joesqua Posted January 29, 2014 Share #21 Â Posted January 29, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I tried to use the menu, but I am totally unhappy. The problem is simple: crappy firmware. Â After using an uncoded Elmarit 90, I mounted my coded Elmarit 24. Even if the 24 is coded, the camera continued to use the manual Elmarit 90 setting, and the uncorrected color vignetting is very noticeable in many shots. Â Did you reset the menu to "Automatic"? If you don't it will retain the manual setting. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 29, 2014 Posted January 29, 2014 Hi joesqua, Take a look here Coding a used Lens. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
CheshireCat Posted January 29, 2014 Share #22 Â Posted January 29, 2014 But as above the camera might mistake a screw head for a coding so might set the wrong code if set to always use a 'detected' code. Â If the code reader cannot distinguish between a screw head and a black patch (!!), then they should have avoided using lens codes that can be "simulated" by screw heads. It is not rocket science... Â By the way, which lenses have screw heads in the "wrong" place ? If the code has a single bit set and does not match the selected frame lines, then it is a screw and the lens is not coded. Â As someone who has a mix of coded and uncoded lenses I share your frustrations but do accept that its the result of using older, legacy lenses. Â ... or brand new third-party lenses. I love my Nokton 35/1.2. I wonder why new third-parties lenses are not "custom-coding ready" ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted January 29, 2014 Share #23 Â Posted January 29, 2014 I tried to use the menu, but I am totally unhappy.The problem is simple: crappy firmware. Â After using an uncoded Elmarit 90, I mounted my coded Elmarit 24. Even if the 24 is coded, the camera continued to use the manual Elmarit 90 setting, and the uncorrected color vignetting is very noticeable in many shots. Â Did you reset the menu to "Automatic"? If you don't it will retain the manual setting. Â I forgot to reset, of course. But a human forgetting things (especially after a few days) is perfectly normal. I should not remember to do trivial things an algorithm can do for me automatically ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 30, 2014 Share #24 Â Posted January 30, 2014 Since the coding was introduced some people have proposed that a manual lens detection chosen from the menue was overridden by a code on the lens. Then you might forget about changing the manual detection but the code on the lens nevertheless cares for the right setting - in your case the right one one for 24mm even if you set it manually for a 90mm lens before. Â Unfortunately Leica did not follow this proposal. Some others spoke against it as they thought that an indivually chosen correction might be better than the automatic one read by the code. But there has been no single proof for this. So Leica might think again and offer the option of automatical override of manual settings by a lens code. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted January 30, 2014 Share #25  Posted January 30, 2014 Bill  Leica NJ would not code some of my lenses that DAG will code. A third party coder is DAG I guess.  That said the11310 Leica NJ coded just fine as well as some pre ASPH lenses, but not all. But some they CLA'd and sent back saying they could not code. My idea was to have both CLA and coding done simultaneously, but I was not pre-notified that only CLA could be done by them.  Why code? I want the lens data in the EXIF as much as possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted January 30, 2014 Share #26 Â Posted January 30, 2014 If the code reader cannot distinguish between a screw head and a black patch (!!), then they should have avoided using lens codes that can be "simulated" by screw heads.It is not rocket science... Frustrating though this system may be, unless someone can come up with a better alternative which can be fitted to older lenses too, I think its an acceptable solution. Whilst I would really like my 35mm pre-aspheric Summilux coded but the mount is unlike most other lenses I believe, so I will have to live with manually telling the camera its fitted (I'm assuming that there is no 'readable' code for this lens, just a manual setting?). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesqua Posted January 30, 2014 Share #27 Â Posted January 30, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you are shooting RAW, then regardless what the lens is coded as, there will be no corrections applied to the image by the camera. Only the EXIF data will be registered. So in the case of an older lens with no code, just pick one in the menu that has the same focal length and max. aperture and perhaps the same name. Then the EXIF data will at least show what lens you had on the camera for further PP. Lightroom has a bunch of Leica profiles. There might be one close enough. If you use R lenses, you will have to use the manual entry screen anyway with the R/M adapter. JPEGs are a different story. If the M has a profile for that lens, then the camera will correct the image when you manually enter it or automatically sense it. No profile, no correction. There are several profiles in the menu for uncoded lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted January 30, 2014 Share #28 Â Posted January 30, 2014 If you are shooting RAW, then regardless what the lens is coded as, there will be no corrections applied to the image by the camera. Â Actually, RAW files are corrected in-camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joesqua Posted January 31, 2014 Share #29  Posted January 31, 2014 Cheshire Cat : I disagree: RAW (DNG) data is unprocessed. When I use LR on a M 240 DNG image and apply a LR Leica lens profile, there is a significant change indicating that no processing in the camera has occurred. What do you base your statement that corrections are applied in camera to DNG images?   