Lens-naming (6-BIT code?) has vanished after service. 35:2 v4 (M10-D)

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Everyone 

I recently sent my 35:2 v4 for service (along with a body).  On inspection, the tech said it didn't really need a service just a clean. Bayonet was adjusted to mount smoother also.

Now, before sending away, lightroom was recognising pictures taken with this lens on M10-D as 'Summicron-M 1:2 / 35'.   I assumed from this that the lens was 6-BIT Coded, but I'm not sure because it's new to me this year.

Now, since coming back from adjustment, pictures in Lightroom taken with this lens simply say 'R Adaptor', like my uncoded lenses.  I'm shooting RAW and nothing has changed there 

What is also odd is that I'm pretty sure that when I was shooting this lens on my D-262 the pictures were also reading across as 'R adaptor', rather than identifying the lens.   I can't be exactly sure because I bought the 10-D around the same time as the lens, but I'm almost certain I shot on the D-262 with it and a) there is nothing in my LightRoom D-262 catalogue that says '35 Cron' and b) I remember being surprised when I suddenly started seeing 'Summicron-M 1:2 / 35' on the 10-D pictures.    

I don't think I've turned anything off in the 10-D menu that relates to lens naming (and I definitely didn't set anything up like that when I got the camera).   I only have 10-D now and no longer have the D-262 (or any other digital M) to test. 

I'm happy to contact the tech but wondered first if anyone here has experienced same or can advise what could be going on ?  

Attached is an image of the lens mount as it is now at least, and here's some EXIF data also (from a lightroom jpeg export, not the RAW).

Cheers for any help!  

Lens Make	Leica Camera AG
Compression	JPEG (old-style)
Modify Date	2021:11:17 18:14:23 18 hours, 47 minutes, 27 seconds in the future
Create Date	2021:11:16 09:44:04 13 hours, 42 minutes, 52 seconds ago
Lens Model	R-Adapter M
Resolution	72 pixels/inch
Thumbnail Length	4,281
Serial Number	5490878
White Balance	Auto
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Thumbnail Image	(4,281 bytes binary data)

 

 

 

 

 

 

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!

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[grahamc]

This is the Lightroom catalogue info for my 10-D, which is pretty straightforward because this is the only lens I have that carries over any naming.  Sadly those days are gone, for now

I was even thinking that perhaps the previous owner of my 10-D had coincidentally also been a Cron v4 user (and had perhaps noted it in the 10-D settings as a default lens).  But I don't think you can do that with the 10-D, which is why I always assumed this lens to have been 6-BIT coding. 

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!

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[Ecar]

There is no coding on the flange, so I don't see how any camera body could have automatically assigned a lens name - unless it was previously manually coded with a marker and wiped off during service. I'm not familiar with the M10D, but there must be a way to access a setting and manually assign a code to an uncoded lens? If that's your only uncoded lens the camera should then remember it as default. Or you could perhaps try manually coding the flange with a marker? Or, if that's important to you, bite the bullet and have it properly coded.

[grahamc]

9 minutes ago, Ecar said:

There is no coding on the flange, so I don't see how any camera body could have automatically assigned a lens name - unless it was previously manually coded with a marker and wiped off during service. I'm not familiar with the M10D, but there must be a way to access a setting and manually assign a code to an uncoded lens? If that's your only uncoded lens the camera should then remember it as default. Or you could perhaps try manually coding the flange with a marker? Or, if that's important to you, bite the bullet and have it properly coded.

Thanks Ecar , Yes I'll definitely consider getting it coded as I like it for cataloguing.  

As far as I know, the 10-D doesn't have the option to set a default named lens the same way the regular M10's do (I could be wrong). Which is why this is a bit of a mystery 

Presuming that the 10-D's can't, then it sounds like something has changed in the service.   Maybe it was marked and I never noticed. 

