Coding Non-Coded Lenses - Why Do It?

[friedeye]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have always used lens profiles on my M9 and think it’s a wonderful feature. And, I confess, that I don’t own newer Leica lenses with coding - instead a rather large collection of non-coded LTM and M glass. This forum has been very helpful in steering me to the correct profile for a non-Leica lens. However...

 

I find it absolutely no trouble at all - maybe an additional 5-10 seconds - to manually set a lens profile, and wonder at all the fuss and trouble people are going through to put code on their non-coded glass.

 

Of course I understand the Leica shooter who has a collection of coded glass and only occasionally uses non-coded lenses. No brainer.

 

And I understand the wedding or crisis photographer who can’t spare 5 - 10 seconds while doing an on-the-fly lens change. They’re probably shooting Canons or Nikons anyway.

 

But for most of us - those who don’t own coded lenses, or maybe just one or two - I think the obsession with using this feature kind of silly. Voigtlander and Leica LTM adapters (the only good ones) don’t have coding depressions, so you’re relegating yourself to cheap Chinese adapters. Zeiss and CV M glass is a pain to code with templates and marker pens - and, even if you do it correctly, the ink eventually rubs off. Is it worth it?

 

I’ll bet that I’m like most people: I don’t change glass often in the field. Most days, one lens stays on the camera. But when I do swap lenses, I’m extremely careful. Dust on the sensor is a big concern. I do it out of the wind. I cap the lens coming off. I take time. The 5-10 seconds to change the profile is nothing.

 

Maybe you all think I’m crazy - but I thought I’d put it out there to discuss.

[Advertisement]

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

[250swb]

Sounds like you making a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

Some lenses don't need coding if they are longer than 35mm, lenses don't need coding for information if you can remember where you were and what you did and what the photograph looks like, the Chinese adapters that are codable work well, and changing lenses is just changing lenses, it shouldn't be turned into a scary exercise.

 

Get some codable adapters, buy a sensor cleaning kit, and change lenses as often as you like.

 

Steve

[friedeye]

I'm not an idiot, thank you. And my concern is not what lens was on the camera, the shutter speed or stop - it's that I get the best performance from that lens by using Leica's lens profiles. I'm of the opinion that they help.

 

And I'm not afraid of cleaning my sensor, and do it as often as needed. I change lenses when I want to, and do it without stress, even if it means spending a very small amount of time changing a lens profile - which I find infinitely easier than buying Chinese adapters for each lens, coding them, then having to pull them on and off the lens whenever I want to shoot one of my ltm cameras (yes, I know, I would have to do that anyway -- but it results in far more adapters floating around in my bag and lens keeps because of the specific coding). And, I repeat, coding Zeiss & CV lenses is a pain.

 

I am actually advocating simplicity, here. Apparently, you don't agree.

[hoppyman]

Was there a question in there?

If you are happy with how you work I don't see any problem.

That doesn't mean it is a 'kind of silly obsession' for others to prefer to use the coding. It is just a personal choice on how you like to work and what is important for you.

Apart from the identification convenience for every coded lens (if you use that information) for lenses wider than 35 the in camera vignetting and potential edge dis-colouration corrections are significant. Those are not the same as lens profile corrections in your image processing program, at least the standard ones.

I don't personally now have any lenses that need to be manually coded, but I wasn't satisfied with hand markings using a template when I tried that in the past. Others are certainly happy with the hand marking process though. Having correctly machined pits and painted markings is a different situation though.

 

What I have done is to shoot a couple of hundred frames once that were mis-identified due to my forgetting to reset a manual selection. Once was enough for me.

 

How you like to change lenses in the field is a different subject. It has never been a significant issue for me personally over 25,000 or so frames with M8,M9 and now M here.

[lct]

I certainly don't want to chimp when i change a lens personally. I expect the process to work the same way as with film bodies and i don't understand why digital ones should me more sluggish in any way. Now that Zeiss and CV lenses have a recess in the flange it is not difficult to hand code them at all and good permanent markers don't rub off easily this way. It can be more painful to use early Leica lenses from this standpoint. Most of mine are coded already and the others are used on crop bodies where coding has less justification if any.

[250swb]

And, I repeat, coding Zeiss & CV lenses is a pain.

 

A dab of paint in the groove machined to accept the coding marks works perfectly with CV and Zeiss lenses, 30 seconds doing it soon outweighs the time spent going through a menu every time a lens is changed, what could be simpler?

 

- it's that I get the best performance from that lens by using Leica's lens profiles. I'm of the opinion that they help.

 

which is why I said lenses longer than 35mm don't need coding anyway because they don't cause the colour and vignetting problems that need correcting on wider lenses.

 

I'm not an idiot, thank you.

 

I don't think I touched on that so take it as read that if I didn't call you one you probably aren't one. But some people just like to get on with photography, spending time composing the photograph, rather than engage in camera play, a laborious game of peripheral rules about this and that which make wargaming seem fast.

 

Steve

[Rick in CO]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Isn't it just wonderful to have options?

I have one user profile set to "wide angle" and one set to "normal".

It covers my 25/35/50/85/135 combo, all non-coded.

Works fine.

[algrove]

I'm with hoppyman.

[bocaburger]

I think the obsession with using this feature kind of silly..... I thought I’d put it out there to discuss.

 

Calling it a silly obsession seems more like trying to provoke an argument than a discussion to me but whatever. I DIY coded (hand-milled the pits and filled them with paint) all my 35mm and shorter lenses (with the exception of the CV 12mm because none of the Leica corrections seem to work well enough for it) way back when I had an M8, which did not have a menu for manually inputing lenses. When I got an M9 I had to change codes of a few lenses to the 21 pre-ASPH because the ones I used with the M8 weren't cutting it (notably the CV 15 and 21). The M9 codes still work perfectly on the M240. I sourced the older full-circle Leitz adapters for the CV screw lenses. I have always left lens recognition on, and it never adversely affected the rest of my uncoded lenses. Although it doesn't take long to go into the menu to set the lens, if I happen to forget, there's hell to pay later on in post processing.

[friedeye]

But some people just like to get on with photography, spending time composing the photograph, rather than engage in camera play, a laborious game of peripheral rules about this and that which make wargaming seem fast.

 

Steve

 

Camera play seems to me to be half of what this board's all about. It's a disingenuous criticism, Steve. This board is about Leica love and how we use these terrific devices. Are they the most practical? No. Do they have the best image quality? We could argue that - but probably no. "I love my M3, M4, M5, M6…" these are expressions that really have nothing to do with pure photography. It's about loving a tool and trying to get the best from it. "Some people just like to get on with photography, spending time composing a photograph" -- fine. Get out there and do it, instead of trolling and trashing to your whim.

 

To the other folks responding - thanks. I especially like the idea of simply using two profiles - certainly worth a try.

 

And to the photographers who don't have the latest Zeiss lenses and can't afford coded Leica glass and use ltm lenses - is coding really worth it to you?

[250swb]

Get out there and do it, instead of trolling and trashing to your whim.

 

LOL, I agree that an awful lot of the forum debate is about equipment and not photography. As you say, you think the 'tool' has overriding importance, so I can see why you'd be riled when I propose that photography is what cameras are for. But it's a bit rich telling me to 'Get out there and do it' when I fail to find any record of a photograph by you either in the Photo Forum or anywhere else!

 

Steve

[lct]

[...] to the photographers who don't have the latest Zeiss lenses and can't afford coded Leica glass and use ltm lenses - is coding really worth it to you?

It should be so on wide lenses at least for those who shoot in color. Here an ugly DIY on CV 21/4. Ugly but it works. No need to chimp to take photos anymore.

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!