M10-D Using Non-Coded Lenses

[CLstan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Getting acquainted with the ethos and usage of the downright gorgeous M10-D and running into some bumps that I should have anticipated but didn't, and nonetheless leave me feeling unsure about the camera. My main concern is the lack of a way to set lens profiles for non-coded lenses. In my testing so far, my camera has misidentified a MS-Optics lens, the MATE and a Voigtlander as R-adapter-M glass. 

And there's no way to change it (ex. switch lens recognition to "off" or select an appropriate profile). On film cameras of course there's no use for lens profiles but on a digital M I think the coding system is important. 

Unfortunately, if a future firmware update does eventually include Lens Profiles, it will be through the menu in the Fotos app -- which, while a great start -- would mean it takes minutes (M10-D takes 30 seconds alone to be ready for pairing) to properly change lenses while shooting in the field. 

It's definitely nitpicky -- especially with a digital camera designed to be distilled into the absolute primitive essentials -- I fully admit that. But the M10-D manual itself suggests users "enter the lens model type manually to ensure the best possible image quality" so it is a bit disappointing -- especially when the camera misinterprets my lenses as R glass!

Hoping someone here can tell me that I'm an idiot and there is in fact a way to handle non-coded different lens models. 

[ramarren]

I would imagine that this will always need to be done with the Leica FOTOs app. It's one of the things I thought of when I realized that the M10-D is essentially a full-featured M10 with these functions off-loaded to an external device and app for configurations. As such, it's less versatile than other digital Ms (other than the M-D and M60 which simply report "not selected" in the EXIF data when an uncoded lens is fitted) because you're either going to have to use coded lenses for maximum compatibility, or take the time up front to set the lens code when you swap lenses. 

I don't know how they'd supply this functionality with a firmware update given that the camera has no displays to work with, other than maybe through the EVF display. 

I have the M-D. Because I value the lens profiles, I sorted my lens kit for it to only include coded lenses, normally. When I use lenses that are not coded, if the lens profiles exist as part of what Lightroom supplies, I assign them there. I usually also keyword the files to include the lens name, again in Lightroom. 

[CLstan]

3 hours ago, ramarren said:

I would imagine that this will always need to be done with the Leica FOTOs app. It's one of the things I thought of when I realized that the M10-D is essentially a full-featured M10 with these functions off-loaded to an external device and app for configurations. As such, it's less versatile than other digital Ms (other than the M-D and M60 which simply report "not selected" in the EXIF data when an uncoded lens is fitted) because you're either going to have to use coded lenses for maximum compatibility, or take the time up front to set the lens code when you swap lenses. 

I don't know how they'd supply this functionality with a firmware update given that the camera has no displays to work with, other than maybe through the EVF display. 

I have the M-D. Because I value the lens profiles, I sorted my lens kit for it to only include coded lenses, normally. When I use lenses that are not coded, if the lens profiles exist as part of what Lightroom supplies, I assign them there. I usually also keyword the files to include the lens name, again in Lightroom. 

All astute thoughts, thank you. I really thought I had anticipated everything about the drastic switch to the shooting style of simplicity and grace the M10-D eschews, but the incorrect lens assignments as well as not knowing that it takes the camera a full 30 seconds to ready itself for a WiFi connection caught me by surprise. 

That said, I’d be happy and satisfied having to assign lens codes up front when I swap lenses via FOTOS, but as of now that functionality does not exist (despite the manual suggesting otherwise).

[Guest]

4 hours ago, ramarren said:

I would imagine that this will always need to be done with the Leica FOTOs app. It's one of the things I thought of when I realized that the M10-D is essentially a full-featured M10 with these functions off-loaded to an external device and app for configurations. As such, it's less versatile than other digital Ms (other than the M-D and M60 which simply report "not selected" in the EXIF data when an uncoded lens is fitted) because you're either going to have to use coded lenses for maximum compatibility, or take the time up front to set the lens code when you swap lenses. 

I don't know how they'd supply this functionality with a firmware update given that the camera has no displays to work with, other than maybe through the EVF display. 

