usm Posted February 6, 2014 Share #21 Posted February 6, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Lary, I'm only saying that's what worked for me. I suspect that the white is intended to reflect IR so that the 6-bit sensor can detect its presence and the black paint is intended to absorb IR so the 6-bit sensor detects nothing. If the white paint absorbs IR owing to its constituents then the 6-bit sensor would be confused and not recognise the code. If the absorbing white paint is scraped away to reveal bare metal then IR will be reflected as intended. This is just my assumption, which only applies to codings not done by Leica. Pete. It' magic - thanks a lot! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 6, 2014 Posted February 6, 2014 Hi usm, Take a look here M240 6 bit coding issue with Leica glass. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thedirektor Posted December 6, 2016 Share #22 Posted December 6, 2016 I'm having this problem on a brand new 262 and 50mm 2.4 Summarit. For such an expensive rig I'm shocked that this is happening. But guess I'll have to take it into Leica Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 7, 2016 Share #23 Posted December 7, 2016 If it is brand new take it in to your dealer and demand that they replace it by a camera that functions properly. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedirektor Posted December 7, 2016 Share #24 Posted December 7, 2016 I took it into Leica London today. A bit of scratching of heads and hmmmmm s. Lovely tech guy updatedfirmware, gave it a wash and brush up and told me to see how it goes. If it keeps malfunctioning, yes indeed Jaapv, I will demand one that works. At the moment they are suggesting a 6 weeks return to the German factory !! But I want it to take pics at Christmas !! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 8, 2016 Share #25 Posted December 8, 2016 If Leica Mayfair couldn't find anything technically wrong it may be worth mentioning the common problem, let the lens click into place and don't keep your finger on the lens release button, if you do the lens over rotates and the coding will be out. And looking back at this old thread the other simple solution not mentioned for lenses that are at fault is to loosen off the flange screws and tighten them again, this both re centres the lens flange and re-tightens one that has loosened. I suspect the cases when people think Leica have done something radical such as change the mount all Leica have done is tighten it up again. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted December 8, 2016 Share #26 Posted December 8, 2016 See the following thread which discusses the issue and may help explain the problem in the case of 50mm lenses on the M240. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/214159-dodgy-mount-registeringnot-registering-6-bit-coding/ 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedirektor Posted December 8, 2016 Share #27 Posted December 8, 2016 Advertisement (gone after registration) Whaaaat ? It's happening on a 8000 pound lens ? The 0.95. Can't believe it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted December 9, 2016 Share #28 Posted December 9, 2016 Whaaaat ? It's happening on a 8000 pound lens ? The 0.95. Can't believe it. Ask not what a Leica lens can do to your bank account but what a Leica lens can do for you. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 9, 2016 Share #29 Posted December 9, 2016 Whaaaat ? It's happening on a 8000 pound lens ? The 0.95. Can't believe it. Nor I as the problem (which I haven't heard much of for the last three years) is not the coding on the lens but the finicky reader on the camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted December 9, 2016 Share #30 Posted December 9, 2016 I took it into Leica London today. A bit of scratching of heads and hmmmmm s. Lovely tech guy updatedfirmware, gave it a wash and brush up and told me to see how it goes. If it keeps malfunctioning, yes indeed Jaapv, I will demand one that works. At the moment they are suggesting a 6 weeks return to the German factory !! But I want it to take pics at Christmas !! If this was the supplying dealer who attempted a repair, they've shot themselves in the foot, as it were. Under the Consumer Rights Act October 2025 (assuming the camera was purchased after the act came into law) they have ONE chance to repair, and if it fails again you have the right to reject the camera under law. Either a replacement or refund. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ModernMan Posted December 9, 2016 Share #31 Posted December 9, 2016 Nor I as the problem (which I haven't heard much of for the last three years) is not the coding on the lens but the finicky reader on the camera. Actually, it appears to me that several years ago Leica switched from the problematic rectangular "pits" on the lens flanges of 50mm lenses, to the pie-shaped pits found on all other non-50mm M lens flanges in an effort to alleviate the problem. (They may have replaced M240 code readers in some cases as well.) So, I think the problem was the increased finickiness of the M240 reader vs the M9 reader, in combination with the differently-shaped pits on earlier 50mm coded lens flanges. See http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/214159-dodgy-mount-registeringnot-registering-6-bit-coding/?p=3148452 for detail. Interestingly, the M-Adapter-L 6-bit code reader is not finicky like the M240. