Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
hankg

Sign a petition for menu selectable lens profiles

Recommended Posts

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

 

I'll save you the trouble. Zeiss and CV do not currently have permission to include these lens codes in their lenses. I've been discussing this issue with both companies since late last summer. The ball is in Leica's court and they are free to make whatever decisions they feel are best.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
not like they are having a hard time selling lenses either. There flying off the shelves

 

There lies the key thing.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'll save you the trouble. Zeiss and CV do not currently have permission to include these lens codes in their lenses. I've been discussing this issue with both companies since late last summer. The ball is in Leica's court and they are free to make whatever decisions they feel are best.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Do you know if they asked Leica about Licensing the mount and Leica have said no?

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.

 

I see no reason that Leica should be expected to provide M8 support specifically for lenses made by other makers. That would be unreasonable, methinks. But, they can provide lens selection for their own (code-able lenses) and photographers can then experiment with other lenses at their own risk. The reality is that many of the Leica codes work very well for other lenses but ensuring that is not Leica's problem any more than Leica is currently responsible for seeing that a ZM 35 focuses correctly on an M8.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you know if they asked Leica about Licensing the mount and Leica have said no?

 

Hi Rob,

 

I'm afraid that I can't answer you in that kind of detail but companies other than Leica do not have permission to use the 6-bit coding.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I see no reason that Leica should be expected to provide M8 support specifically for lenses made by other makers. That would be unreasonable, methinks. But, they can provide lens selection for their own (code-able lenses) and photographers can then experiment with other lenses at their own risk.

 

 

That is exactly what we are asking for. "Provide lens selection for their own (code-able lenses) and photographers can then experiment with other lenses at their own risk." Perhaps I should have been more specific.

 

I would guess the Leica digital market will need to be a lot bigger and more mature before you see licencing as with Canon and Sigma, Tamron, etc., of course by then it might be a non-issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

 

Hi Rob,

 

If you get time to research this fully, you'll find that a lot of Leica RF lenses (including all of the screwmounts) cannot be coded. Over time, more of the M mount lenses may become code-able, however.

 

I think that many of us, myself included, are happy to see that Leica M lens sales are so strong. I hope that continues. But I can't support a closed system even though its certainly Leica's prerogative to continue with this one if they so choose.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That is exactly what we are asking for. Perhaps I should have been more specific.

 

I understand exactly what you're asking for and its essentially the same as what I've discussed in previous M8 articles that touched upon this issue. It's a reasonable request but Leica is free to do as they see fit.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's a reasonable request but Leica is free to do as they see fit.

 

Sean,

you are absolutely right, but of course Leica's customers are also free to do as they see fit, and for some (i.e. me) being treated as too stupid to be able to operate a menu selection (for whatever real or smoke and mirror reasons) reduces the likelyhood of me spening my money on Leica products in the future.

Sure the M8 has its own unique advantages, but the harder Leica makes it for me to utilise them, the less likely I am to bother. Simple really.

 

Oh, and just because they havn't said yes yet, thats no reason to stop asking. Giving their customers what they want is, after all, in Leica's interests more than in anyone elses......

Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sean,

you are absolutely right, but of course Leica's customers are also free to do as they see fit, and for some (i.e. me) being treated as too stupid to be able to operate a menu selection (for whatever real or smoke and mirror reasons) reduces the likelyhood of me spening my money on Leica products in the future.

Sure the M8 has its own unique advantages, but the harder Leica makes it for me to utilise them, the less likely I am to bother. Simple really.

 

Oh, and just because they havn't said yes yet, thats no reason to stop asking. Giving their customers what they want is, after all, in Leica's interests more than in anyone elses......

Guy

 

I've argued to them that, long term, a more open system will sell more M8s and Leica lenses but again, its their call. I'll continue to discuss this in articles as appropriate.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Signed (I am petitioner #124 according the web-site).

 

Thank You Hank for taking the initiative.

 

Peter

 

PS: Steter Tropfen hoehlt den Stein...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
Jan,

 

There are lots of us on this forum who are using a mixture of lenses from Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Canon, Nikon and in my case Zenit. On some of these coding will not be possible or very difficult, as there is a screw head on the bayonet flange, in the area of the coding pits. If I could find someone to code my Zeiss lenses I would. I spent days trying and failing with ink and paint markers. I will be sending my Leica Elmarit 90 and if I get a Summicron 50, that too, for coding once the rush has died down, irrespective of whether or not manual coding is available. I would doubt if Leica sold many additional lenses, where the decision was driven by coded or not coded, whereas they might well sell more M8's to those thousands of people who have a bag full of non-coded/non-codable lenses, if the manual option were available. If people like Sean and Guy think it is in Leica's long term interest, I for one am not going to argue with them.

 

Wilson

 

Do you really expect that Leica anlyses the lenses from Zeiss, Voigtlander, Canon, Nikon and Zenit, and write a lens profile for each from them ? How many profile do you want about 100 ?

You can use all of them if you disable the lens detection without any problems (ok you wont have an .exif with shows "Hi these picture was made with a Leica M8 and the following lens...), but THATs not Leicas problem. Leica do everything to optimate their workflow body->lens-> sensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
Remember that Leica has a patent on it's 6-bit coding so having a machine shop code your non-supported lens is actually illegal. In addition if everyone who owns an M8 sent all their lenses to be coded tomorrow Leica would not be able to handle the volume. As it is now in the USA it's 3 weeks for coding.

 

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.

