MATE users: Some help needed

[ArtZ]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've bought this morning a MATE (Dec 2003) with hood never used for 2200 euros (La Maison du Leica). It comes from a replacement (Solms).

 

I have DYMO coded it (no problem to attach it to the camera) and I think it will live on my first M8 permanently (or almost).

 

My questions are:

 

1.- Have you used a MATE without been coded? Is coding really important on this lens? What are your conclusions?

 

2.- Do you think I should to send it to Solms for being properly coded or, as this lens will be permanently on my first M8, I just leave it coded with the DYMO tape (it seems to work fine)?

 

Thanks

.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AlanJW]

I've bought this morning a MATE (Dec 2003) with hood never used for 2200 euros (La Maison du Leica). It comes from a replacement (Solms).

 

I have DYMO coded it (no problem to attach it to the camera) and I think it will live on my first M8 permanently (or almost).

 

My questions are:

 

1.- Have you used a MATE without been coded? Is coding really important on this lens? What are your conclusions?

 

2.- Do you think I should to send it to Solms for being properly coded or, as this lens will be permanently on my first M8, I just leave it coded with the DYMO tape (it seems to work fine)?

 

Thanks

.

I used my MATE for seven months without coding (and without IR filters either). After I bought the WATE and had my coupons for free coding I sent it in. I Was never able to achive the hand coding that other have, so I just lived with it uncoded. I can't say that there is any perceivable difference at 35 and 50 and maybe a slight improvement at 28 (completely subjective; I have made no objective tests, and by the way the instances where I saw a magenta shift were few and far between). Now that the lens is coded, the filter is always on. But coding is coding; if the lens detects the FL with your dymo setup, why bother sending it to Solms and spending the money?

[Paul_S]

Manuel, I have the same lens, bought it recently, and it was already coded. I have not been using it much because I wait for the UV/IR filter to be deliverd.

 

If you have it home-made coded with DYMO, and it works, than leave it as it will be permantly on your M8. Your question whether coding is needed (my take: always) for you, you can find out yourself very easily. Take some pictures with lens detection OFF and ON (and ON+UV/IR is you use the filter) with all three focal lengths. If you see any difference between detection OFF and ON, and you like the ON setting better, than you need coding all the way.

 

I expect you will benifit from coding in general and specifically if you use the IR cut filter. But don't take my word for it!

[tom0511]

As I remember they say that everything wider than 35mm benefits from coding when using IRcut filters (which I allways do).

I get more and more lenses coded, my TE was allready coded when I bought it.

I also kind of like to have the focal length in the exif.

Iwould say its not a must but a nice to have.

[ArtZ]

Thank you for your answers.

 

I've been testing thoroughly this afternoon the WATE. Fantastic "walking around" lens! I bought also this morning the E49 UV/IR filter. This afternoon I tried to get a 49mm clipsable lens cap (Nikon style) with no success (I hate removing the lens hood to place the original cap). Well, if you know where I can get one of those caps... you're welcome!

 

The DYMO 6-bit coding seems to work perfectly. I can see on the LCD the corrections, especially at 28mm.

 

When I choose "Lens detection OFF" I can see cyan corners at 28 and 35mm. I agree with you, it's much better when coded.

 

I think I will keep it with the DYMO tape for a while and I will, probably, send it Solms in a while.

 

After seeing the pictures on my laptop, I have the feeling that at 28 and 35mm you get the best of this lens. I got the impression there's a bit less of contrast and sharpness at 50mm but I'm not sure. It was maybe for the light or slight overexposure. In fact, I've been testing more at 28 and 35mm. Your thoughts?

 

Thanks!

.

[stunsworth]

The 28mm setting can have noticeable distortion on some subjects. May not be an issue, but it keeps nagging at the back of my mind.

[DavidStone]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 28mm setting can have noticeable distortion on some subjects. May not be an issue, but it keeps nagging at the back of my mind.

 

The Tri-Elmar used to be almost glued on to my M6, but now it's become effectively a 37-46-66 instead of a 28-35-50, I find it much less useful, although others will, undoubtedly, disagree. I entirely agree with Steve on the distortion at 28mm. It shows up most clearly when the camera is aimed up at a building - the converging verticals show a distinct and rather unsettling curve. At 35 or 50, however, it is, in my opinion as good as any other Leica lens - and can confidently be used at f/4. I got mine coded and IR-filtered, thinking I would use it a lot, but this doesn't seem to be happening.

