mirekti Posted December 11, 2013 Share #21 Posted December 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) ...i use UV/IR filters with both and i rarely need to tweak colors in PP otherwise than by adjusting contrast and WB. My widest lens at the moment is 35mm, and I'm waiting for the UV/IR cut filters and ColorChecker to arrive. Once I get all this I'll create dual illuminant profile with the filter on the lens, and hopefully get the colors finally right in the LR5. I truly hope this will work. In near future I also plan on getting a 21mm SEM, and wondered if you tried any of the wide angle lenses with the UV/IR filter on? The filters shouldn't be used with the lenses wider than 60 degrees angle of view, and I wondered if the color cast is there or it was addressed in the firmware? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 11, 2013 Posted December 11, 2013 Hi mirekti, Take a look here Purple cast on M's files.. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted December 11, 2013 Share #22 Posted December 11, 2013 Doing a personal profile is the best way of course. I needed one before FU 2.0.0.11 but not any more with C1. Re: UV/IR filters i've got a bit of cyan shift with them on CV 21/4 and Elmarit 21/2.8 asph (pics) but i have no experience with other 21s from Leica. CV 21/4 coded as 28/2.8 # 11804, f/4, w/o UV/IR filter: http://lctphot.smugmug.com/Other/M240-UVIR/i-F6hZt92/0/L/2140-L.jpg CV 21/4 coded as 28/2.8 # 11804, f/4, with UV/IR filter: http://lctphot.smugmug.com/Other/M240-UVIR/i-jWWLF2M/0/L/2140_F-L.jpg Elmarit 21/2.8 asph, f/2.8, w/o UV/IR filter: http://lctphot.smugmug.com/Other/M240-UVIR/i-6DTN3Jf/0/L/2128a-L.jpg Elmarit 21/2.8 asph, f/2.8, with UV/IR filter: http://lctphot.smugmug.com/Other/M240-UVIR/i-2xT7Jhd/0/L/2128af-L.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted December 11, 2013 Share #23 Posted December 11, 2013 Thanks for the quick response!! I really wish Leica could come up with the firmware that would include UV/IR filter on or off so one could use the camera with the full set of lenses. In some cases the IR contamination is not so strong or not seen, but in some photos it is more than obvious. I believe this problem is worth the UV/IR option in the firmware as there are more than one lens that would require it including WATE, 18 SEM, 21 lux and many others... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 11, 2013 Share #24 Posted December 11, 2013 Such firmware updates will never happen i'm afraid. It is up to raw converters to implement IR cuts settings if need be. They did it for the M8 but M240 users will probably never see that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MirekE Posted December 11, 2013 Share #25 Posted December 11, 2013 . At least GPS is working properly now on C1 - see below. Wilson 50N, 0.1W - was it shot in the middle of the English Channel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 11, 2013 Share #26 Posted December 11, 2013 50N, 0.1W - was it shot in the middle of the English Channel? 50N would indeed be in the middle of the English Channel but 50º 56’ is about 16km north of the sea. I checked the coordinates against the figures I have given a couple of people who have landed helicopters in our fields and as you would expect, they are absolutely correct. We nearly bought a house about 25 years ago, about 1km further east, where the Greenwich meridian ran through the house. It never fails to amaze me how simple these GPS modules are nowadays. I remember in the early days of the predecessor “SatNav” having to spend an hour re-programming the receiver after the power tripped off in a boat and where the receiver’s internal back up battery had gone flat, the replacement having to come from Japan. Not easy in a 15M yacht in very heavy seas, when you only have a 10 digit keypad and a 200 page manual written in English, badly translated from Japanese. You had to tell the receiver roughly where it was, before it would tell you exactly where it was, as well as lots of other data, and then only when one of the relatively few satellites flew over. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted December 11, 2013 Share #27 Posted December 11, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Evidently you need the uv/ir cut filters from the M8 days as the built in one is not strong enough. If you get a black going red/magenta and the rest seem ok, then use the filters or make a selection and desaturate the offending black. If it is an overall problem, filters are the answer. And I thought that was solved 99% after the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dougg Posted December 12, 2013 Share #28 Posted December 12, 2013 I've been using the IR cut filters on the M lenses from the start, just leaving them on from M8 use, then M9 use as well... I have only gotten as wide as 28mm so far, though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 12, 2013 Share #29 Posted December 12, 2013 jip - Would you mind posting an example and we can try and help if, you are still here? A link to a DNG file would be best. Rick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share #30 Posted December 13, 2013 jip - Would you mind posting an example and we can try and help if' date=' you are still here? A link to a DNG file would be best. Rick[/quote'] I shall post a DNG file where I noticed it tomorrow. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted December 13, 2013 Share #31 Posted December 13, 2013 I hear how this affects mainly wide angle lenses.... Does one still need UV/IR cut filters for say a 50 Cron? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 13, 2013 Author Share #32 Posted December 13, 2013 I hear how this affects mainly wide angle lenses.... Does one still need UV/IR cut filters for say a 50 Cron? It doesn't matter how wide or long the lens is, if there is IR contamination you need the filter, so basically it doesn't matter what lens... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted December 13, 2013 Share #33 Posted December 13, 2013 It doesn't matter how wide or long the lens is, if there is IR contamination you need the filter, so basically it doesn't matter what lens... Cheers for the response - I feel like I was using a fact that affects something else. I thought the IR was more apparent on a wide angle lens, or was there something else that affected wide angles. I guess I have to look for those UV/IR filters that are somewhere in the shelves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 13, 2013 Share #34 Posted December 13, 2013 No the focal length does not affect the IR light, but the filtering effect of the IR filter is incidence-angle dependent, so the corners of the image may exhibit colour shifts on wideangle lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 16, 2013 Author Share #35 Posted December 16, 2013 So sorry for the delay but here is a .DNG file of course the image looks okay, but if you were there you'd know the sky wasn't that magenta or purple... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11005523/L1001020.DNG Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted December 16, 2013 Share #36 Posted December 16, 2013 So sorry for the delay but here is a .DNG file of course the image looks okay, but if you were there you'd know the sky wasn't that magenta or purple... https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/11005523/L1001020.DNG Nothing more than a white balance problem. If you increase the colour temperature from as shot by around 1,250º to 1750º Kelvin, the sky starts to look perfectly normal for an evening sky. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted December 16, 2013 Share #37 Posted December 16, 2013 I just see a bit of magenta on the top of the pic out of C1 v7. Easy to reduce but the sky tends to become too grey then. I would just do magenta saturation -10 or keep the pic as is personally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted December 16, 2013 Share #38 Posted December 16, 2013 :confused:How can one judge magenta casts on a sunset? Anyway, nothing wrong here to my eye: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/218132-purple-cast-on-ms-files/?do=findComment&comment=2488368'>More sharing options...
01af Posted December 16, 2013 Share #39 Posted December 16, 2013 ... here is a .DNG file. Of course the image looks okay, but if you were there you'd know the sky wasn't that magenta or purple ... In Camera Raw or Lightroom, try White Balance—Temperature = 3,500 K and White Balance—Tint = -30. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 17, 2013 Author Share #40 Posted December 17, 2013 What I meant to say was that the image didn't look like reality to me, something the DMR or M9 does better in my opinions. for me the DMR has the best out of camera colours I've ever seen in a camera, especially if WB is set just at 5400 and I just adjust that afterwards the green/purple is always okay left at 0 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.