 

Leica still codes all their lenses, its clear that they cant dot this for all the lenses in 1 week, and ist OK that Leica earns money with this. If you dont want to spend these money, you can use all their lenses without lens detection and correct the pictures later with photosphop etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
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 thats so why do you have to pay for a music CD, if its only for your own non commercial purpose ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
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

 

Thats true, if Zeiss lenses should work with a M8, its Zeiss job to take care about this and not Leica.

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

 

this is a most excellent and pertinent point

in other instances where a manufacturer of lenses makes a lens for a specific mount

as Sigma do for C&N etc

it is Sigma's duty to make sure their gear is compatible

why would Zeiss be excused from this seemingly obvious path

and to add, this is entirely conventional practise within the industry

 

what it doesn't do, is provide a workaround for existing gear

where the only solution is permissions to retrofit lens coding on an individual basis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you really expect that Leica anlyses the lenses from Zeiss, Voigtlander, Canon, Nikon and Zenit, and write a lens profile for each from them ? How many profile do you want about 100 ?

No one expects Leica to do any such thing. The profiles are already in the firmware, we are proposing that users who want to have the option of manually selecting them, have that option. If you have all your lens coded you won't use the option.

 

If a user decides to use a profile for an unsupported lens he would do so at his own risk. Just like if he decided to overide the auto exposure or not use the recomended IR filter. A Leica M camera should always place the control in the hands of the photographer. Along with that control comes the responsibility for the consequences of what you do with it.

 

you can use all their lenses without lens detection and correct the pictures later with photosphop etc.

There is no reason to do this when an easy solution exists. Companies don't grow by penalizing customers for doing business with them.

 

it is Sigma's duty to make sure their gear is compatible

why would Zeiss be excused from this seemingly obvious path

 

what it doesn't do, is provide a workaround for existing gear

where the only solution is permissions to retrofit lens coding

and to add, this is entirely conventional practise within the industry

 

Sigma does not need to have access to Canon's firmware for a lens profile to correct for the effects of an IR/Cut filter. Unless Leica wanted to offer licences to Zeiss and provide them with individual codes and profiles in firmware there is not a lot Zeiss can do except make sure their mounts bring up the right frame lines on the m8.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A bit to Jan's point, but from a different approach.....

 

Can folks that have a wide range of various lenses (Leica, Zeiss, CV, etc.) comment on what may be needed for the UV/IR filter part only? I see this coding thing as now having two somewhat separate parts, but would like to get the confirmed. The software instruction sets that are designed specifically for Leica lenses are just that, lens specific, and were originally built to accommodate any vignetting issues. Correct? With the introduction of the need for the UV/IR filters, Leica has now introduced a new problem of the cyan cast on the wider angle lenses. My question is if this cast problem is lens specific or just focal length specific?

 

If it is lens specific, meaning that there are significant differences in how the cyan is handled on say a 28/2.0 and a 28/2.8 lens, for example, then the code table would be quite large. On the other hand, if the cyan problem when using filters is simply focal length dependent, then there are only 10 Leica FLs to deal with (16, 18, 21, 24, 28, 35, 50, 75, 90 and 135), ad we know that 50 on up is more academic with respect to cyan in the corners. However, using the UV/IR filter, and more specifically the Leica UV/IR filter does introduce some changes to the color profiles that the camera uses for image handling (JPEGs).

 

My perspective is that it would be wonderful if coding was not needed at all. It is great that Leica has designed a system that does enhance image quality with coding that is lens specific, and that is an encouraged option for users. What is more important to folks with uncoded or uncode-able lenses is to utilize in-camera image adjustments for color, and if the cyan corner problem is FL dependent and NOT lens specific delpendent, then the menu only needs Leica's 10 FLs at max and folks can pick and choose whatever they want for uncoded lenses to attempt a match.

 

In my thinking, that would be a very satisfactory solution that would embrace many user needs, not compromise Leica's original plan for using 6-bit codes to automatically set in-camera adjustments, and directly deal with the cyan issue they have sort of forced upon folks by requiring the use of UV/IR cut filters for color work.

 

So, if anybody can say with some confidence that cyan adjustments are FL dependent and a simple correction would cover a broad range of lenses, then it should not be as big an issue. The corrections for color for UV/IR use are already in place. All that is needed is to allow users to select the FL they want for those non-coded lenses they use. Simple. (In othere words, is a 24mm cyan problem pretty much the same for most 24mm lenses? Same for the bunch of 35mm lenses out there and the 28s.

 

Just my thinking on this.

 

LJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Olof
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.

 

Again, what could Leica do ? They could make a manual lens detection for their own actuall lens range. Then people can use their Zeiss lens, enable the Leice lens profile for it, became problems with Cyan and more and the .exif says "Hi these picture was taken with original Leica equippment" WHY should Leica do this ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no reason to do this when an easy solution exists. Companies don't grow by penalizing customers for doing business with them.

 

except you are asking Leica to do this for nothing on another companies behalf

 

 

Sigma does not need to have access to Canon's firmware for a lens profile to correct for the effects of an IR/Cut filter. Unless Leica wanted to offer licences to Zeiss and provide them with individual codes and profiles in firmware there is not a lot Zeiss can do except make sure their mounts bring up the right frame lines on the m8.

 

my hearing of this is Sigma by agreement doesnt offer lenses in the prime canon sizes, so that they dont compete with canon glass

 

Sigma also needed permissions to use the faster AF on a lesser number of their offerings

clearly there are issues of access/permissions/and agreements between the two

 

Im sure Zeiss have what it takes to examine their own situation and come to a co-operative conclusion

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...