Jump to content

What is the best Lens Profile to use with the ZEISS Distagon 35 f/1.4 ZM?!


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked them two months ago, and this was their reply -

Thanks for your inquiry.
With the Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM, we recommend to use one of the manual lens profile settings:
28 f/2 ASPH. 11604
or
28 f/2.8 ASPH. 11606

Please do your own tests to find out the best setting for your applications.
We do not recommend to try any self-coding (6bit coding) on the lens. 

For further details, please do not hesitate to contact us!

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, astrostl said:

I asked them two months ago, and this was their reply -

Thanks for your inquiry.
With the Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM, we recommend to use one of the manual lens profile settings:
28 f/2 ASPH. 11604
or
28 f/2.8 ASPH. 11606

Please do your own tests to find out the best setting for your applications.
We do not recommend to try any self-coding (6bit coding) on the lens. 

For further details, please do not hesitate to contact us!

THANK YOU SO MUCH!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
On 2/2/2019 at 4:18 PM, astrostl said:

I asked them two months ago, and this was their reply -

Thanks for your inquiry.
With the Distagon T* 1,4/35 ZM, we recommend to use one of the manual lens profile settings:
28 f/2 ASPH. 11604
or
28 f/2.8 ASPH. 11606

Please do your own tests to find out the best setting for your applications.
We do not recommend to try any self-coding (6bit coding) on the lens. 

For further details, please do not hesitate to contact us!

Thank you - v helpful. I am using the distagon on an SL.

What does lens coding do and therefore why doesn’t Zeiss recommend an M lens of similar focal length?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Lens coding tells the camera which lens is mounted so that it can be recorded in exif data an so that the camera can make corrections to the image.

Zeiss optical formulas are different so coding the exact same may not produce the best results.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Recorded data is not an issue for me, am more interested in what the camera profile software does to the image (jpeg or DNG too?).  Would have expected vignetting and other compensations to be similar for similar focal lengths....hence wonder why Zeiss recommend a Leica 28mm profile for a Zeiss 35mm lens. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, oudjunk said:

I have no idea about the profile. First I thought profile use for exif only. Do the profile affect to the picture’s rendering? 

You will lose some resolution from software distortion correction. 

Sean Reid has a long article on this.

Presonally, I prefer to keep lens detection switched off, and do without EXIF. Off-axis faces (ie near the edges of the frame) will render more naturally with SDC switched off...especially with 35mm and wider lenses. 

Edited by Guest
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi guys regarding the profiles, if you are shooting raw, why care about the profile? With the m10 the lens profile is not transmitted to lightroom (unless the lens is 6 bit coded), but for profiles set up manually in the camera, when opening the file in lightroom you will still need to tell lightroom which lens you are using. And lightroom does have many more profiles, than the ones in the camera. So why waist time telling the camera which lens profile to use?

Edited by Malabito
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Malabito said:

Hi guys regarding the profiles, if you are shooting raw, why care about the profile? With the m10 the lens profile is not transmitted to lightroom (unless the lens is 6 bit coded), but for profiles set up manually in the camera, when opening the file in lightroom you will still need to tell lightroom which lens you are using. And lightroom does have many more profiles, than the ones in the camera. So why waist time telling the camera which lens profile to use?

Because it matters in RAW as well (do some research - keyword Italian Flag ...). I am not sure however, if application of the lens profile matters a lot in the case of the 1.4/35 for normal photography.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Photon42 said:

Because it matters in RAW as well (do some research - keyword Italian Flag ...). I am not sure however, if application of the lens profile matters a lot in the case of the 1.4/35 for normal photography.  

No - with the ZM 1,4/35 there is no problem with with colour fringes at the edges - the lens profile is likely chosen simply to help compensate for the vignetting. When I shot with the lens I always just left the lens detection off.

If you want an absolutely perfectly corrected result when shot wide open, the best option is to disable lens detection and create a suitable correction profile for the RAW developer that you use (you are shooting RAW, yes? 😉). But in practise I always really liked the uncorrected results from the ZM shot wide open!

Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Photon42 said:

Because it matters in RAW as well (do some research - keyword Italian Flag ...). I am not sure however, if application of the lens profile matters a lot in the case of the 1.4/35 for normal photography.  

Thanks, I was not aware of it. So Leica is cooking the raw files? I didnt know that. All the info i could find was related to m9, same situation with m10? Thanks!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/26/2019 at 1:29 AM, hemlock said:

You will lose some resolution from software distortion correction. 

Sean Reid has a long article on this.

Presonally, I prefer to keep lens detection switched off, and do without EXIF. Off-axis faces (ie near the edges of the frame) will render more naturally with SDC switched off...especially with 35mm and wider lenses. 

The Leica Q requires significant software distortion correction, yet the resultant images are blisteringly sharp and detailed. If any resolution is lost, I certainly don't miss it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Malabito said:

Thanks, I was not aware of it. So Leica is cooking the raw files? I didnt know that. All the info i could find was related to m9, same situation with m10? Thanks!

Virtually all raw files are manipulated in-camera, with all brands. The idea is to correct certain issues that cannot be completely corrected in post-processing (or only with difficulty), like certain types of noise at high- ISO, colour shifts like Italian Flag and Cyan vignetting, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...