jaapv Posted April 17, 2007 Share #261 Posted April 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not a tele problem of course. Just Leica and other wides that cannot be coded so far. We don't use dozen of such wides obviously. We don't need special settings either. Just default settings for each Leica focal length i.e. 16, 18, 21, 24, 28 and 35mm. This way i could use the '35' setting for my Summaron 35/2.8 or my Summicron 40/2 if need be. Also i may be a somewhat great Leica user with 5 Leica bodies and 19 or 20 Leica lenses but i like much my cute M-Rokkor 28/2.8 as well and i would like to get a little 21mm lens like the Zeiss 21/4.5. I could then use the '28' and '21' default setting and everybody would be happy. Also the question is not to know if it will be easy to use the menu or not or if the results will be perfect or not. The problem is to know if Leica users are allowed to use their M or LTM lenses without ugly color casts on their Leica body. A negative response would be a disrespect towards old and new Leicaphiles IMHO. But the Summaron will certainly have a different cyan drift than the Summicron. So it is not possible to apply the same correction. Even lenses with the same specification are different. The best we can hope for with changelings is a correction that is "close enough" That is what Sean is testing right now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 17, 2007 Posted April 17, 2007 Hi jaapv, Take a look here Leica stubborness will hurt sales. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted April 17, 2007 Share #262 Posted April 17, 2007 People like me don't need perfection, Jaap. Just the right to use our lenses without ugly color casts as i said above. If it stays a bit of cyan shift or whatever drift on the pics never mind, we'll do a bit of PP no problem we've been there already. We just ask for respect that's all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted April 17, 2007 Share #263 Posted April 17, 2007 Hi, Given that coding is different from ie: a 28cron to a 28 Elmarit... coding a Zeiss or CV lens (or selecting a similar Leica lens from a menu) would be very approximate, although better than nothing. It is likely that post production profiles would be better. These profiles could be develop by Zeiss or CV or a third party. Though what I would add to the menu would be: detection: OFF detection: OFF + IR filter * detection: ON detection: ON + IR filter * this option could be selected for non Leica lenses or uncoded Leica lenses This way the IR problem could be covered by the camera and the cyan one which need more precise tuning via post production. And of course the IDEAL situation would be an agreement between all three companies to colaborate on coding lenses, although this may mean an increase of prices for a royalty fee or similar. Leica could also work on a licence fee for coding third party lenses or developing specific firmware add-on for non Leica lenses. I am sure some people would prefer pay an extra US$ 100 or 150 for a coded CV lens than spend US$1000+ for the Leica one. Regards, Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted April 17, 2007 Share #264 Posted April 17, 2007 Eric, some photogs look happy with their 'sharpies' don't they? Approximations of course but they live well with that and i understand that. I just ask to get the same results with a menu that's all. Fair enough no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 17, 2007 Share #265 Posted April 17, 2007 People like me don't need perfection, Jaap. Just the right to use our lenses without ugly color casts as i said above. If it stays a bit of cyan shift or whatever drift on the pics never mind, we'll do a bit of PP no problem we've been there already. We just ask for respect that's all. That is exactly what I have been doing with my Biogon 21 until I coded it. I still have no filter with it, but the results without coding and without filter have been rather satisfying. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 17, 2007 Share #266 Posted April 17, 2007 In present times there is a way of acting it’s been in fashion: the cinism, (say or defend something knowing that is a lie or, at least, not telling the hidden truth and interested grounds why something has said or defended). And this fact can be jointed to another: every body knows about all. Marketing, finances, earnings, technical know how, Physics, software, hardware, etc. The question is, how so many people is expert in so many matters at once? In this thread some ideas are flying: - According last news, third producers has made the fantastic miracle of reaching leica-quality in several lenses at a price ten times cheaper. - - There are, at least, 210 owners or potential buyers, interested or sales promoters, who want, in Leica benefit, of course, that those miraculous lenses could be enjoyed for the M8 users at zero cost. The margin of the encreased sales of M8 bodies will do. - - Leica is a company that has taken profit of IR issue only to earn much money from the poor customers, especially from the owners of X, Y, Z lenses, even if they are important professionals with very good earnings. Only with coded lenses and filters sold… - - All the project of M8 has nothing to do with the quality of the Leica lenses, with preserving the use of the majority of the lenses bought by the owners of Leicas M and with the fact that, because of a physical limitation, this lenses should be identified for the camera in order to solve vignetting problems and other issues could appear in the future (f.i. IR issue). Leica has