I have the M-D. Because I value the lens profiles, I sorted my lens kit for it to only include coded lenses, normally. When I use lenses that are not coded, if the lens profiles exist as part of what Lightroom supplies, I assign them there. I usually also keyword the files to include the lens name, again in Lightroom. 

All this advice from ramarren is sensible and shouldn't spoil the enjoyment of the new M10-D for what it is and that's quite simply in my view the best digital M I've owned and used so far. Yes CLstan it sure is "downright gorgeous".... 

Managing profiles in LR is the way to go, I myself having gone through all sorts of efforts to code old Leica lenses, M's, R's and Voigtlander glass have found that apart from focal lengths under say 21mm it really hasn't been worth the effort because in post the corrections are quite easily applied to pretty much all usage of uncoded lenses. I ignore coding uncoded lenses now........But having said that, for those that do value this facility that Leica has built in to it's digital M's Leica should address this issue with the M10-D and I guess that has to be done within Fotos as there's no other option, but it is a clumsy way to go if you switch uncoded lenses frequently.

Yes I agree with CLstan too that setting up the D with Foto's whilst perhaps innovative is for me too slow and occasionally frustrating and I hope that there will be a way down the road as the M10-D matures that that can be handled with the EVF, but somehow I doubt whether that's technically possible. It's a choice made by the Leica engineers that I cannot understand, having done something truly valuable by adding the functionality of an EVF in a D camera, they made it half-arsed. Tethering the M10-D to a smart 'phone runs counter to the "simplification" thinking behind the D, but luckily I have found that it can mostly be ignored once you've set the camera up. Viewing, reviewing and downloading images to one's smart phone is truly a waste of valuable time, ( and battery life ), and I just ignore that too.

I am fortunate in that I have the M10 as well as the M10-D so when there's something, some function or other that is a pain to work out with the D then I pick up the regular M10.......However using the D is just wonderful, sure it has limitations, but wasn't that part of the whole idea of this camera?

Edited December 5, 2018 by petermullett

[PaulJohn]

I guess with uncoded lenses you will be getting the true raw! The Leica software corrections will only be to fix distortion and vignetting which in some cases might be worth keeping. Anyways both are easily fixed in post. 

[a.noctilux]

4 hours ago, PaulJohn said:

I guess with uncoded lenses you will be getting the true raw! The Leica software corrections will only be to fix distortion and vignetting which in some cases might be worth keeping. Anyways both are easily fixed in post. 

Hello everybody.

I'm not aware of distortion corrections in M camera DNG or even jpg.

This is after using for years digital M since M8 to M10.

Are you sure for that PaulJohn ?

 

Edited December 5, 2018 by a.noctilux

[TomB_tx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I believe Leica only has in-camera corrections for vignetting and color edges, not distortion.

[jaapv]

3 minutes ago, TomB_tx said:

I believe Leica only has in-camera corrections for vignetting and color edges, not distortion.

That is correct. The only way to get distortion correction is through profiles in postprocessing - which are few for Leica lenses.

For non-Leica lenses (like the MS-Optical and Voigtländer mentioned by the OP) there are no corrections at all, not even dedicated lens codes, so there will be no automatic identification by the M10, unless one fools it into thinking there is a Leica lens mounted.

The MATE is a case apart. The frameline mechanism is so complicated that it often does not function 100% within tolerance, especially  the first version. A mismatch between lens code and framelines will cause the lens to remain unidentified.

[ramarren]

Um, "true raw"?? 

I do see differences in the rendering qualities of various Leica lenses when I compare exposures made with profiles off and profiles on. They were more obvious when I had the M-P and SL than now when I use the CL (given that the M-D has no ability to turn the use of profiles off or on, they're simply always on if a lens is coded). They're most evident with short focal lengths: controlling corner falloff and color shifts mostly, although with some lenses I've seen some small rectilinear correction as well. (I'm speaking across M and R lenses that I have or had.) I've also noted that the same lens, shot with profiles off, produces a look slightly different on the SL and M-P... 