 

David

 

MATE at 28mm

[stunsworth]

David, a bit like yourself I'm not using it as much as I expected. I think the issue might be that a 28mm and 50mm f2 takes up almost the same space as a Tri-Elmar and are of course faster. Then the only advantage of the Tri-Elmar is the speed of changing focal length, and that's never really proved to be an issue for me.

[ArtZ]

David & Steve,

 

I must say I agree with 28mm distorsion. I've been doing some tests tonight at home. I didn't realize outside.

 

Concerning 50mm lack of contrast, it happened just in a couple of shots I did outside (two portraits). I believe it was the light (it was a difficult and strange light today in Paris) I've just made some indoor shots and they are fine. I will try to make some more shots outside tomorrow.

 

I use quite a lot 28mm and 35mm focal lengh (37-46mm) as walking around lenses with the M8. I like the idea of having one M8 just with the MATE to take with me all the time. No bags! I'll see what happens in the future.

 

Thanks for your answers.

 

Cheers

 

 

PS: My cron 28 just arrived from Solms today fixed!

.

[DavidStone]

David & Steve,

 

I must say I agree with 28mm distorsion. I've been doing some tests tonight at home. I didn't realize outside.

 

Concerning 50mm lack of contrast, it happened just in a couple of shots I did outside (two portraits). I believe it was the light (it was a difficult and strange light today in Paris) I've just made some indoor shots and they are fine. I will try to make some more shots outside tomorrow.

 

I use quite a lot 28mm and 35mm focal lengh (37-46mm) as walking around lenses with the M8. I like the idea of having one M8 just with the MATE to take with me all the time. No bags! I'll see what happens in the future.

 

Thanks for your answers.

 

Cheers

 

 

PS: My cron 28 just arrived from Solms today fixed!

.

 

Manuel,

 

If you are working mainly outside, if the 'new' angles of view (on the M8) suit you, and if you are aware of the curvature of those converging verticals, then the Tri-Elmar is still an excellent general-purpose lens. The image quality on mine at 50mm is, in practical terms, as good as the 50mm Summicron. If only Leica would make a 21-28-35 and thereby give us back what we lost, I for one would be first in the queue, with a 28mm finder plugged in to the shoe - as I used to with the MATE on my M2.

 

David

[ArtZ]

Manuel,

 

If you are working mainly outside, if the 'new' angles of view (on the M8) suit you, and if you are aware of the curvature of those converging verticals, then the Tri-Elmar is still an excellent general-purpose lens. The image quality on mine at 50mm is, in practical terms, as good as the 50mm Summicron. If only Leica would make a 21-28-35 and thereby give us back what we lost, I for one would be first in the queue, with a 28mm finder plugged in to the shoe - as I used to with the MATE on my M2.

 

David

 

Yes, David, I do agree. I like this lens as a walking lens even with the converging verticals @ 28mm. In fact, I didn't realized on the shots I took yesterday in the street. This morning I took four shots with @ 50mm and they were fine. I took the same shots with the CRON 50 and there's not really difference. I believe it was my fault in metering the light on the protraits I took yesterday. They were taken under difficult light and they were overexposed.

 

The idea of leaving the MATE always on one of my M8 it does seduce me: no dust, a camera I can always have with me, light to carry. I only can see advantages.

.

[tom0511]

For me 28 and 50 are by far the most used focal lengths, if it was 24,28,35 I would definatly miss the 50.

So the TE suits me very good. The tonality and maybe slightly less contrast works very well together with the M8 IMO.

Distorsion might be there, but since I dont shoot much architecture I never really realized it and therefore think not an issue for me.

Just came back from one week USA and just brought the WATE (plus the small ricoh GR external finder), TE and 28cron for low light.

You fit this in a Tamrac Expo1 bag. very convenient.

Didnt miss anything besides (maybe) my 90/4.0.

Cheers, Tom

 

TE @ 50mm:

 

 

and one from the wate: