Should I have my lens coded?

[Csacwp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just bought a pre-asph 90mm summicron, the latest version that was made until 1998. Is there any advantage to having it 6-bit coded versus selecting the lens manually from the camera menu?

[Gregm61]

You just need to remember to manually code if you want "90mm" to show up in the EXIF data. You also need to remember to re-code when you change lenses or the 90mm setting will continue to be shown on subsequent images no matter the lens you use.

 

Or, just shut the coding system off if it does not matter to you. I sent a Canadian-made similar lens from the mid 80's to Leica and had it coded as manual coding and having to remember to do it with each lens change is a royal PITA.

[Ko.Fe.]

If you are switching lenses like crazy it will be big advantage, if you know what you are doing, then it will be nice convenience.

I just sold my uncoded Elmar-M 90 F4. It was not in use much by me. And every time I forgot to switch to this lens in the menu.... I can't find any difference in IQ. But EXIF is another story...    

[lct]

No IQ advantage to me but your lens should be calibrated for digital if coding is done by Leica. Could be interesting as i've never heard of a spot-on non calibrated 90/2 pre-apo, on digital at least. 

[ibramr]

Greetings.  I checked the cost of coding a lens in NJ a year or so ago, and it was $300.00. I understood at that time that cleaning the lens is a likely service I would also receive.   If you think that the Summicron is a keeper for a long period, then I think the comfort factor of a coded and cleaned lens is worth it.  Best regards.   

[jmahto]

I think DAG does it for cheaper and faster.

[Gregm61]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

That's about right. I think with shipping back to me it was around $345 to get my 90mm f2 pre-ASPH done by Leica.

 

DAG later did a 21/2.8 ASPH for me for $200, using the same parts Leica would have.

[adan]

I just bought a pre-asph 90mm summicron, the latest version that was made until 1998. Is there any advantage to having it 6-bit coded versus selecting the lens manually from the camera menu?

 

In general, strictly convenience - the same vignetting corrections (which for a 90 will be microscopic anyway) will be applied by the camera whether it is coded, or ID'd manually from the lens menu.

 

I say "in general" because it is my (undocumented) impression that older lenses (75 f/1.4, 90 Tele-Elmarit, early 135 f/3.4) that have had servicing by Leica to add 6-bit coding, often perform a little better than uncoded examples of the same lens. Not because of the presence of the coding, but because a Leica factory tech took the lens apart, and in reassembling it, checked the collimation and focus accuracy on an optical bench to make it "like new."

 

Adding 6-bit coding is not simply screwing on a new lens mount (or else it would cost $100 rather than $300) - the lens is checked and adjusted otherwise to be sure it is in spec, so that the customer won't return it complaining of "new" focusing errors or other problems introduced by the servicing.

 

My assumption is that the top-end 3rd-party techs (e.g. Goldberg and Krauter) are equally meticulous.

[jaques]

with a 90mm lens- my understanding is their are no real corrections applied by the camera - so coding is less important. However if you put a 90 on the camera and the camera is manually set to 50 or below- the images will have noticeable 'anti-vignetting' (?) as in- they will be whiter at the edges. So be sure to turn lens coding off or set it to 90 before you put it on.

[rramesh]

I got my 90 Elmarit-M coded and Leica adjusted my lens for digital M as well. I think the latter is important.

[lct]

I got my 90 Elmarit-M coded and Leica adjusted my lens for digital M as well. I think the latter is important.

 

Indeed and the DoF of 90/2 lenses is even shorter so lens calibration is of paramount importance for use on rangefinders at least.

[UliWer]

Some remarks about coding - besides the EXIF issue:

 

1. On which camera does one want to use the lens? If it is an M 10 and only one lens is uncoded, there is no necessity to code this single lens (or better: there should be no necessity for it). When the M10 recognizes any coded lens, it automatically switches  from any other setting to the code it reads on the lens. So all you have to do is to choose manually the recognition for your single uncoded lens. When you apply any other coded lens, it will be automatically recognized without switching from manual to automatic recognition. 

 

That said one has to add: It should be so. Unfortunately the M10 still has some glitches in this regard: sometimes coded lenses are not recognized, sometimes the M10 takes an uncoded lens for a coded one and applies some setting out of fantasy  Those glitches should be addressed in a future firmware update.

 

2. Do you want to use Auto-Iso?

For Auto-Iso coding may be interesting if you use the setting, that the shutter time should not be longer than e.g. 2*focal length. For a 90mm lens short shutter times are important to avoid movement. Since the Auto-Iso function must know which focal length you use, it must recognize the lenses code or the setting for the lens must be choosen manually. As one tends to forget the latter, coding might be helpful (if point 1 above does not apply). 

[epand56]

I had my Summilux 35/1.4 Asph and my Elmarit 90/2.8 coded at Will van Manen's Kamera-Service in Netherlands years ago, both for around 100 euros, and they still perfectly work. Don't know if the price is increased lately, but it's worth asking.

[lct]

I had my Summilux 35/1.4 Asph and my Elmarit 90/2.8 coded at Will van Manen's Kamera-Service in Netherlands years ago, both for around 100 euros, and they still perfectly work. Don't know if the price is increased lately, but it's worth asking.

 

Not sure if van Manen calibrates lenses for the coding price. Lens calibration is included in the CLA service IINW.