if it is not coded than the option comes up in the menu to select and it stays on that setting until you change it or you change to a coded lens and automatically goes to that. This way for folks that have the code there is no slowdown just what Leica wants and what we want. At least this would be my suggestion on how to do it from a shooters point of view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not a lawyer but I don't think this is true, as long as it's for your own personal non-commercial purposes.

 

If you did it your self for your own use with a magic marker that's one thing. But if you had a machine shop mill out the wells -the machine shop would be charging you and making money copying a patented product. That could open them up to legal hassles if Leica wanted to pursue it. If users anounced online that "x shop could do the work and did it for me", I expect that might warrant a letter from Leica's lawyers. The ramgefinder forum ditched plans to provide a coding service for this reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not crazy about the word petition but that's just me . But Sean or myself will be happy to pass along the results of this. Were all trying to get everyone working or shooting is the better word.

That's OK. And I myself will eventually (when schedule permits) get everyone of my lens that can be coded coded. But as to communicating this issue to Leica, so far Leica seems very unconvinced, so I figure it's another way to keep beating the drums in a positive way. It's better then having users take out their frustration in angry threads and conspiracy theories. We're all commited to the platform and want to see it successful. Leica should be happy it's got such a dedicated base. When they make an announcement that they will include it in some future update then we can stop figuring out ways to communicate how high a priority this is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

I agree Hank much better to have everything structured in this type of fashion in a proactive way to achieve what the end user needs. Bitching and moaning really gets nothing done in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

One other thing also . I think Leica's reluctance to do this at first is because if they code for a 28mm 2.8 lens than you stick on a Zeiss 28mm than they cannot guarntee that the vignetting and cyan cast would exactly work correctly for that lens. They can do this with Leica lenses because they have that control but you know somebody will stick on a Zeiss lens and than blame Leica for it not working like they think it should we have to remember this part and really it is a liability for them. So if they do something like this than a disclaimer also would have to come with it is my guess. So i would think this part of it comes into play here. Just like they can't be responsible for you going to a mill shop and have them work on a Zeiss lens to work on a Leica body

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't that a bit paranoid, Guy? I mean, it is obvious they can't take responsibility for other brands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sirvine

And since Leica probably won't code that Zeiss lens....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And since Leica probably won't code that Zeiss lens....

 

Has anybody actually spent the time to ask Zeiss if they can code their lenses? There seems to be a lot of complaining here and all the responsibility is left on Leica's shoulders. If the Leica 6-bit coded mount is patented, Zeiss and Cosina could ask Leica to license this mount so they can be compatible with the M8.

 

It is about time people with the Zeiss an Cosina lenses got an answer from Zeiss and Cosina regarding lens codings.

 

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso
Isn't that a bit paranoid, Guy? I mean, it is obvious they can't take responsibility for other brands.

 

It maybe but i would not rule some of that out on there end. If you think about it they make no money and actually probably lose money on the coding of leica lenses. So really what other reason would there be, not like they are having a hard time selling lenses either. There flying off the shelves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just like any manufacturer Leica makes clear that they do not support or guarantee the function of any 3rd party product or any Leica product that is not supported. That would not change here. All though I am sure they imagined a wave of irate users complaining that the 35mm profile doesn't work with their 35mm VC, Zeiss, etc., lens. I think that will be less of a problem with all the discussion leading up to enacting this feature. Although they will probably have to add a big red proviso to the packaging, manual, etc., If they had just included this in the beginning I'm sure there would have been more then one post on how the profiles suck.

 

One of the great things about Leica cameras is that, unlike many electronic wunder-products, they don't try and make it stupid proof. The user has the control and the responsibility. It's one of the reasons the product is so attractive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

That is kind of what i am saying. last thing they need is whining that zeiss lenses won't work right. You have to wonder about all this stuff.

 

i do agree with Robert someone should be asking Zeiss and Cosina to make there lenses compatible and what legally they can do. Think about itfor them there biggest market is or will be the M8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica may fear that this will open a Pandora's box. Next users will be demanding they allow Zeiss and VC access to 6-bit coding. I think users understand there are reasonable limits to what Leica should be expected to do. This menu selection is a modest step and does not compromise their intellectual property. It's the users responsibilty to use it wisely , just like ISO, exposure, etc. Having to purchase IR filters and be required to 6-bit code your lenses these were not in the original plan. Let's just get back to a situation where we have less barriers and more control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Has anybody actually spent the time to ask Zeiss if they can code their lenses? There seems to be a lot of complaining here and all the responsibility is left on Leica's shoulders. If the Leica 6-bit coded mount is patented, Zeiss and Cosina could ask Leica to license this mount so they can be compatible with the M8.

 

It is about time people with the Zeiss an Cosina lenses got an answer from Zeiss and Cosina regarding lens codings.

