Leica stubborness will hurt sales

[terrycioni]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This was all done a long time ago. I've begun to wonder if I've been typing in invisible ink and don't know it. <G>

 

Best,

 

Sean

 

My goodness. I do carefully read what you write Sean. The point I so badly made is the suggestion that Zeiss and CV consider approaching Leica AG about licensing the lens codes for use on their lenses. Really that simple.

 

My reasoning, I have no way of knowing this with any supporting facts, but I get the feeling that the M8 has driven up the sales of both Zeiss and CV lens offerings thus it might be to their advantage to address the M8 coding needs.

 

Sean you seem to intimate you know something the rest of us may not and I can not in anyway address that, all I can do is fend for myself, if in the process of posting my approach has offended you my humble apologies.

 

Cheers Terry.

[sean_reid]

My goodness. I do carefully read what you write Sean. The point I so badly made is the suggestion that Zeiss and CV consider approaching Leica AG about licensing the lens codes for use on their lenses. Really that simple.

 

My reasoning, I have no way of knowing this with any supporting facts, but I get the feeling that the M8 has driven up the sales of both Zeiss and CV lens offerings thus it might be to their advantage to address the M8 coding needs.

 

Sean you seem to intimate you know something the rest of us may not and I can not in anyway address that, all I can do is fend for myself, if in the process of posting my approach has offended you my humble apologies.

 

Cheers Terry.

 

Hi Terry,

 

Gosh, no - not offended at all. The invisible ink comment (which was general, not specific to any one person) is that I have mentioned many times on the forum that CV and Zeiss cannot currently use this coding system. I think your initiative was great in contacting them and I always appreciate people trying to take constructive action.

 

Leica is the company that would have to decide, at some time, whether or not their coding will be licensed (or the like) to other companies. I can think of several reasons why that may not happen and can explain them if you're interested.

 

Best,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[terrycioni]

Sean,

 

Certainly, I am interested in your explanation. As always, I value your opinion. This is obviously is sensitive issue.

 

On another note I have a friend who shoots Pentax K10D and K100D, both cameras have built-in shake reduction and if the camera can't tell what lens is attached you can use the menu and select the correct focal length for the SR feature. Obstensively, I understand, this was done to accomodate the older manual Pentax lenses (it works amazingly well), it is a very sensible solution for all those Pentax owner who have a bevy of <older> non-automatic K lenses. By way of extending the use of older lenses Pentax has also added the GREEN BUTTON which handles exposure with the older lenses.... interesting how different companies see things differently.

 

Cheers. Terry.,

[sean_reid]

Hi Terry,

 

The following thoughts are based primarily on my personal reasoning and deduction. In other words, I'm taking off my reviewer hat for a moment. I don't think that CV or Zeiss would want to address the coding issue by half-measures. So their lenses would either be coded or not. The natural path to coding would be a license from Leica to use the 6-bit system. But even if Leica granted that license, consider what would need to be involved.

 

1. The lens corrections for each specific code, of course, reside within the M8. Leica has to research each supported lens in order to build its specific corrections. I think that it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect that Leica would research and develop support for competing lenses and build that into their firmware.

 

2. Correcting for red vignetting/cyan drift, in particular, is a delicate business and a "generic" setting for each focal length would be unlikely to give satisfying results.

 

Considering 1 and 2, even if Zeiss (for example) was licensed to code their own lenses, what codes would they use? We know that a given lens can often do well emulating a specific Leica lens code. But this is always an approximate pairing. Would a company such as Zeiss, who are quite perfectionistic, want to sell lenses that are "sort of" coded correctly? Many of them would work quite well, but how would a company market such as lens? How would they deal with customers who felt the chosen code emulation was not delivering the desired performance? Imagine the press release:

 

"The new Zeiss 21/2.8 Biogon now features a built in 6-bit code that will cause the Leica M8 to detect it as a Leica 21/2.8 Elmarit Aspherical, bringing about almost outstanding performance when used with Infrared-cut filters!"

 

Ughh...

 

The reality is that many lenses do very well with code emulations but that sort of emulation is best done by the individual photographer. Leica can't be expected to provide firmware support for competing lenses and Zeiss or CV can't realistically be expected to sell lenses with approximately correct codings (even if said coding was licensed to them). Almost every company works towards its own definition of excellence and that certainly includes Zeiss and CV who produce many exceptional lenses.

 

So where does that leave us?

 

Option A) As individual photographers, we can choose to have our lenses or adapters milled to accept whatever codings *we* choose to give them. Since *we* take this upon ourselves, neither Leica nor the lens manufacturers bear any responsibility for the results. If the results are not satisfactory, it is not the fault of Leica, CV, Zeiss, etc. It's squarely on us. Many photographers have already taken this path.

 

Option This is the option that I have been advocating since last fall and yet, ironically, one that so many seem to not understand clearly. Leica can provide a menu option that allows the photographer to select *any of the lenses that can currently be coded*. The drill down might look like this:

 

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.

