BerndReini Posted January 28, 2017 Share #41 Posted January 28, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) While I always believe in "Trust but verify," and look forward to seeing what my 21 non-ASPH (my money lens) does on the M10, I am not overly worried. Adan, is the 21 non-aspherical your money lens by choice or out of necessity? I own this lens and sold the Zeiss 21mm Biogon for it because I never had great experiences with the Zeiss as far as color shift was concerned with my M9. I don't use the 21mm focal length that often, but just started doing so on a recent trip. I have been contemplating upgrading to the Leica 21mm 3.8 because I hear that distortion is extremely well controlled and the lens is very compact. I should probably create a new thread in the lens from with this question, but I was wondering if you had any insight. Thanks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 28, 2017 Posted January 28, 2017 Hi BerndReini, Take a look here Corner Color Drift on M10?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted January 29, 2017 Share #42 Posted January 29, 2017 20/21mm has been my "money" focal length since 1977 and my first Canon 20mm f/2.8 - it provides exactly the context and "space" I am looking for in wide-angle shots. Landscape, architecture, people, settings, journalism - I use it for all kinds of pictures (not that I don't use a 35, 75/90 or 135 in addition!) The Leitz Canada 21mm Elmarit-M specifically is the lens that dragged me into the Leica system, after comparing its cooler, greener rendering to the Zeiss Biogon-G 21mm I was using in 2001. More accurately, an "anti-magenta" rendering in neutral colors, that actually makes bright reds "pop" by contrast. Also a characteristic, but a bit bluer, in that first Canon 20mm, which I missed a lot. That may be a creative choice - for me it feels more like a creative necessity. Picture below made with the Mandler 21mm and very early M9 firmware (10/09) - so (back on topic) I had to hand-correct some corner/edge red drift with a graduated Photoshop filter on the left-hand 10% of the image. 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! 3 Quote 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/268488-corner-color-drift-on-m10/?do=findComment&comment=3199227'>More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 29, 2017 Share #43 Posted January 29, 2017 I've shot with the pre-ASPH 21 Elmarit for years, in fact I bought a mint ASPH, tried it, sold it and kept the pre-ASPH. Indeed Leica never came up with a completely effective firmware update for the M9 and that lens. However it has always behaved perfectly with my M240s, so unless the M10 took a step backward or the initial firmware needs tweaking, I don't think you have anything to worry about. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 4, 2017 Author Share #44 Posted February 4, 2017 (edited) Here's my own question answered. I've presented the info on a neutral grey background to accentuate the color drift. Sorry, I could have done this more scientific but I don't have the time. I think this is good enough to show the differences in these cameras however. Leica M10 w/ Zeiss 15mm Distagon ZM using Leica 21mm 2.8 (11134) Profile: Higher Res Here Leica M typ 240 with Zeiss 15mm Distagon ZM using Leica 21mm 2.8 (11134) Profile: Higher Res Here Sony A7S (Kolarivision Modded) with Zeiss 15mm Distagon ZM: Higher Res Here Thoughts on the Zeiss 15mm ZM: On M10 - Corner drift looks very well controlled at both F/2.8 and F/8. Some very slight magenta drift but not really field relevant. 9/10. On M typ 240 - Corner drift is definitely noticeable at the vertical edges of the frame. 6/10. On A7SK - Looks like some cyan drift is present but not overly field relevant in this particular case. 8/10. Edited February 4, 2017 by cookedart 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 4, 2017 Author Share #45 Posted February 4, 2017 Leica M10 w/ Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 VII using Leica 21mm 2.8 (11134) Profile: Higher Res Here Leica M typ 240 w/ Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 VII using Leica 21mm 2.8 (11134) Profile: Higher Res Here Sony A7S (Kolarivision Modded) w/ Voigtlander Super Wide-Heliar 15mm f/4.5 VII: Higher Res Here Thoughts on the Voigtlander 15mm: On M10 - Magenta corner drift is noticeable on vertical edges of frame. 6/10. On M typ 240 - Corner drift is pretty extreme here. 3/10. On A7SK - Looks like some cyan drift is present but not overly field relevant in this particular case. 8/10. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 4, 2017 Author Share #46 Posted February 4, 2017 Some conclusions I can make so far: The M10 definitely has more controlled magenta color drift than the M typ 240. I tried other profiles like the Wide Angle Tri Elmar 16mm, but the 21mm coding seemed to have the best results. Unfortunately these are the only drift-prone lenses I own currently. Unfortunately I made a focusing error with the 15mm ZM so comparing across the frame sharpness is difficult with these tests. Comparing the Voigtlander at F/4.5 at full screen on my monitor made the M240 and M10 look almost identical in terms of edge to edge corner sharpness. The A7S clearly had some corner smearing at the very edges of the frame and seems to expose very differently than the Leicas. So while the Sony's cyan drift seems to not be an issue with this kind of photography (for me anyways), the lack of edge to edge sharpness is definitely an issue. The M10 in my mind is definitely the most stable digital shooting platform for M lenses created so far. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