Of course I am paranoid that the tech swapped the flange but that seems very unlikely.  I can ask, just a bit of a mystery 

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[LocalHero1953]

Putting on my deerstalker and puffing on my meerschaum stuffed with an ounce of shag........these are the options:

• The lens was 6 bit coded before CLA and the technician replaced the mount with an uncoded one. Solution: ask the tech.
• The lens was coded by an amateur with just a marker pen, and the technician cleaned the code off. Solution: ask the tech if there was a painted code.
• The lens was not coded before CLA, and your M assigned it the only code it knew (from a previous ownership - or you did it yourself and have forgotten). Solution: accept it and move on, and tell your M again that it's a 35/2.

Do you still have a receipt or other info from when you bought the lens? Was it said to be 6 bit coded? 

Edited November 17, 2021 by LocalHero1953

[grahamc]

1 minute ago, Al Brown said:

You probably had manual coding set up for the lens and after service it is no more. The lens is uncoded, so no way to show 6-bit coding.

 

Thanks Al - I agree maybe manual coding, however only the lens went away, not the M10-D 

And I don't recall changing any settings in my M10-D 

Is it possible the previous owner of my 10-D also had this lens and had it set up that way ?   Even so I haven't changed anything on the camera either which is kinda weird 

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 minutes ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Putting on my deerstalker and puffing on my meerschaum stuffed with an ounce of shag........these are the options:

• The lens was 6 bit coded before CLA and the technician replaced the mount with an uncoded one. Solution: ask the tech.
• The lens was coded by an amateur with just a marker pen, and the technician cleaned the code off. Solution: ask the tech if there was a painted code.
• The lens was not coded before CLA, and your M assigned it the only code it knew (from a previous ownership - or you did it yourself and have forgotten). Solution: accept it and move on, and tell your M again that it's a 35/2.

Do you still have a receipt or other info from when you bought the lens? Was it said to be 6 bit coded? 

Thanks !    I agree that this is where we are at with this investigation.    I agree with Points 1 and 2 and will ask the tech 

RE point 3 ... I definitely didn't set into camera and not sure if 10-D can do so (Anyone know if they can ? ) .  it would be a strange (but not impossible) coincidence if the first owner of my 10-D set it has his default .     but considering I also haven't knowingly made any changes this option might be unlikely. 

With the unlikeliness of #3 I guess we are looking at something changing with the mount .  I'll reach out and ask 

Sooner I get can this over with the sooner I can get off to an opium den, Watson ! 

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[grahamc]

2 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

AFAIK you can not set up non-coded lenses on the M10-D via Fotos app - probably the only "flaw" usinf this gem of a camera. It surely COULD be fixed by HQ but will it? I doubt it.

Yeah I was thinking the same.  Well this is definitely a mystery then.  

It looks like there's been some flange-tampering at play here .    WHODUNNIT ! 

[grahamc]

Does anyone have a picture of a 'proper' 6-BIT coded flange they can post please.    I think I would've noticed some marker pen or paint on this lens.

Leaving 2 options :

• Another 35:2 v4 Manually coded in the 10-D by previous owner  
• Flange was previously properly 6-BIT coded, and was taken off in service 

Both seem unlikely tbh  .  But I've reached out to the technician  

[grahamc]

19 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

AFAIK you can not set up non-coded lenses on the M10-D via Fotos app - probably the only "flaw" usinf this gem of a camera. It surely COULD be fixed by HQ but will it? I doubt it.

Hey Al, curious when you mentioned "probably had manual coding set up for the lens" .. you did mean on the camera, right ?   if it's not possible on the 10-D via fotos app then guess we can now rule this one out   .

I think I'll have to let this one go, it's too confusing  

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[grahamc]

6 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

Yeah the plot thickens because you said that on your M262 the lens was not showing any coding....

Mate the plot is thickening by the minute ... I just found some correspondence with the previous owner of the 35:2 v4 and the lens was not 6-BIT Coded prior to my purchase / prior to service .  I think we can also count out the option of marker pen or paint being on the flange, I would've noticed for sure 

So this leaves the M10-D . It was reading it (see my LR catalogue screenshot above) .  But now it isn't .  So weird. 

