alexanderruas Posted June 2, 2007 Share #1 Posted June 2, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am thinking of buying a summilux 35/1.4 and/or an Elmarit 21/2.8 but neither are 6 bit encoded. It seems to take between 4-12 weeks to ship them to Solms for encoding so is it not worth the extra few hundred to buy new already encoded - and then get the full year warranty? thanks for your input! alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 Hi alexanderruas, Take a look here is it worth it to buy used non 6 bit lenses?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lars_bergquist Posted June 2, 2007 Share #2 Posted June 2, 2007 First, used Leica lenses in good optical and mechanical shape are always worth buying. The only Leica lenses I own that I have bought new are in fact the 35mm Summilux and the 50mm Summilux – and that was before the M8. Second, it may well take you longer to find those lenses new than to have old lenses coded! It all depends on your local situation of course. The old man from the Age of the M3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexanderruas Posted June 2, 2007 Author Share #3 Posted June 2, 2007 hmmm.... after owning a M8 for a month and after reading this forum for two months I still do not quite understand if I really need the 6 bit encoding. what would I miss out on if I use a non 6 bit lens? alexander Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted June 2, 2007 Share #4 Posted June 2, 2007 The coding on wides helps to sort out vignetting and cyan fringing problems "in camera". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 2, 2007 Share #5 Posted June 2, 2007 I am thinking of buying a summilux 35/1.4 and/or an Elmarit 21/2.8 but neither are 6 bit encoded.It seems to take between 4-12 weeks to ship them to Solms for encoding so is it not worth the extra few hundred to buy new already encoded - and then get the full year warranty? thanks for your input! alexander New lenses come with a 3 year warranty, at least they do here in the USA. I like the coding even on longer lenses because it places the mm of the lens in the EXIF data and to be honest I can't remember which lens was used for which shot I take on the M8. The coding also helps in correcting vignetting and the cyan cast when used with a IR cut filter. There is NO GOOD reason NOT to use coded lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tummydoc Posted June 2, 2007 Share #6 Posted June 2, 2007 There is NO GOOD reason NOT to use coded lenses. Just as there is NO GOOD reason NOT to drive a Rolls-Royce and live in a 42-room mansion:rolleyes: The cost of upgrading a kit-full of un-codable lenses even to secondhand samples of those on "The List" would be substantial. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted June 2, 2007 Share #7 Posted June 2, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Alexander, The 21 would definitely need to be coded, but you might be able to get by with an uncoded 35. I'm holding off on coding my 35 until the wait is a little shorter -- the cyan corners and vignetting on it are barely noticeable. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2007 Share #8 Posted June 2, 2007 ...There is NO GOOD reason NOT to use coded lenses. If there are no good reasons may i suggest 7 bad ones? 1/ Not everybody use their Leica lenses with a M8 2/ Not everybody use IR-cut filters with their M8 3/ Not eveybody need exif to take photographs 4/ Not everybody's sure that the new mount will fit perfectly the lens 5/ Not everybody wish to pay $100+ to get what they had for free previously 6/ Not everybody's sure that the M9 will have the same problems as the M8 7/ Not everybody is as grumpy as LCT Edit: the 7th reason is really bad. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guidomo Posted June 2, 2007 Share #9 Posted June 2, 2007 On a more practical note, you can self-code them with a pen, takes a few minutes and costs virtually nothing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artichoke Posted June 2, 2007 Share #10 Posted June 2, 2007 and other than the EXIF issue (which only adds the focal length when coded) probably makes no difference above focal lengths of 50 mm and little above focal lengths of 35 mm for the 21 mm you will see a difference, particularly if you use ir/cut filters, which I think are important for color photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym911 Posted June 2, 2007 Share #11 Posted June 2, 2007 i do not own any coded lenses but don't shoot wider than 28mm. I don't care about EXIF data, I know which lens I used. I think for real wide it is useful (vignetting correction in camera) but other than that I am not really seeing any benefits that I may be missing. probably others with ore experience will chip in. cheers andy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
B&W Posted June 2, 2007 Share #12 Posted June 2, 2007 Alexander, The 21 would definitely need to be coded, but you might be able to get by with an uncoded 35. I'm holding off on coding my 35 until the wait is a little shorter -- the cyan corners and vignetting on it are barely noticeable. Larry The 35 will need to be coded to correct cyan fringing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted June 2, 2007 Share #13 Posted June 2, 2007 Incidentally, the worst vignetters are the very fast long (50-90) lenses, which suddenly shift from having no light falloff at the edges to a stop or more when they are opened to their widest aperture. This has nothing to do with IR, merely the fact that the corners of the image don't get light from the full aperture when wide open because parts of it are obscured by the lens tube. The "on" setting provides a strong fix for this (yes, the M8 knows what aperture you are using most of the time, or at least makes a pretty good guess). The "ON+UV/IR" doesn't do much for this kind of vignetting as yet, but may include it in the future. So having the lens coded makes these corrections available. Plus I like to see the focal length in the EXIF -- my memory's not that good. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larry Posted June 2, 2007 Share #14 Posted June 2, 2007 The 35 will need to be coded to correct cyan fringing Particularly if you're prone to pixel-peeping. :-) In real-world situations, cyan fringing with the 35 is rarely and barely noticeable. Larry Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 2, 2007 Share #15 Posted June 2, 2007 Just as there is NO GOOD reason NOT to drive a Rolls-Royce and live in a 42-room mansion:rolleyes: The cost of upgrading a kit-full of un-codable lenses even to secondhand samples of those on "The List" would be substantial. My statement was for if you have lenses that can be coded or you buy lenses that are on the list that can be coded you should code them, IF coding is important to you. If it's not then fine. Do what you think is best for YOU. For me since my first entrance into digital was with a Nikon D200 and with that camera the lens mm and min/max f/stop along with shutter speed and aperture used for each shot is written into the EXIF I have gotten use to it. With the Leica M8 I have to be satisfied with just the mm of the lens, Max f/stop of the lens and the shutter speed. Without coding I wouldn't get any lens info at all. No where did I say you should replace the lenses you already have, if the ones you have can't be coded, with ones that are or can be coded. For me I have replaced one lens, filled out my M lens collection and coded all lenses that could be coded. Whether the were originally owned be me and uncoded or bought used and uncoded. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted June 2, 2007 Share #16 Posted June 2, 2007 When they change the mount at Solms or elsewhere, do they test each lens to check if it doesn't front- or back focus afterwards? Just curious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted June 2, 2007 Share #17 Posted June 2, 2007 When they change the mount at Solms or elsewhere, do they test each lens to check if it doesn't front- or back focus afterwards? Just curious. I'm not really sure but I would suspect that each lens mount is made for that particular lens type and focal lenght. So in theory you couldn't use a mount from a new 50mm f/2 lens on a new 75mm f/2 lens even if you changed the coding on it to read as a 75. I think the mount thickness would be different. Now what they might do is gage the original mount when they take it off and then grind the new coded mount to match. Hopefully they do check each lens for focus accuracy after they change the mount. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted June 2, 2007 Share #18 Posted June 2, 2007 They do adjust after each mount-change. This is part of the reason why it is only done in Solms or N.J. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted June 2, 2007 Share #19 Posted June 2, 2007 The 35 will need to be coded to correct cyan fringing What is cyan fringing? Is there leather involved? Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted June 2, 2007 Share #20 Posted June 2, 2007 They do adjust after each mount-change. This is part of the reason why it is only done in Solms or N.J. Not true, in the UK some lenses are done in Milton Keynes, others need to be sent to Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.