steppenw0lf Posted February 5, 2017 Share #47 Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) Just as good for M lenses is the SL, which (unfortunately) has not been included in the comparison. (Please add images, if you think this statement is wrong.) Examples: WATE is perfect on SL, ZM 15 and CV 15 have slight color shift, while Milvus 15 is ok. (Milvus 15 is quite big, but allows filter use (95mm) and has floating element for error correction) See also Vieri Bottazzini about tests with CV 10 and 15. https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/surgery-voigtlander-super-wide-heliar-15mm-iii.html https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/voigtlander-heliar-hyper-wide-10mm-f5-6-review.html Edited February 5, 2017 by steppenw0lf Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 5, 2017 Author Share #48 Posted February 5, 2017 Just as good for M lenses is the SL, which (unfortunately) has not been included in the comparison. (Please add images, if you think this statement is wrong.) Examples: WATE is perfect on SL, ZM 15 and CV 15 have slight color shift, while Milvus 15 is ok. (Milvus 15 is quite big, but allows filter use (95mm) and has floating element for error correction) See also Vieri Bottazzini about tests with CV 10 and 15. https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/surgery-voigtlander-super-wide-heliar-15mm-iii.html https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/voigtlander-heliar-hyper-wide-10mm-f5-6-review.html It wasn't included since I don't own a SL. Vieri's review features the V3 of the Voigtlander 15mm which is larger to work better on digital bodies and reduce color drift. The WATE works well on most bodies, even an unmodified A7 series body. The 15mm Voigtlander V2, the Voigtlander 21mm skopar, and a few Zeiss wide angles have all been problematic with digital bodies in the past, so these are the lenses really in need of data. Nothing I've seen suggests that the SL has better performance than what I've seen on the M10 however. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edwardkaraa Posted February 5, 2017 Share #49 Posted February 5, 2017 Thank you for the comparisons! These clearly show that Leica has improved or modified the microlens design from the M240. Very interesting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv1857 Posted February 5, 2017 Share #50 Posted February 5, 2017 Can anyone report on their experience with the Voigtlander 21mm f4 color Skopar on an M10? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 5, 2017 Share #51 Posted February 5, 2017 http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/269002-m10-paranormally-gifted-recognizes-cv-15mm-without-bit-code/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted February 5, 2017 Share #52 Posted February 5, 2017 Can anyone report on their experience with the Voigtlander 21mm f4 color Skopar on an M10? Sorry? Did you read post #2 of this topic? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viv1857 Posted February 5, 2017 Share #53 Posted February 5, 2017 No need to apologise. In post 2 the OP notes he has not had an opportunity to assess any files. I may have missed it but i have not yet seen reports here on real world experiences with the vm f4 21 on an M10. However, based on the jist of the thread so far - lovely pics from an M9 and the assumption that the M10 has improved wide angle performance - I'm probably safe in assuming the lens would be a good purchase. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nico1974 Posted February 5, 2017 Share #54 Posted February 5, 2017 Can anyone report on their experience with the Voigtlander 21mm f4 color Skopar on an M10? I have the M10 and the Voigtlander 21/4 - it works perfectly when coded as 21 f/2.8 11134 a lot better than on the M240 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 6, 2017 Author Share #55 Posted February 6, 2017 I have the M10 and the Voigtlander 21/4 - it works perfectly when coded as 21 f/2.8 11134 a lot better than on the M240 Would love to see some images if at all possible! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 9, 2017 Share #56 Posted February 9, 2017 Leica rep met me alongside Interstate 25 so that I could try out the M10. Specific to this thread: My 6-bit-coded 21mm Elmarit pre-ASPH is free of color drift. Yay! On both the 21 and my 135 Tele-Elmar (uncoded) there does seem to be slightly more corner darkening (no color drifts, though) than I am used to with the M9. (21 shot right side, 135 shot, all corners.) Which plays to cookedart's theory about long lenses on the M10. But it's early days yet.... In any case, regular brightness falloff is easy to correct if troubling - I usually end up adding some corner darkening to M9 files anyway (old habit from photojournalism days). 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! 4 Quote 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/268488-corner-color-drift-on-m10/?do=findComment&comment=3208422'>More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share #57 Posted February 9, 2017 (edited) Leica rep met me alongside Interstate 25 so that I could try out the M10. Specific to this thread: My 6-bit-coded 21mm Elmarit pre-ASPH is free of color drift. Yay! Do you by any chance notice any improvement in corner performance (resolution/sharpness) as well? Edited February 9, 2017 by cookedart Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted February 9, 2017 Share #58 Posted February 9, 2017 The 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH produces rather fuzzy corners until one is down to f/9 or so anyway, so not a great lens to test that with. That was true on film as well, so not "sensor" softness. FWIW, the 100% crop below is from the extreme lower left corner of another of my test shots. About 7% of picture height and 25% of width. Probably f/8-ish (ISO100, hazy sun, 180th) About normal for this 1980 early attempt at designing a retrofocus superwide for the M. It does show that this lens, while soft in the corners, has virtually zero lateral CA (red/cyan or purple/green fringes around fine, contrasty details). At any aperture. Just fuzzy. 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! 1 Quote 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/268488-corner-color-drift-on-m10/?do=findComment&comment=3208856'>More sharing options...
cookedart Posted February 9, 2017 Author Share #59 Posted February 9, 2017 The 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH produces rather fuzzy corners until one is down to f/9 or so anyway, so not a great lens to test that with. Thanks for your input! In my experience with some of the A7 bodies vary pretty wildly with corner smearing introduced depending on the sensor design. Just trying to see if this has more or less stayed the same from previous M generations. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted February 9, 2017 Share #60 Posted February 9, 2017 Has anyone tried the Super Angulon yet? I have a f4 and wondering how it fairs Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.