[grahamc]

1 hour ago, LocalHero1953 said:

Do you still have a receipt or other info from when you bought the lens? Was it said to be 6 bit coded? 

Regarding the receipt / info I've only been able to find some correspondence where the seller confirmed it was not coded.   And think that was accurate as he pointed me to speak to Leica if I wanted it coded, so he clearly knew what it was and wasn't selling an item he knew nothing about . All together points to the M10-D, which apparently doesn't offer that function and if it does then it definitely wasn't done by me .  Very odd 

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[pop]

Lens codes are not arcane mysteries. If a lens is coded, you see that right away. Once you know what those codes look like, you also see right away when a lens is not coded. There are many sites in the internet with examples and explanations, such as this one: https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/ (I am not associated in any way with that site; I just picked one at random)

Any digital Leica M camera with reasonably recent software will be able to recognize every M lens which is correctly coded and mounted. The software in the camera contains a table which lists every known code.

The camera might mistake uncoded lenses for coded ones when there are scews or other things (dirt, for instance) where the camera expects the dark and light spots of the code. In this case, the camera will claim that one of the coded lenses was mounted when there is, in fact, quite a differernt lens, usually elderly, certainly without any code.

The camera also might misread an existing correct code when the 'code reader' (the eyes that should see the code) are not clean enough or broken.

When you mount an uncoded lens, the camera will show you a list of all (uncoded) M-Lenses known to Leica, so that you can tell the camera what lens you mounted. From then on, the camera will name that lens in the EXIF data until you mount a coded lens. I think the camera remembers that uncoded lens and will use that information when later you mount an uncoded lens again, but I'm not sure about that. I don't own any digital M cameras any more.

The adapter for mounting R lenses to the M camera is mentioned above. This adapter is coded, just like the lenses are, and its code tells the camera (unsurprisingly) that it is an adapter and that it accepts R type lenses. I rather think that in this case you then tell the camera which of the supported R type lenses is mounted, but I don't know that.

When your camera mentions the Leica R adapter it can do so for two reasons: One, there is a Leica R adapter mounted. Two, it misread the code and there's is something else mounted. You tell us.

[grahamc]

43 minutes ago, pop said:

Lens codes are not arcane mysteries. If a lens is coded, you see that right away. Once you know what those codes look like, you also see right away when a lens is not coded. There are many sites in the internet with examples and explanations, such as this one: https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/ (I am not associated in any way with that site; I just picked one at random)

Any digital Leica M camera with reasonably recent software will be able to recognize every M lens which is correctly coded and mounted. The software in the camera contains a table which lists every known code.

The camera might mistake uncoded lenses for coded ones when there are scews or other things (dirt, for instance) where the camera expects the dark and light spots of the code. In this case, the camera will claim that one of the coded lenses was mounted when there is, in fact, quite a differernt lens, usually elderly, certainly without any code.

The camera also might misread an existing correct code when the 'code reader' (the eyes that should see the code) are not clean enough or broken.

When you mount an uncoded lens, the camera will show you a list of all (uncoded) M-Lenses known to Leica, so that you can tell the camera what lens you mounted. From then on, the camera will name that lens in the EXIF data until you mount a coded lens. I think the camera remembers that uncoded lens and will use that information when later you mount an uncoded lens again, but I'm not sure about that. I don't own any digital M cameras any more.

The adapter for mounting R lenses to the M camera is mentioned above. This adapter is coded, just like the lenses are, and its code tells the camera (unsurprisingly) that it is an adapter and that it accepts R type lenses. I rather think that in this case you then tell the camera which of the supported R type lenses is mounted, but I don't know that.

When your camera mentions the Leica R adapter it can do so for two reasons: One, there is a Leica R adapter mounted. Two, it misread the code and there's is something else mounted. You tell us.

Thanks Philipp for the detailed info.

None of my Leica lenses are coded, and as you've pointed out I'm sure that because of this I would have immediately have noticed that this lens was coded, had it arrived to me either 'properly' coded, or DIY coded from a previous owner .    This is good to know. 