done things so badly. It doesn’t matter the quality of M8 images, the efforts done in solving quicker as possible the problems of the camera updates, giving free of any cost two filters and giving one chosen lens 30% off. The very important goal for Leica, as has been so bad, is open its technology to these poor companies that have done so much for the Leica customers. Leica, as a charity institution, must give up to maintain or even increase lenses sales, since now must put in menus all the possible options to select the focal length, the aperture, or any characteristic necessary to make more efficient the lens that every one wishes to fit in his M8. And as somebody has said: “Leica take care to do any modification in the future could leisure the user’s investments in those lenses”. Nobody with his head over his shoulders can accept such tale. I recognize I’ve stopped reading the endless and repeated arguments. I expect Leica will go on with its policy not to close specifically but preserve its developments without making easy for its concurrence to get hold of its segment of the market. Leica, fortunately, is not in war against this type of third party users, only do what a free company must do, no more, but not less. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 17, 2007 Share #267 Posted April 17, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) You're way behind times, Francisco. Haven't you heard? Porsche, as of April first, has normalized its engine mounts, enabling the use of Ford, Peugeot and other engines by the users...One can also use Volkswagen Beetle and Porsche 356 engines in the latest models now.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 17, 2007 Share #268 Posted April 17, 2007 You're way behind times, Francisco. Haven't you heard? Porsche, as of April first, has normalized its engine mounts, enabling the use of Ford, Peugeot and other engines by the users...One can also use Volkswagen Beetle and Porsche 356 engines in the latest models now.... In Spain we say: "Comparing is odious". Cars market has nothing to do with photography market. And I could say: Poor Porche owners if the trade has fallen so deep. It seems to me that many of you, in stead of beeing phantastic photographers, are not so good in business evaluation. I think Porche is a subsidiary company. Isn't it? Yes, I'm old, but I've work in bussines 50 years. Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Branch Posted April 17, 2007 Share #269 Posted April 17, 2007 ..... I think Porche is a subsidiary company. Isn't it? Francisco. NO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted April 17, 2007 Share #270 Posted April 17, 2007 In Spain we say: "Comparing is odious". Cars market has nothing to do with photography market. And I could say: Poor Porche owners if the trade has fallen so deep. It seems to me that many of you, in stead of beeing phantastic photographers, are not so good in business evaluation. I think Porche is a subsidiary company. Isn't it? Yes, I'm old, but I've work in bussines 50 years. Francisco. Check your other leg for length, Francisco.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FMB Posted April 17, 2007 Share #271 Posted April 17, 2007 Check your other leg for length, Francisco.... Be happy , Jaap. And bye, (no more debate). Francisco. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
egibaud Posted April 17, 2007 Share #272 Posted April 17, 2007 let's see it this way you have a Canon camera and you want to use a Nikon lens ... Who is suppose to make the adaptor ring? Nikon ? Canon ? or a third party ? Same question with lense detection / correction / coding etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
j. borger Posted April 17, 2007 Share #273 Posted April 17, 2007 I agree with everybody who stated it's not Leicas business to promote or encourage use of 3d party lenses ...... One of the benefits of buying modern coded Leica lenses is COVENIENCE if used on the M8.... all other glass is perfectly usable but with compromises ..... nothing more or less ... and very legitimate. The vintage Leica lenses are most suitable for B&W ......... so there is no need for coding these anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted April 17, 2007 Share #274 Posted April 17, 2007 It seems that there're quite a number of Leica noobies here ... so you guys only use the latest and greatest Leica ASPH. lenses, fine ... congratulations. But how many times some of us have repeated and repeated? It is not only about supporting third party lenses ... some people want to use some of Leica's old lenses which aren't supported by the bogus 6-bit coding. If you feel just happy with what you've already got ... how hard is it for you to shut up and let others express their opinion? some of you guys need to learn something even a little kid would have known. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