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted December 10, 2016 Share #32 Posted December 10, 2016 I DIY coded my lenses (just 35mm and wider) freehand with a dreml back when I had an M8. No template, just measured and marked. Only added the black pits, painted with Testors model car enamel flat black. They all worked fine with my M9, and currently 2 M240s. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Ricoh Posted December 10, 2016 Share #33 Posted December 10, 2016 (edited) I DIY coded my lenses (just 35mm and wider) freehand with a dreml back when I had an M8. No template, just measured and marked. Only added the black pits, painted with Testors model car enamel flat black. They all worked fine with my M9, and currently 2 M240s. I presume the flange was removed prior to the 'surgery'. The idea of swarf contaminating mechanisms and optics... I'm sure you did it most carefully, but some might not. The idea puts me off buying any 2nd hand lens that has been DIY coded. Edited December 10, 2016 by Steve Ricoh Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwong.aust Posted December 12, 2016 Share #34 Posted December 12, 2016 Anyone else having problems with lenses showing as uncoded/code - even though they are Leica M lenses? I just noticed tonight that the M240 seems very sensitive to the lens placement. The 50 'lux seems to flick between uncoded and coded - there is a little more play in the lens when it's on the camera and that tiny amount is enough to make the camera think there is no coded lens on.. can't be even 1mm. Doesn't happen with my other lenses (21SE and 35 'lux) - so it could be specific to the 50 'lux. Anyone else had issues? Can the lens mount be 'tightened' so it locks with less play and therefore won't move on the camera? It can only be half a mm as it is.. but it's a little more than other lenses I tried. Could of course be due to the LED sensor or the coding in the other lenses in relation to it - but wondering where the fault lies.. camera or lens? What tack do you think I should take.. is this something that can be done by Leica Mayfair and not sending to Germany? Are these tolerances something that can be altered.. which bit? The lens of the camera.. not sure what would be an 'easier' possible fix. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwong.aust Posted December 12, 2016 Share #35 Posted December 12, 2016 I have a similar problem with my M240 when using my 0.95/50 lens, which is intermittent. Sometimes, when I took several pictures, the recognition from coded to uncoded appeared, which I could rectify the problem temporary by slightly twisting the Mount . Then the problem came back. Very strange indeed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedirektor Posted December 12, 2016 Share #36 Posted December 12, 2016 I have a similar problem with my M240 when using my 0.95/50 lens, which is intermittent. Sometimes, when I took several pictures, the recognition from coded to uncoded appeared, which I could rectify the problem temporary by slightly twisting the Mount . Then the problem came back. Very strange indeed. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk But are you happy to put up with it ? Such an expensive lens ! I have the vintage Canon 0.95 but haven't looked for an adapter to try it with my M262 body. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwong.aust Posted December 12, 2016 Share #37 Posted December 12, 2016 Yes, I can wear it . Perhaps just turn off the lens code sensor completely, which the performance of the M240 and the noctilux lens itself remains to be excellent, in my opinion. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted December 13, 2016 Share #38 Posted December 13, 2016 I presume the flange was removed prior to the 'surgery'. The idea of swarf contaminating mechanisms and optics... I'm sure you did it most carefully, but some might not. The idea puts me off buying any 2nd hand lens that has been DIY coded. Actually, very little swarf is generated, as the pits are shallow and one only need mill those receiving black paint, not the white ones. It would be entirely feasible to mask off the area to be milled, and an assistant holding a vacuum hose over the working field would surely pick up the shavings as they are generated. However yes, I did remove the flanges on mine. There are a few Leitz lenses which don't utilize screws on the flange face and require a bit more disassembly, but none of mine I coded were that type. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Livingston Posted December 13, 2016 Share #39 Posted December 13, 2016 I bought pre-milled flanges from eBay and used those to code my lenses. They worked really well and I painted both black and white pits... mostly because I enjoy doing that sort of thing anyway. No issues on reading codes on my M-P 240. Its a very simple and very inexpensive job to do. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
samwong.aust Posted October 18, 2018 Share #40 Posted October 18, 2018 (edited) Now I bought the M10 and the problem goes away. Expensive solution. Edited October 18, 2018 by samwong.aust More information Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.