My feeling on this is that Leica isn't trying to do what some other camera manufacturers do with in-camera or in-raw lens correction parameters. They're not trying to make every lens "perfectly corrected", whatever that means. I believe that Leica puts a tremendous amount of value in the way each particular lens renders as they deliver it, whether delivering NOW for the current bodies or delivered in the past for the legacy film bodies. They seem to use lens profiles for the digital models in order that each lens retains that specific rendering look, regardless of which body/sensor/etc it is fitted to. For instance, when I compare the look presented by my Summicron-R 90mm lens on the Leicaflex SL or R6.2 bodies and then shoot the same scene with that lens on the SL or M-P 240 using the profile, the result is as near to identical as I can imagine where if I turn the profiles off, the resulting image is slightly different in nuance.

So, what's "true raw"? The uncorrected rendering that doesn't look the way Leica intended or the corrected image that maintains the intended look regardless of body? 

These rendering nuances are often very subtle and hard to see ... and because they are so subtle, one can choose to ignore them and just get on with working with what the lens and camera produces. Because these lenses and bodies are always going to produce good results, with few exceptions. 

(... And so I go back to my CL fitted with Pentax-L 43mm f/1.9 Limited, using the lens profile intended for the Summicron-M 35mm ASPH, and get such lovely work out of it. ...)

[UliWer]

A modest proposal for a rule of thumbs:

1. The M10 is the digital M body which has the least necessity of any digital correction for lenses.

2. The M10-D is an offer to reduce digital functions of the camera as far as possible.

3. Lens correction being already almost superfluous for the M10 contradicts with the concept of the M10-D.    

 

 

[PaulJohn]

I stand corrected by those with more knowledge than I and grow wiser - thanks

[scott kirkpatrick]

The M10-D runs the same firmware as the M10-P, so all the profiles for correcting vignetting and color shifts at the edges are in tables inside both cameras, even for R lenses.  The protocol of defaulting to the previously selected uncoded lens when an uncoded lens is encountered is used in the M10-P.  The only question is how to access these menus in an M10-D in order to do this selection.  Leica hasn't put this into FOTOS yet,, but they certainly could.   However, the full manual (the .pdf file or printed copy) says that it will simply supply a generic profile to any uncoded lens.

Edited December 10, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick

[setuporg]

Of course you need the coded lenses, or knowing what the lens was.  Say I want to select all the photos made with a particular lens in Lightroom, the EXIF must note it.  It's not about corrections per se, that might be needed or not, it's about knowing what the lens was for future reference.  The fact that Wi-Fi takes forever to start means that M10-D is not good for use with non-coded lenses, a regular M10 is much, much better at that.  I'd either have the lenses 6-bit coded or not use non-coded lenses with the M10-D at all, when doing a two-body shoot, or would pick the M10 for the setups with non-coded lenses.  The only other solution is to pedantically note which card was shot with what lenses and edit the EXIF at home ASAP, which will never happen as intended.  The other radical solution for the computer scientists out there is to use Deep Learning to label the images as shot by a given lens automatically, but you need to know some AI and train your data still, i.e. annotate a bunch of actual photos with the actual lenses you shot them with, which might depend on the specific camera/lens combo.

[UliWer]

vor 4 Stunden schrieb scott kirkpatrick:

...However, the full manual (the .pdf file or printed copy) says that it will simply supply a generic profile to any uncoded lens.

This is strange. I cannot find a similar statement in the manual for the M10. What could the „generic profile“ do with the results of any lens? If I don‘t want to apply any code, I switch lens detection off - and I never saw any result to the lense‘s detriment.   So why doesn‘t the lens detection of the M10-D switch off or just stay irrelevant if your lens is not coded?

[ramarren]

24 minutes ago, setuporg said:

Of course you need the coded lenses, or knowing what the lens was.  Say I want to select all the photos made with a particular lens in Lightroom, the EXIF must note it.  It's not about corrections per se, that might be needed or not, it's about knowing what the lens was for future reference.  The fact that Wi-Fi takes forever to start means that M10-D is not good for use with non-coded lenses, a regular M10 is much, much better at that.  I'd either have the lenses 6-bit coded or not use non-coded lenses with the M10-D at all, when doing a two-body shoot, or would pick the M10 for the setups with non-coded lenses.  The only other solution is to pedantically note which card was shot with what lenses and edit the EXIF at home ASAP, which will never happen as intended.  The other radical solution for the computer scientists out there is to use Deep Learning to label the images as shot by a given lens automatically, but you need to know some AI and train your data still, i.e. annotate a bunch of actual photos with the actual lenses you shot them with, which might depend on the specific camera/lens combo.