finkaudio Posted April 17, 2007 Share #275 Posted April 17, 2007 In Spain we say: "Comparing is odious". Cars market has nothing to do with photography market. And I could say: Poor Porche owners if the trade has fallen so deep. It seems to me that many of you, in stead of beeing phantastic photographers, are not so good in business evaluation. I think Porche is a subsidiary company. Isn't it? Yes, I'm old, but I've work in bussines 50 years. Francisco. Funny! In fact, Porsche is just on the way to take another major share in Volkswagen. So it could be one day that VW is a subsidary of Porsche. I'm serious! Maybe Leica should think about buying shares in Zeiss. That would make it easy to code the lenses for them . OK, not so serious Best regards KH Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted April 17, 2007 Share #276 Posted April 17, 2007 Thank you, Sean, I'll look into this. I'm sorry, but I don't know a thing about older screw mount to M mount adaptors. What exactly are theses "no notches" adaptors? And aren't they getting very scarce? The modern LTM to M adapters have notches that, alas, sit right in front of the coding sensors. Some of the old Leitz adapters were made without this notch, including the old 13.5 cm and the 9 cm. Those two adapters alone will work with a lot of lenses. Yes, they're getting much harder to find because I started writing and posting about these adapters several months ago. So one needs to search for them. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted April 17, 2007 Share #277 Posted April 17, 2007 There is a world of difference between rotating aperture and focusing rings, shutter speed and ASA dials compared to working menus being an old boomer-greybeard. Tom Tell me about it. That's why I've sent Leica proposals for improving access to ISO and EV. If one want to use the lens menu selections, then he or she will need to remember to change them when a lens is changed - personal choice, personal responsibility. If one forgets to change the lens setting, so be it. I misplace my truck keys constantly but I don't expect the manufacturer to automatically find them for me. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted April 17, 2007 Share #278 Posted April 17, 2007 But pausing to re-program the camera every time you do a lens swap? Now if you have just one lens for each body, that might work. I recall you have more than one M8??? So if you could work with 2 or 3 bodies with the same number of lenses this could work. If that is your MO. Recall too there are multiple code choices for several Leica FL's. When I did my hand coding I had to look up the product number in my Leica library to figure out which one to use for my skinny Tele-Elmarit. Neither the lens code table and or this hypothetical menu would list the lens as the 'skinny Tele-Elmarit'; an example of another headache to this 'solution' IMHO. I guess one could carry a few Leica books with so that one could be assured of entering the correct code! Tom Hi Tom, Not re-program....make a menu selection, as we now do for ISO, EV, etc. I myself use lenses that are coded as well as lenses with milled adapters for coding. I'm absent-minded and often work at a fast pace so coded lenses work better for me. But...I'm not supporting this menu for my own needs, per se. I'm looking at the broader picture of M8 photographers in general. There are many photographers who work at a more relaxed pace and who have time (if they choose) to select something like the following: Scroll menu to "Specify lens"....click set Focal length...scroll to chosen focal length and click set Lens Option...scroll to chosen lens and click set The lens options, of course, would only include the lenses that Leica currently codes. So, for example, if I select "28", I then have the choice of perhaps five different Leica lenses. A list of the lenses that Leica can code can be found at: Leica Camera AG - M lenses with 6-bit coding (BTW: Leica's list on that PDF is very thorough but we won't need to tell the M8 which color our lens is. <G>) Now it may be that "I" in this case am one who owns only Leica lenses but who owns some that are not coded (although they could be coded by Leica). And perhaps I, on this day, will be working with a specific lens for several hours at a time. Sure, it took me a few seconds to set this up in the menu but now I'm all set for the day. Different photographers have different working styles. I recently worked with one lens at a time for 7 hours at a stretch. Or...it may be that "I" am working with a lens that Leica does not code. Then I'll need to apply a little elbow grease and creativity to determine, through my own experiments and the shared experience of other photographers, if my lens will work well using the settings for a different (Leica) lens. I'll need to do my homework and be willing to spend some time reading and testing. A photographer who is frequently changing lenses (under the time and other pressures of a professional shoot) would likely do better with coded lenses. But that's not everyone. I try to never assume that what works best for *me* is what works best for *everyone*. The lens menu selection would be helpful to thousands of photographers and it might help to sell more M8s. But I really care most about the former. Photographers who don't want to use this option can ignore it. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted April 17, 2007 Share #279 Posted April 17, 2007 What is interesting is that you suggest the correction has been altered (Ultron not over-shot now). Maybe still more tweaking in future FW, the IR correction may be a moving target, implication is possibly problematic for 'non-supported' lenses.Tom Theoretically perhaps. But, in practice, many of the non-supported lenses are doing beautifully with 1.102, as you saw in that article. We may come to find that what works very well for a given set of Leica lenses will also work well for many other Leica lenses and for lenses by other makers as well. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted April 17, 2007 Share #280 Posted April 17, 2007 Can you say Canon? (you have to have read Seans site to get this)Tom 28 actually...with apologies for the inside joke. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.