Jump to content

Leica M11 Review by Jono Slack


jonoslack

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 1/21/2022 at 4:28 PM, Sean ASA said:

Hi Jono, regarding your I Love new purchase 50mm DR. has removing the Classic three small sensors inside the bayonet and going Off señor only for metering allowed room for the Dual Range lens to be used. Or is this a modified version. Thanks. 

I too am interested in this - I have a wonderful copy of this 50 DR lens, with goggles, that I was lucky to pick up as my entry into the Leica world during lockdown, to go with my M3 (and now MP alongside a 35FLE) - thus the pun in my profile name.

I've seen one or two suggestions to the effect that the 50 DR can mount on the M11, though I have no further info about whether these are modified lenses.  I have also seen this review: https://t.co/9K25HLVGyx, according to which it is claimed that the 50 DR with goggles also works on the M11, though seemingly you have to unmount the lens from the body first to achieve this.  But I have no idea why this might be the case, and can't verify.  What I do know from the MP instructions is that you are advised to mount the DR to the MP with the lens set at infinity (again, I see variations on such advice for different bodies).  (Obviously the goggles are or may be pretty redundant, other than for the mount that engages the button to release the close-focusing range - would be nice perhaps for a smaller metal attachment to do this job and use an EVF for focusing on latest digital Ms without the otherwise necessary goggles?)

I'm interested to know the answer to these points here because frankly the M system is so amazing that I may decide I want to shoot with it even more than I can with film!  (I'm also e.g. interested to get travelling again in months/years ahead and don't really want any of my film x-rayed, and want to make my 10x8 Chamonix jealous 😁.  I've also e.g. re-edited some of the supplied dng files supplied alongside the frankly poor DPReview jpegs to convince myself that I can be bothered to go back to a digital workflow and get very satisfying results.)

 But I have no way of knowing whether my lens will work properly on an M11, can't tell (or don't know how to) whether my version has been modified (though I'm tending to assume not?), and am also assuming that no dealer in their right mind would allow one to try this out on an in-store demo camera (given e.g. what it technically advises in the manual)!

Any further enlightenment on this would be great.  I just watched the latest RDForum YouTube video today hoping they might have an answer but sadly not (so far).

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 by Dr Cron
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, ELAN said:

But the sky isn't blown out.  Here's the image processed with exposure at -1, including the histogram, so you can see than not a single pixel is clipped!

I understand about purple fringing and have been removing it in LR for ages.  Especially with the 28 lux that tends to fringe more than others.  And I understand too that 60 MP would amplify all flaws in the lens compared to 24 MP.  I am simply confirming others' observations that purple fringing appears more pronounced with the new sensor, even without pixel peeping.

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!

 

 

In your picture you say the highlight have been preserved. I don’t think the histogram is telling you watch you actually seeing. I can see that lightroom just turn your blow highlights in to gray and not into proper color.

Time and time again in my tests I can avoid some purple fringing if I under expose and don’t bring my highlights into danger territory

Typically when you have a sharp lens you get a lot of fringing unless it is corrected in the lens, APO. It doesn’t have to do much with the sensor the sensor is usually just taking the information from the lens. I use the noctilux  lens and I see a lot of purple fringing in my shots at 0.95, but closing the f-stop even half a click it will drastically reduce my purple fringing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dr Cron said:

I too am interested in this - I have a wonderful copy of this 50 DR lens, with goggles, that I was lucky to pick up as my entry into the Leica world during lockdown, to go with my M3 (and now MP alongside a 35FLE) - thus the pun in my profile name.

I've seen one or two suggestions to the effect that the 50 DR can mount on the M11, though I have no further info about whether these are modified lenses.  I have also seen this review: https://t.co/9K25HLVGyx, according to which it is claimed that the 50 DR with goggles also works on the M11, though seemingly you have to unmount the lens from the body first to achieve this.  But I have no idea why this might be the case, and can't verify.  What I do know from the MP instructions is that you are advised to mount the DR to the MP with the lens set at infinity (again, I see variations on such advice for different bodies).  (Obviously the goggles are or may be pretty redundant, other than for the mount that engages the button to release the close-focusing range - would be nice perhaps for a smaller metal attachment to do this job and use an EVF for focusing on latest digital Ms without the otherwise necessary goggles?)

I'm interested to know the answer to these points here because frankly the M system is so amazing that I may decide I want to shoot with it even more than I can with film!  (I'm also e.g. interested to get travelling again in months/years ahead and don't really want any of my film x-rayed, and want to make my 10x8 Chamonix jealous 😁.  I've also e.g. re-edited some of the supplied dng files supplied alongside the frankly poor DPReview jpegs to convince myself that I can be bothered to go back to a digital workflow and get very satisfying results.)

 But I have no way of knowing whether my lens will work properly on an M11, can't tell (or don't know how to) whether my version has been modified (though I'm tending to assume not?), and am also assuming that no dealer in their right mind would allow one to try this out on an in-store demo camera (given e.g. what it technically advises in the manual)!

Any further enlightenment on this would be great.  I just watched the latest RDForum YouTube video today hoping they might have an answer but sadly not (so far).