 

This option would be provided by Leica strictly for those Leica lens owners who (for reasons of preference, schedule, cost., etc.) prefer not to send their Leica lenses in for coding. *Again* the only lenses available for selection in that menu would be those that can also be coded. Leica would no doubt be very specific in stipulating that these corrections are only designed for (X,Y, Z) lenses and should not be used with any others, etc.

 

With full knowledge of Leica's cautions and stipulations, individual photographers could then experiment with using the various menu selections with other lenses (including Leica lenses that cannot be coded). Once again, neither Leica nor the lens manufacturer would bear any responsibility for the results of this "emulation". If it worked well for the photographer, great. If it didn't he or she would have no reason to blame Leica, Zeiss, CV, etc.

 

In other words, there are ways in which Leica (without ever lending official support to non-coded lenses) can nonetheless make their M8 system much more open for photographers. One is by enabling the menu selection option described above. The other would be by not interfering with a potential cottage industry of lens and/or adapter machinists.

 

I'm afraid that many may not read this carefully and will then misunderstand it but I hope these thoughts are of interest to people who are willing to read them carefully. They come as a result of having been thinking a lot about this issue for the past several months. And, yes, I have had discussions with various lens and camera manufacturers but naturally those discussions must remain private.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[terrycioni]

Thank you Sean. Makes perfectly clear/good sense. We can keep our fingers crossed that logic will prevail from our favorite camera OEM.

 

Cheers. Terry.

[jrc]

I don't see any reason that Zeiss or CV couldn't do their own research on Leica lens coding, and while they might not be allowed to mill the codes into their lenses, I don't think they could be prevented from suggesting the best codes for each individual lens if a user was interested in self-coding. Once you own a lens, it's yours -- you're buying it, not licensing it, and if you want to put codes on it, I don't think you could be legally stopped.

 

JC

[sdai]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

John, only to code the lenses themselves won't help us a lot except that now the EXIF data would be complete.

 

The matter is about to enable the in camera processing support for the lenese being recognized, in Terry's example, that's to enable shake reduction for the non-auto K mount lenses, in Leica's case, that's to enable color shift correction, vignetting correction, distortion correction etc for the M mount lenses.

 

Now Leica doesn't even support some of their own lenses, not to mention the ZMs and CVs. You can machine an adapter, do your own coding with sharpie, white paint whatever ... but that's not going to help you a lot unless Leica provide a solution in camera to utilize your coding.

[sean_reid]

I don't see any reason that Zeiss or CV couldn't do their own research on Leica lens coding, and while they might not be allowed to mill the codes into their lenses, I don't think they could be prevented from suggesting the best codes for each individual lens if a user was interested in self-coding. Once you own a lens, it's yours -- you're buying it, not licensing it, and if you want to put codes on it, I don't think you could be legally stopped.

 

JC

 

Hi John,

 

I suppose they could, theoretically, but as photographers we'll get that job done much faster. I've been researching these emulations for several months and making recommendations which are not only in the articles on my site but also on Carsten's coding page. Figuring out what the emulations should be isn't that hard. The challenge lies in letting the M8 know which lens to emulate.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[hankg]

Neither Leica or Zeiss will ever officially sanction some "good enough" work around. It's not in their corporate culture, which is why they produce such great products. Leica has a very nice set up with the 6-bit coding and they should conitinue doing what they are doing. I agree with Sean's comments above about Leica giving users more control over all the features of the camera (like profiles) to make it a better platform for the maximum number of photographers.

 

Will there ever be a business arrangement between Leica and any of the 3rd party lens makers? Who knows. If it happens it will be a ways off. The M8 is still in its infancy.

[waterlenz]

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.

 

This won't work since two lenses that have identical FL and max. apertures but have different optical formulas are likely to have different correction parameters. If you look on the code list there are already multiple codes for Leica lenses with the same name such as 21mm Elmarit, which by definition are f/2.8 lenses, i.e., same max aperture.

Tom

[waterlenz]

People like me don't need perfection, .

 

This, for Leica, would be unacceptable, and also for a number of their users. Leica wants to be as perfect as feasible.

Tom

[waterlenz]

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

 

I am leaving mine at On + IR since I don't like fidgeting with menus. I was shooting with a Viso today, no code, camera did not seem to mind. The other settings may be more for those that want to use a coded lens (mainly applies to WA) without a cut filter and turn off the correction or to turn off vignetting correction (they want vignetting effect).

Tom

[waterlenz]

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

 

I have already forgotten to re-set the ISO back to 160 after doing a 640 boost a number of times (also with certain of my dSLRs, but less of a prob with the Nikon D2's becuase ISO control is at the bottom on a separate display) . At least pix are correctly exposed ;-> if I fail to notice the very high shutter speed - typically the first clue to my mistake.

Tom

[waterlenz]

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

 

 

Ok, lets call it programming via menu selection. Three parameters! Not a trivial matter. The multiple versions of certain FL aperture combinations I see as being particularly problematic if they are based on product number. I sometimes use a nickname such as skinny tele-Emarit to refer to a lens. In the case of the 28/2.8 lenses by the filter size since they differ. But not product number. Maybe I will have to change. Either three menu items or a nested menu ala Nikon - sharpies look better all the time.