Or you can do what we all did for the 164 years of photography before digital cameras with interchangeable lenses at consumer affordable prices came about: 1) remember what lens we used, 2) write down what lens we used, or 3) guess. 

I still do that today whenever I shoot a roll of film with my M4-2 or R6.2. (Mostly either remember or guess, for sure. )

[mdemeyer]

Or don’t care...  😉

[setuporg]

Sure, but in the 164 years of photography there was no M10-D.:). Not caring is always an option.  For those who do care, I am a huge fan of Peter Krogh's DAM Book approach,

http://thedambook.com

-- and was using Lightroom since version 1 Beta after taking his course in 2007.  I prefer to be able to recall what lens was used for what image in 20 years from now, and have a reliable process to do so.  It's no big deal to get into the swing of things selecting a lens name on the M10 right after you put it on.

As long as one is happy not caring, it should be fine too.

[david strachan]

I use a lot of vintage lenses, also Canon and Voigtlander, some Russian and Nikkors as well as Leica...don't code any of them.  But do like DAM in LR, and being able to sort lenses in my catalogue.

 

Simplest thing for me, is to photograph a piece of paper with the lens details written each time i change lenses.  Then when I download to LR just block select the shots and write the details into the EXIF in User Comments.  Makes lens searches easy.  Of course i don't get any lens corrections, but i always edit images before posting or printing anyway.

 

It's perhaps a minimal  hassle but used to it now.

...

[scott kirkpatrick]

48 minutes ago, UliWer said:

This is strange. I cannot find a similar statement in the manual for the M10. What could the „generic profile“ do with the results of any lens? If I don‘t want to apply any code, I switch lens detection off - and I never saw any result to the lense‘s detriment.   So why doesn‘t the lens detection of the M10-D switch off or just stay irrelevant if your lens is not coded?

I think what the M10-D manual is saying is simply that when lens detection fails it is the same as when it is switched off.  I don't see why they can't do better than that.  Then if you use only one uncoded lens, the problem is solved by setting it once and defaulting to that setting.  No WiFi startup.  Of course, if you want to use a whole bag of Zeiss or Voigtlaender lenses, the M10-D might not be the best choice.

Edited December 10, 2018 by scott kirkpatrick

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ramarren]

1 hour ago, setuporg said:

Sure, but in the 164 years of photography there was no M10-D.:). Not caring is always an option.  For those who do care, I am a huge fan of Peter Krogh's DAM Book approach,

http://thedambook.com

-- and was using Lightroom since version 1 Beta after taking his course in 2007.  I prefer to be able to recall what lens was used for what image in 20 years from now, and have a reliable process to do so.  It's no big deal to get into the swing of things selecting a lens name on the M10 right after you put it on.

As long as one is happy not caring, it should be fine too.

Read that years ago. It reflects many of my own practices dating from thirty years before it.

In effect, I don't really care one way or the other about lens names, etc. But if the information is available, I often find reason to look at it ... basic curiosity more than anything else. Since I only rarely carry or use more than two lenses on any given photo session, it's very easy to remember which lenses they were at the time I process and import the images into LR. I can usually remember which f/stop I used too, since for me making photographs is a deliberate act which requires that I know and think about such things beforehand. It's easy enough to keyword my image files with lens name, etc, if that's of interest. 

Also, if you use just a few lenses a lot of the time, over time you get to recognize what lens was used and even what f/stop was used on a frame by frame basis: you know how your lenses image and produce, and can see it in the photographs you make. 

It seems to me if this data is very important to you, you're likely better staying away from the M10-D, ME60, and M-D bodies when you use uncoded lenses. It'll likely just be frustrating.