None of my other lenses are coded (and let's presume this one isn't either), and they all show 'Leica R Adaptor'.  So I just interpret this to be 'unknown lens', since I don't have an R adaptor.  The same EXIF data reading appeared when I used one of my lenses on my friends M10R, so I don't think this is particular to my camera, it is perhaps common for uncoded lenses.

For the lens in question, the camera was certainly recognising it previously as a 35 Summicron.  If that was through dirt on the flange then it would seem unlikely (although not impossible) that it 'guessed' it correctly (I know that's not what you were suggesting and that you were talking in general terms about how the coding and reading works).   

So let's presume that the naming information is not coming from the lens, it must be manually set on the camera.  The curious thing is that the M10-D doesn't have this functionality (unlike other digital M's).  Or at least if it does it's not common knowledge ... many others on this forum don't think it does / don't know how to do it .  Despite this, if it was done at the camera end then it certainly wasn't manually input by myself because I don't know how to do it.   So it would've had to be done by a previous owner with the same lens and for it to have been the last one they manually entered, in the way you explained.  Seems unlikely especially given the M10-D not having this functionality, but maybe not impossible.

Understand that it's not voodoo but with these parameters it's quite hard to determine how/where this lens was getting named into EXIF . 

I'm curious as to what the technician says regarding whether they cleaned off anything from the flange but I just can't imagine having this lens and not noticing that kind of DIY.  And the previous owner also said it's not 6-BIT coded. 

All things considered, maybe the real mystery is how someone manually coded a lens-type into an M10-D.    Or some dirt on the flange was indeed being 'read' as the correct lens by some stroke of luck, and is now clean. 

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[a.noctilux]

Graham,

looking at your posts, the EXIF say " Lens Model {0xA434} = R-Adapter M "

like here

 

[grahamc]

20 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Graham,

looking at your posts, the EXIF say " Lens Model {0xA434} = R-Adapter M "

like here

 

Thanks Anand , great idea.   I had seen this image in the 'R Adaptor' section of lightroom and wondered if I had taken it with the 35mm Cron (as I thought I had).  

Let me extract an image that Lightroom is categorising as '35mm Summicron" and see what the EXIF says for that . 🤔

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[grahamc]

Interesting.  @a.noctilux  So here is the EXIF for this image which I also remember using the cron.  Same camera and no settings changed by myself .  How strange 

XMP -aux

Serial Number

5490878

Lens Info

35/1 35/1 200/100 200/100

Lens

Summicron-M 1:2/35

Approximate Focus Distance

20

Lateral Chromatic Aberration Correction Already Applied

1

 

 

XMP -exif EX

Lens Model

Summicron-M 1:2/35

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!

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc

[grahamc]

Maybe the lens wasn't mounting properly on occasion and was manually entered into the 10-D, so only sent lens info when mounted properly .    That doesn't explain why it's now showing R Adaptor again though as I checked the mounting when I noticed it was no longer showing the lens name.  

I'll update when the tech gets back to me, eg if he saw any DIY on the lens (unlikely) 

[a.noctilux]

Ah 6bit coding mysteries ...

We had some discussions a while back, in this thread

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[grahamc]

11 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Ah 6bit coding mysteries ...

We had some discussions a while back, in this thread

 

 

I remember !    The funny thing is I never originally thought this lens was coded, it just started 'sending' the (correct) lens name soon after I got the M10-D, so I just carried on and it was a nice surprise.

Considering that my early photos on the 10-D don't show the correct lens name, this points to the fact that the ex owner of this camera didn't manually place it in the settings (it's also impossible to do so as far as we know).     We can also safely say this lens wasn't 6 BIT coded 'properly' (the previous owner said it wasn't) or DIY (I would've noticed in a heartbeat and posted here) .

So this only leaves one option - Dirt on the flange being read as the correct lens.  if @pop has experienced that then it's not inconceivable that it was just a happy accident on this occasion that resulted in sending the right lens type from the many available.  

I still think it's extremely odd , but working through all the scenarios it seems to be the most likely .  

 

 

Edited November 17, 2021 by grahamc