Tom

[waterlenz]

...and what I'm seeing so far is that sometimes the results aren't just "close enough", they're nearly spot-on. n

 

Why am I not surprised!

Tom

[waterlenz]

Do you suggest i also need a filter and coding on my 35mm Canon Serenar ......

 

M8 + 35/2,8 Serenar

 

These look like the old peel-apart Polaroids!

Tom

[waterlenz]

Punching in the serial numbers with existing controls shouldn't be that difficult at all. Leica could build a soft numerical keypad into the menu and let users navigate through the numbers using the arrow keys.

 

No thanks, the button I want to push on on my M8 is the shutter release!

Tom

[waterlenz]

Ok, let's stop it here. I would easily pay $100 to avoid setting date and clock every time I change the lens.

 

Well said! Touché!

Tom

[waterlenz]

Precisely because we are in the same boat, we cannot sit all on the same side.

 

Touché!

Tom

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[waterlenz]

Hi Terry,

 

The following thoughts are based primarily on my personal reasoning and deduction. In other words, I'm taking off my reviewer hat for a moment. I don't think that CV or Zeiss would want to address the coding issue by half-measures. So their lenses would either be coded or not. The natural path to coding would be a license from Leica to use the 6-bit system. But even if Leica granted that license, consider what would need to be involved.

 

1. The lens corrections for each specific code, of course, reside within the M8. Leica has to research each supported lens in order to build its specific corrections. I think that it would be unreasonable for anyone to expect that Leica would research and develop support for competing lenses and build that into their firmware.

 

2. Correcting for red vignetting/cyan drift, in particular, is a delicate business and a "generic" setting for each focal length would be unlikely to give satisfying results.

 

Considering 1 and 2, even if Zeiss (for example) was licensed to code their own lenses, what codes would they use? We know that a given lens can often do well emulating a specific Leica lens code. But this is always an approximate pairing. Would a company such as Zeiss, who are quite perfectionistic, want to sell lenses that are "sort of" coded correctly? Many of them would work quite well, but how would a company market such as lens? How would they deal with customers who felt the chosen code emulation was not delivering the desired performance? Imagine the press release:

 

"The new Zeiss 21/2.8 Biogon now features a built in 6-bit code that will cause the Leica M8 to detect it as a Leica 21/2.8 Elmarit Aspherical, bringing about almost outstanding performance when used with Infrared-cut filters!"

 

Ughh...

 

The reality is that many lenses do very well with code emulations but that sort of emulation is best done by the individual photographer. Leica can't be expected to provide firmware support for competing lenses and Zeiss or CV can't realistically be expected to sell lenses with approximately correct codings (even if said coding was licensed to them). Almost every company works towards its own definition of excellence and that certainly includes Zeiss and CV who produce many exceptional lenses.

 

So where does that leave us?

 

Option A) As individual photographers, we can choose to have our lenses or adapters milled to accept whatever codings *we* choose to give them. Since *we* take this upon ourselves, neither Leica nor the lens manufacturers bear any responsibility for the results. If the results are not satisfactory, it is not the fault of Leica, CV, Zeiss, etc. It's squarely on us. Many photographers have already taken this path.

 

Option This is the option that I have been advocating since last fall and yet, ironically, one that so many seem to not understand clearly. Leica can provide a menu option that allows the photographer to select *any of the lenses that can currently be coded*. The drill down might look like this:

 

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.

 

This option would be provided by Leica strictly for those Leica lens owners who (for reasons of preference, schedule, cost., etc.) prefer not to send their Leica lenses in for coding. *Again* the only lenses available for selection in that menu would be those that can also be coded. Leica would no doubt be very specific in stipulating that these corrections are only designed for (X,Y, Z) lenses and should not be used with any others, etc.

 

With full knowledge of Leica's cautions and stipulations, individual photographers could then experiment with using the various menu selections with other lenses (including Leica lenses that cannot be coded). Once again, neither Leica nor the lens manufacturer would bear any responsibility for the results of this "emulation". If it worked well for the photographer, great. If it didn't he or she would have no reason to blame Leica, Zeiss, CV, etc.

 

In other words, there are ways in which Leica (without ever lending official support to non-coded lenses) can nonetheless make their M8 system much more open for photographers. One is by enabling the menu selection option described above. The other would be by not interfering with a potential cottage industry of lens and/or adapter machinists.

 

I'm afraid that many may not read this carefully and will then misunderstand it but I hope these thoughts are of interest to people who are willing to read them carefully. They come as a result of having been thinking a lot about this issue for the past several months. And, yes, I have had discussions with various lens and camera manufacturers but naturally those discussions must remain private.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

If they ever reached an agreement, there would have to be a way for corrections specific to each Zeiss be incorporated in the M8 FW and specific codes be established for each of the Zeiss lenses (add a bit - to seven bit?). I doubt this will ever happen given that these companies are in competition.

Tom