 

Hi There Dr Cron

Apparently it says in the manual that the DR is not suitable for the M11, but I wonder if that isn't just a hangover from previous models. Certainly in one of the Wetzlar videos around the launch someone was using one, and that's what inspired me to get one - an unmodified one (but without goggles). It's in perfect condition optically and mint- as far as the body is concerned.

You need to mount it to the camera set to about 5ft otherwise it feels pretty graunchy. After that however it's rather magical and works extremely well on the M11. To change to the close focus you pull the lens forward slightly (it's spring loaded) and round the peg at 1 metre. Then just push the ball bearing whilst turning the focus ring and you can use the distances down to a little less than 1/2 Metre. 

I've had some great results, and it's a lens with real character!

As I say, the manual says don't use it, but it seems to work really well. The only limitation is that mounting it needs care with the focus ring set to 5 ft (I haven't tried setting it to infinity).

 

All the best

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There Dr Cron

Apparently it says in the manual that the DR is not suitable for the M11, but I wonder if that isn't just a hangover from previous models. Certainly in one of the Wetzlar videos around the launch someone was using one, and that's what inspired me to get one - an unmodified one (but without goggles). It's in perfect condition optically and mint- as far as the body is concerned.

You need to mount it to the camera set to about 5ft otherwise it feels pretty graunchy. After that however it's rather magical and works extremely well on the M11. To change to the close focus you pull the lens forward slightly (it's spring loaded) and round the peg at 1 metre. Then just push the ball bearing whilst turning the focus ring and you can use the distances down to a little less than 1/2 Metre. 

I've had some great results, and it's a lens with real character!

As I say, the manual says don't use it, but it seems to work really well. The only limitation is that mounting it needs care with the focus ring set to 5 ft (I haven't tried setting it to infinity).

 

All the best

This is great, and many thanks for replying.  Since I have the goggles I haven't actually tried pushing the ball down while turning the focus in the close range - I tend to avoid too many physical experiments with such fancy equipment(!)

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2022 at 12:22 AM, ELAN said:

I do.  And it's an issue for me.  As stated, the sun is just rising behind me, hardly daylight sky.  Click twice on that cropped image for full res and observe the purple fringing. I've never seen so much CA from my Summiluxes before, including the 28 lux.  Here's the unedited full image, not really a shot into daylight sky.

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!

Wow this looks more purple than green :o Just FYI that my summicron 6 elements from 1970 and my summilux 35mm from 1969 have not shown any purple fringing whatsoever with the M11 at this point (I’ve only had the camera for less than a week in my hands though).

Edited by shirubadanieru
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just read somewhere that you cannot choose any Leica lens that originally was 6 bit coded manually anymore when using an non-coded lens! 😧 For example, you cannot choose a Summicron 35 APO when a VM 35 mm APO is attached. 
 

Is this really true for the M11 (and M10R/M already)??

Edited by FrankX
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's pretty much always been that way - no point (from Leica's point of view) in having a selection for Leica lenses that never existed in uncoded form.

(And Leica is not in business to accomodate other brands' lenses ;) )

Fortunately, VM lenses (and later Zeisses, and maybe some others) have a nice protective channel machined into the back surface of their mounts, for fairly permanent manual coding marks made by users.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, FrankX said:

For example, you cannot choose a Summicron 35 APO when a VM 35 mm APO is attached. 

I’m pretty sure it’s not true. I’ve just checked on my M11. I mounted VM 10mm and set this up as WATE 16mm in the settings. I actually like the super wide 10mm Voigtländer lens on the M11. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 6 Stunden schrieb adan:

It's pretty much always been that way - no point (from Leica's point of view) in having a selection for Leica lenses that never existed in uncoded form.

(And Leica is not in business to accomodate other brands' lenses ;) )

Fortunately, VM lenses (and later Zeisses, and maybe some others) have a nice protective channel machined into the back surface of their mounts, for fairly permanent manual coding marks made by users.

That’s definitely not correct! For example, with my SL2 I can select a Summicron 35 APO manually.

Maybe it was just a misunderstanding… Of course, I cannot choose a VM 35 APO, but at least something similar from Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, FrankX said:

That’s definitely not correct! For example, with my SL2 I can select a Summicron 35 APO manually.

Maybe it was just a misunderstanding… Of course, I cannot choose a VM 35 APO, but at least something similar from Leica.

I am then not sure I understood you correctly. Here is what I do again in more detail…I’m mounting the VM10 lens on my M11 (just like I can do on my SL2). The next step is to select a suitable Leica M lens to match if we want to hope the software corrections in the firmware will apply some ‘magic’ to rendering. The closest Leica M lens is the WATE, there is nothing wider that this. So I choose it to be applied as profile for my Voigtländer. I am able to do it on my SL2 and it works just the same way on the M11. The results are fine, I mean I like what I get. And I haven’t compared the outcome with and without the profile. I’m not that investigative or interested. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FrankX said:

That’s definitely not correct! For example, with my SL2 I can select a Summicron 35 APO manually

On an SL2, perhaps - but if you note the title of this part of the forum, it is about the M system cameras.

