marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #21 Posted August 11, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) APO Summicron 75mm ASPH 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/2301-lens-codings/?do=findComment&comment=28744'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 11, 2006 Posted August 11, 2006 Hi marknorton, Take a look here Lens Codings. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #22 Posted August 11, 2006 35mm Summicron pre-ASPH Interesting to note that this lens has a different coding from the 35mm Summilux ASPH, so the codes identify the actual lens formulation, not just the focal length, as I think we expected. 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/2301-lens-codings/?do=findComment&comment=28746'>More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 11, 2006 Share #23 Posted August 11, 2006 What about lenses not made by Leica??? I have a 50mm M Hexanon which I favored over a 80's version Summicron. After comparing the two, I decided that the Hexanon was every bit as sharp and gave me a bit more contrast. If I go with an M8, is there any chance of getting the Hexanon coded? Or will I have to go for broke and purchase the latest 50mm Summilux (or Summicron or Noctilux)? What about Voiglander lenses? It would be interesting to see the difference between coded lenses and those not coded, but that's not to happen just yet. Cheers, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 11, 2006 Share #24 Posted August 11, 2006 Another question. Any chance of this coding wearing off, or flaking off? The Red dot on my 90mm Elmarit fell off. Leica paint scuffs really easily. I'm not feeling to confident about this coding business. Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #25 Posted August 11, 2006 I expect there will be lots of comparisons made between non-coded and coded Leica lenses to understand the extent of the image enhancements. It's unlikely Leica will have gone to these lengths if the improvements were not real and worthwhile. As for other lenses, we don't yet know whether it will be possible to dial-in any form of image enhancement based on just focal length. We can be certain they will not have built in anything for Zeiss, Konica and CV lenses. They want to provide added value for those people buying Leica lenses. How much that value is, we don't know yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #26 Posted August 11, 2006 The lens codings consists of pits milled into the lens mount, maybe 1/64 inch or 1/4 mm. They are filled with paint, so there is no possibility of the paint "wearing off". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overgaard Posted August 11, 2006 Share #27 Posted August 11, 2006 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hmm ... six spaces. Anyone who have figured out how many combinations that make? I'm just hoping they won't invent more lenses and one day 7 spaces will be neeedded ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #28 Posted August 11, 2006 63 lenses plus one for "no coding". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Ross Posted August 11, 2006 Share #29 Posted August 11, 2006 Hi Mark, On your 35/2 they have simply eleminated the mount screw where the codes are located. The 75/2 is the one shown in the Shutterbug article as I guessed. Bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 11, 2006 Author Share #30 Posted August 11, 2006 Yes! They've reduce the number of screws from 6 to 5 to make space for the lens coding. Well spotted! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbesz Posted August 11, 2006 Share #31 Posted August 11, 2006 Thanks Mark it's interesting to see. I must have similar IR detecting photodiodes in my M7 now for decoding the film canister DX code. (Also interesting to see amateur decipherers at work, but code looks too illogical at this time ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 12, 2006 Author Share #32 Posted August 12, 2006 Yes, I can't see any pattern either, as we've said before, we don't know which way the code reads and which is 0, which is 1. Perhaps they allocated codes when the World Cup matches were being drawn... Like you, I feel certain the sensors to read the lens code and the film cannister DX code are closely related. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 12, 2006 Share #33 Posted August 12, 2006 Whether more numbers are needed in the future, new marks could be added. The reader would perceive if the code is 6-bit or 8-bit. Thank you Mark for this information!! R. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 12, 2006 Share #34 Posted August 12, 2006 Mark says: "They want to provide added value for those people buying Leica lenses. How much that value is, we don't know yet." Well, I guess it would be expecting too much of Leica to also code lenses not made by Leica. I'll be interested to see what the actual difference will be between coded and non-coded lenses. Cheers, Wilfredo+ Benitez-Rivera Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 12, 2006 Author Share #35 Posted August 12, 2006 Leica are looking to obtain a commercial advantage, "buy our lenses and get something the competition cannot offer". I think they are spooked by the lower cost Zeiss and CV lenses and we should not expect them to provide the same functionality for non-Leica lenses. The ball is in Zeiss' court to produce their own digital rangefinder optimised for their lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted August 12, 2006 Share #36 Posted August 12, 2006 Mark: Could this lens coding be a Leica ploy to get people to buy Leica lenses? Why is it that the RD1 needed no lens coding? I'm just wondering about this. We won't know for sure what the real difference will be until real tests are presented and people try both. It will be a few months before that fully happens. In the mean time, this new Leica saga continues. It really is great publicity for the M8, brilliant! Cheers, Wilfredo xxx.BenitezRivera.com Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wbesz Posted August 12, 2006 Share #37 Posted August 12, 2006 "this new Leica saga continues" Nothing to really worry about. No amount of software manipulation can change the light path into the light sensor. I feel certain that we can make the desired image compensation ourselves in photoshop, --custom! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 12, 2006 Author Share #38 Posted August 12, 2006 Wilfredo, that's exactly what it is, but it has to be backed up by real benefits in terms of image quality. If Leica can demonstrate that the image quality from using a coded lens is clearly better than an uncoded or uncodeable lens, there will be real reason to code existing lenses or buy Leica lenses. If, however, it proves pretty marginal, Leica will be a laughing stock and people like me (I've just spent €600 or so having my lenses coded) will have been "had". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted August 12, 2006 Share #39 Posted August 12, 2006 Mark: Interesting thought occurs - the Tri-Elmar has "a" code, but not three different codes, or variable coding, for the 3 FoV available. Guess that means that to fully correct for focal-length-specific imaging flaws (light fall-off, color fringes, etc) the camera will have to read from the viewfinder setting as well as the zebra dots. i.e., zebra code 010101 (or 101010) is read as "this is a 28/35/50 Tri-Elmar - get actual focal length in use from the viewfinder selector position". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 12, 2006 Author Share #40 Posted August 12, 2006 I agree it will use the viewfinder setting to determine the focal length in use since each of the 3 focal lengths sets a different viewfinder setting. Makes you wonder about the 16-18-21 being talked about. They might still use the existing viewfinder setting mechanism even though the frames are undefined. There's also nothing to stop them presenting a different code depending on the selected focal length but the lens would use up 3 of the 63 available codes which is quite greedy. They could for example, have a mask in the lens mount which changes what the sensor sees as you adjust the focal length. There's a logic to all of this, to be sure, but I don't think we have enough information yet to know what it is! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.