 

Robert

 

They would have to also get Leica to agree to include a profile in firmware and provide them with Zeiss specific codes. It's one thing for users to take it on their own to use a kludge like using a summicron profile for a biogon but Zeiss won't sell a coded lens and Leica would'nt liscense it if its not done right. In any case this is getting way ahead of ourselves here. I don't know that either company has any interest in something like this and its still very early days for Leica M digital.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They would have to also get Leica to agree to include a profile in firmware and provide them with Zeiss specific codes. It's one thing for users to take it on their own to use a kludge like using a summicron profile for a biogon but Zeiss won't sell a coded lens and Leica would'nt liscense it if its not done right. In any case this is getting way ahead of ourselves here. I don't know that either company has any interest in something like this and its still very early days for Leica M digital.

 

Licence also implies a fee. In other words, Zeiss pays Leica a fee up front to get into the firmware and then a fee per lens sold coded. for these fees, Leica gives the Zeiss lens a specific code and Leica takes Zeiss provided details for the Cyan correction of that lens and programs it into the firmware.

 

Robert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sirvine

I only meant that owners could at least apply the firmware correction to their third party lenses (even if the correction weren't 100% profiled to the lens) by selecting the closest Leica focal length. As it stands, third party lenses are left out entirely (with the exception of hand coding).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've signed.

 

Thanks Hank, a more constructive approach than my moaning post

 

Do I object to paying, having bought such expensive lenses? Well yes, actually, I do. Not because the cost of coding is 'too high', but because it is not neccessary!!!!!! (or rather should not be neccessary).

Regardless of the cost, the time is also a significant hassle.

Whether coding works or not with 3rd party lenses is, as far as I am concerned, nothing to do with Leica supporting their own products and their own customers.

 

If you have coded lenses already, or only shoot B&W and dont care, or whatever, the addition of lens selection will have ABSOLUTELY NO detrimental effect on you or how you use your camera, but for the rest of us, it will further improve our camera's usefulness.

 

Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think all Leica said is it is compatible with all their lenses except the few they listed as not compatible. I don't think they ever made any claims regarding third party lenses.

 

I would rather not have the lens selection menu if it slowed down the use of the M8 or introduced other bugs.

 

Robert

 

Hi Robert,

 

There are a large number of RF Leica lenses that cannot currently be coded by Leica, including all of the screw mounts. With the IR-cut filters has come the necessity of coding wide angle lenses and one currently can't do that for many Leica lenses. I doubt that adding lens selection as a menu item would slow the camera down at all but a company might (theoretically) be concerned about the effect of that feature on lens sales.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One other thing also . I think Leica's reluctance to do this at first is because if they code for a 28mm 2.8 lens than you stick on a Zeiss 28mm than they cannot guarntee that the vignetting and cyan cast would exactly work correctly for that lens. They can do this with Leica lenses because they have that control but you know somebody will stick on a Zeiss lens and than blame Leica for it not working like they think it should we have to remember this part and really it is a liability for them. So if they do something like this than a disclaimer also would have to come with it is my guess. So i would think this part of it comes into play here. Just like they can't be responsible for you going to a mill shop and have them work on a Zeiss lens to work on a Leica body

 

As we've discussed before, Leica need only provide selections for manually specifying the same lenses that they provide coding for. If someone chooses to use lenses other than those then Leica has no responsibility for the results. As it stands, Leica has no control over what results one gets when mounting a Zeiss, CV, Canon, etc. lens on the M8.

 

There is a limited degree to which a company should trying to be protect us from ourselves. For crying out loud, a photographer can mess things up with ISO selection, aperture, shutter speed, etc. The M8 is not a hand-holding camera and the owners need not be babied. People can and will blame Leica for all kinds of things that really are the responsibility of the photographer and failure of the "between the ears" feature. Such is life and Leica knows that.

 

I don't think this issue is a liability for them at all and naturally they would include a disclaimer in the manual addendum that would explain that the corrections are only designed for specific Leica lenses, etc. I ran through these details in discussions with them several months ago.

 

Bottom line is that they could do this but, so far, they have chosen not to. I greatly like and support Leica but I need to call this as I see it. It's their right to choose what features their cameras will and will not have but lets not be naive about why manual lens selection has met with such a tepid reception.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Robert,

 

There are a large number of RF Leica lenses that cannot currently be coded by Leica, including all of the screw mounts. With the IR-cut filters has come the necessity of coding wide angle lenses and one currently can't do that for many Leica lenses. I doubt that adding lens selection as a menu item would slow the camera down at all but a company might (theoretically) be concerned about the effect of that feature on lens sales.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

I just checked the 6-bit lens coding PDF posted on the Leica site and it says "Many of the lenses made from 1963 onwards can be converted." When I looked at the list of discontimued lenses that could be coded, there seems to be the Summarons missing, plus the early 35mm Summicrons. There are other lenses missing from the coding list, but these are the ones deemed not compatible with the M8, such as the Dual Range 50mm Summicron.

 

As for the loss of lens sales, I am sure the sale of new lenses was factored into the selling price of the M8. If they didn't think they would sell more lenses, they may have priced the M8 at a higher price so the sale of the camera fully paid for the R&D and production costs of the M8.

 

Would the people signing the petition be willing to pay more for a M8 to have the lens selection option?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...