Which operate differently (and always have), since the M lenses are "native" only to the M system.

Link to post
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, FrankX said:

I just read somewhere that you cannot choose any Leica lens that originally was 6 bit coded manually anymore when using an non-coded lens! 😧 For example, you cannot choose a Summicron 35 APO when a VM 35 mm APO is attached. 
 

Is this really true for the M11 (and M10R/M already)??

Yes that seems to be true in M11. Using a non-coded VG lens, I cannot find the Leica 35 APO which I think is 11699

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, FrankX said:

I just read somewhere that you cannot choose any Leica lens that originally was 6 bit coded manually anymore when using an non-coded lens! 😧 For example, you cannot choose a Summicron 35 APO when a VM 35 mm APO is attached. 
 

Is this really true for the M11 (and M10R/M already)??

A little OT, but I 6-bit coded a VM35APO as 35mm APO-summicron-M. The result was not good (on the M10); greenish tint in the extreme corners. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 2 Stunden schrieb meerec:

I am then not sure I understood you correctly. Here is what I do again in more detail…I’m mounting the VM10 lens on my M11 (just like I can do on my SL2). The next step is to select a suitable Leica M lens to match if we want to hope the software corrections in the firmware will apply some ‘magic’ to rendering. The closest Leica M lens is the WATE, there is nothing wider that this. So I choose it to be applied as profile for my Voigtländer. I am able to do it on my SL2 and it works just the same way on the M11. The results are fine, I mean I like what I get. And I haven’t compared the outcome with and without the profile. I’m not that investigative or interested. 

My response wasn’t to your reply! I think you understood it correctly. The only thing I don’t know is if the WATE is a lens which was available without coding at the beginning. Therefore I used as an example the 35 APO Summicron.

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 4 Stunden schrieb adan:

On an SL2, perhaps - but if you note the title of this part of the forum, it is about the M system cameras.

Which operate differently (and always have), since the M lenses are "native" only to the M system.

You’re right! Thanks for clarification! Wasn’t aware that an SL2 with Leica M/L-adapter behaves differently! My M10 also doesn’t list the newer lenses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, FrankX said:

The only thing I don’t know is if the WATE is a lens which was available without coding at the beginning.

The WATE has always been 6-bit coded (as has the 28 Elmarit-M ASPH) - they were introduced along with the M8 and were the first lenses made only in coded form.

But since it provides 3 different focal lengths, it still has to be in the lens menu, to identify which specific focal length is actually in use for any given picture. "16-18-21 Tri-Elmar at 21mm" etc.

It is an oddball in that way.

As to:

7 hours ago, Edax said:

A little OT, but I 6-bit coded a VM35APO as 35mm APO-summicron-M. The result was not good (on the M10); greenish tint in the extreme corners. 

... yes. The 6-bit coding and the corrections it produces are targeted at specific Leica optical designs and light paths, not lens names or even generic lens types (e.g. "APO").

Not all "APO-35mms" are the same design - so the coding won't treat their various images the same.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, adan said:

The WATE has always been 6-bit coded (as has the 28 Elmarit-M ASPH) - they were introduced along with the M8 and were the first lenses made only in coded form.

But since it provides 3 different focal lengths, it still has to be in the lens menu, to identify which specific focal length is actually in use for any given picture. "16-18-21 Tri-Elmar at 21mm" etc.

It is an oddball in that way.

 

 

Thanks Andy

You've put it all so clearly!

best

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, adan said:

As to:

... yes. The 6-bit coding and the corrections it produces are targeted at specific Leica optical designs and light paths, not lens names or even generic lens types (e.g. "APO").

Not all "APO-35mms" are the same design - so the coding won't treat their various images the same.

YES I KNOW. Only by trying out one can find out if a profile is suitable for a lens. The 'normal' 35mm ASPH profile encodes too much distortion for the VC35APO (of course that can be corrected by hand in LR), so that is why I gave it a try. B.T.W. the APO-Summicron-M 50mm profile works well for the VC50APO...

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, adan said:

The WATE has always been 6-bit coded (as has the 28 Elmarit-M ASPH) - they were introduced along with the M8 and were the first lenses made only in coded form.

But since it provides 3 different focal lengths, it still has to be in the lens menu, to identify which specific focal length is actually in use for any given picture. "16-18-21 Tri-Elmar at 21mm" etc.

It is an oddball in that way.

As to:

... yes. The 6-bit coding and the corrections it produces are targeted at specific Leica optical designs and light paths, not lens names or even generic lens types (e.g. "APO").

Not all "APO-35mms" are the same design - so the coding won't treat their various images the same.

 

So is the 35mm APO only an APO after software corrections? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The other issue... upcoming issue as its not there yet... with uncoded optics relates to PC which relies on knowing the focal length to do its thing.  Though, it's an interesting question as to whether or not it matters.  I never tried it, but as the M stores the numbers needed for corrections, regardless of whether you enable it or not, you might be able to set the profile after upload to LR and still have PC operations work properly.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...