From the M 240 Manual Note: The functions and settings described in the next two sections refer exclusively to pictures in one of the JPEG formats. If one of the two DNG formats is specified, these settings have no effect, as in this case the picture data is always saved in its original form.  • The standardized DNG (Digital Negative) format is used for storage of completely unprocessed raw picture data. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted January 31, 2014 Share #30  Posted January 31, 2014 Cheshire Cat : I disagree: RAW (DNG) data is unprocessed. When I use LR on a M 240 DNG image and apply a LR Leica lens profile, there is a significant change indicating that no processing in the camera has occurred. What do you base your statement that corrections are applied in camera to DNG images?  From the M 240 Manual Note: The functions and settings described in the next two sections refer exclusively to pictures in one of the JPEG formats. If one of the two DNG formats is specified, these settings have no effect, as in this case the picture data is always saved in its original form.  • The standardized DNG (Digital Negative) format is used for storage of completely unprocessed raw picture data.  I would suggest your quote from the manual refers to the JPEG settings of things like colour, contrast, saturation and photo style etc. These settings affect the rendering of the image and do not make any difference to the .dng file. It does not refer to lens corrections. The reason you see a change in Lightroom is because it is applying an additional correction to the file. But if you, for instance, put an uncoded 21mm lens on the camera the resulting .dng file will show red edge syndrome. If you then code the lens the red edge is gone when the file is imported to Lightroom (with no Lightroom corrections) showing that corrections must be made to the .dng file in the camera.  I don't even have an M240 but it seems obvious to me.  Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 31, 2014 Share #31 Â Posted January 31, 2014 Vignetting and color shift corrections are applied to DNG files actually. Suffice it to disable Lens Detection to see the difference immediately. More visible with WA than tele lenses obviously. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share #32  Posted January 31, 2014 Bill Leica NJ would not code some of my lenses that DAG will code. A third party coder is DAG I guess.  That said the11310 Leica NJ coded just fine as well as some pre ASPH lenses, but not all. But some they CLA'd and sent back saying they could not code. My idea was to have both CLA and coding done simultaneously, but I was not pre-notified that only CLA could be done by them.  Why code? I want the lens data in the EXIF as much as possible. Interesting that they would not code them if there is a code built into the system for them. My uncoded 50 is a 11816. I will use it as is for a while. It appears to spot on for focusing. I just need to remember to manually code it in the menu. I will give DAG a call in April to get ti coded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 31, 2014 Share #33 Â Posted January 31, 2014 11816 is the current silver 50/2. Never heard of coding problems with it. Leica should do it as well and should optimize the lens for digital at the same price if they still do for you what they did for me. LeicaM_lens_coding.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted January 31, 2014 Share #34 Â Posted January 31, 2014 Vignetting and color shift corrections are applied to DNG files actually. Suffice it to disable Lens Detection to see the difference immediately. More visible with WA than tele lenses obviously. Â Correct. Â A DNG by it's nature is a processed file to a point. Leica chose that format for it's basic image rendering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share #35 Â Posted January 31, 2014 11816 is the current silver 50/2. Never heard of coding problems with it. Leica should do it as well and should optimize the lens for digital at the same price if they still do for you what they did for me. I was not talking about any problem, Leica will code it but DAG will do it for half what Leica will. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 31, 2014 Share #36 Â Posted January 31, 2014 So much the better but will DAG optimize the lens as well? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted January 31, 2014 Author Share #37 Â Posted January 31, 2014 So much the better but will DAG optimize the lens as well? What exactly would Leica do to optimize the lens? I know DAG will make sure that the lens is adjusted properly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted January 31, 2014 Share #38 Â Posted January 31, 2014 So much the better but will DAG optimize the lens as well? Â Yes. He was trained with Leica and does many things in an "old school" way, which is often better than Leica does now. I posted elsewhere about his getting my 50 Summilux Asph to focus smoothly (which Leica couldn't do) by replacing the grease with new, but old, Leitz grease. And, yes, he made sure everything else was working properly for no extra charge. Â Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted January 31, 2014 Share #39 Â Posted January 31, 2014 I was not talking about any problem, Leica will code it but DAG will do it for half what Leica will. Â And probably twice as fast. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted January 31, 2014 Share #40 Â Posted January 31, 2014 What exactly would Leica do to optimize the lens?... They adjust it to tighter tolerances i guess, don't ask me more. All i can say is the lenses i've sent in for coding have never been that accurate before. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.