sydkugelmass Posted January 22, 2014 Share #1 Posted January 22, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Selecting the typ 11851 from the manual lens profiling list on the M9 generates EXIF data corresponding to the Macro Elmar 90mm, when the DNG is imported in LR 5.2. Is this an appropriate choice or a (possibly sub-optimal) best fit? Distortion correction seems quite a bit aggressive, resulting in a barrelized, "corrected", image. Someone has already encountered this problem? Thank You in advance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 22, 2014 Posted January 22, 2014 Hi sydkugelmass, Take a look here Tele Elmar 135mm typ 11851 on M9 - lens profile?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wlaidlaw Posted January 22, 2014 Share #2 Posted January 22, 2014 Why not hand code it as a 135/3.4 Telyt (110101). That is what I have done with my 135 T-E. Hand coding works well on an M9, much better than the fussy M8 or extremely fussy M240. You will find a thread all about this with photos of the coding here http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/187141-owners-brand-new-apo-telyt-m.html I have had all my hand coded lenses milled and permanently coded except the 135 T-E, as I don’t use it as a telephoto any longer. I have the Vario Elmar R 80-200 to take its place. I now use the 135 T-E head on a Novoflex bellows as a macro lens, for which purpose, it is an excellent performer. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 22, 2014 Share #3 Posted January 22, 2014 I just tried with an uncoded 135mm Apo-Telyt, lens detection set manually for the Tele-Elmar. The camera's display info says "135mm". In LR 5.3 it says "135mm" f/3.4 (which was right in this case) but "Leica Macro-Elmar-M 90 f/4". So it's just a wrong translation by LR. You don't have to fear that any harmful correction is applied. Lens correction works in the camera and seems to be right for the 135mm lens. Anyway there is only some very mild vignetting correction at work, which you won't miss if you don't use any lens detection. If you use lens profiles in LR, you might choose the one for the Apo-Telyt, distortion corection seems to be much milder, though I don't see much use in profiles for this type of lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydkugelmass Posted January 23, 2014 Author Share #4 Posted January 23, 2014 Thank You very much. It seems in fact just a bug in LR 5. Telyt 135 profile is ok. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 23, 2014 Share #5 Posted January 23, 2014 This thread is quite timely for me as I have sent my newer (slide lens hood) Elmar 135/4.0 in for 6bit coding and it was suggested to use the 135/3.4 code, but I asked why not use the 11851 code which the lens in fact is. If the 90 macro coding seems too aggressive, them maybe the 135/3.4 is in fact the best route to go. Any further comments? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 23, 2014 Share #6 Posted January 23, 2014 Please don't let confuse yourself, that coding a 135mm lens with one or another code - or none at all - does make any difference. You may try by selecting many codes from the menu: since this type of lense does not have any vignetting which is important in practice, in-camera correction will not show you any significant impacts. Coding of these lenses is just for the EXIF, not for the picture. There may be some visible differences if you use profiles in Lightroom. Though once again: those profiles are not necessary and sometimes I get the impression they change more than anyone needs. Longer focal lengthes for the M really don't need any software correction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 24, 2014 Share #7 Posted January 24, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Indeed, I think the remark on distortion in the OP is a misinterpretation as the camera does not do distortion correction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydkugelmass Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share #8 Posted January 25, 2014 When LR reads the exif data, contained in the M9's dng, corresponding to a 'typ 11851' manual selection, a 'Macro Elmar 90mm' is assigned in LR so that the distortion correction corresponding to a Macro Elmar 90mm is applied. It happens probably in LR, but I have not reverse engineered the M9's dng. So it is possible that the Macro Elmar equivalence is assigned in camera, and simply copied in LR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydkugelmass Posted January 25, 2014 Author Share #9 Posted January 25, 2014 (Continued). In both cases, selecting a typ 11851 on the M9 induces a Macro Elmar 90mm profile correction in LR. Thus the aggressive distortion correction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.