Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

5 hours ago, evikne said:

Seems to be 000101, same as the v2/v3:

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!

I recently asked a similar question in the M Lens section.  I want to use the classic reissue Summilux on the SL3 but the lens reference number, 11714, does not appear in the SL3 menu of M lenses.  @lct suggested the code should be the same as the latest Summilux, reference number 11868.  Both lenses do indeed have the code 000101, so that seems to be the answer.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

x
15 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

My Monochrom, doesn’t recognise a number of my lenses (specifically, the 35 & 50 APO Summicrons).

I didn’t reload the battery of my M9 to test whether the camera (with latest firmware) detects the 50mm Apo-Summicron. The lens was introduced in 2013. The first Monochrom was introduced a couple of months earlier.  I am rather sure there was a Firmware during the time of production of the first Monochrom which included lens detection for the 50mm Apo-Summicron. The Monochrom Typ 246 which was introduced in 2015 always had the detection for the lens. There are still Firmware updates for the Typ 246 available at the Leica website.

The 35mm Apo-Summicron is a different story of course as it came only in 2021. Can‘t you use a manual choice for lens detection e.g. for the „normal“ 35mm Summicron asph? 

Approx. 75% of my lenses havn‘t got any coding and won‘t be detected. I can live with it - though perhaps I am the only person in this Forum who strongly believes that lens detection is a highway in the pursuit of unhappiness. 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

In my very early days of photography, I carried a notebook and recorded all my relevant shooting parameters. I still have it, somewhere. Today, all my film cameras shoot without record of 'critical' data. I wonder if Leica will consider an upgrade for them, sometime in the future? 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites

Besides vignetting correction, 6-bit coding is relevant when the camera needs to know the focal length of lenses. For auto iso or perspective control, for instance. Then it can be frustrating to buy an expensive lens with a 6-bit code that can be read on some Leica cameras but not on others. Been there with the Summicron 35/2 apo that can be recognized on my M11 but not on my M240. There is a solution, by selecting another 35mm profile manually, but it is a compromise i found too painful to buy the 35/2 apo. No regrets as i own other versions of the Summicron 35/2 already but Leica missed a sale with me and a firmware update of the M240 would have avoided this.

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, adan said:

I completely understand!

But this is the Deal we make with the Devil by using camera-shaped computers for photography. They simply are not a "camera for a lifetime" 1954 M3.

I wonder if Leica even knows in which drawer they stashed their "latest" M-CCD firmware master file (in 2017). And whether they still have the in-house software to recompile firmware for an M9/Monochrom, even if new lens data is added.

And where does it end? Some M9s will likely still be functional in 2040, if they still have functioning batteries (the far side of the expected-lifetime bell-curve, but some will reach the far side). But should new-lens support extend until then?

Can you get 2025 software to run on a 2009 desktop computer, without jumping through hoops? Or run 2009 Photoshop on a 2025 computer?

I figure firmware counts as "spare parts" - we get 10 years support after production ends.

I think Stefan Daniel said, when someone wanted some similar upgrade for the M8, that "the M8 is a 'finished' product." And Leica fired a CEO for (among other reasons) suggesting that the M8 could be eternally upgradeable.

Well, welcome to 21st century technology, I suspect. I can still get all parts for my 1963 Triumph TR4, but it is more than unlikely that my 2021 PHEV will be usable after 62 years, or even far before that. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I am 1941 vintage and still going (reasonably) strong. But that is thanks to several upgrades. 👍

  • Like 4
  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like Leica engineers, after reading what we wrote on 86 pages, realized that they were preparing a completely different EVF-M. Therefore, Leica decided to postpone the release until the next anniversary😂

  • Like 2
  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Engineer A: They want IBIS!
Engineer B: They want rangefinder emulation!
Engineer C: Now they want help with eye focus too🤯
Chief Engineer: Just paint the M11 camera green, we should have that by May 3rd if the paint container arrives from China on time and the beta testers don't let us down.

Edited by Smogg
  • Like 3
  • Haha 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, erl said:

In my very early days of photography, I carried a notebook and recorded all my relevant shooting parameters. I still have it, somewhere. Today, all my film cameras shoot without record of 'critical' data. I wonder if Leica will consider an upgrade for them, sometime in the future? 😉

Nothing to do with an EVF-M, but this comment reminded me that I still use a notebook on the rare occasions I shoot film.  I find a lack of data is better than incorrect data. Incorrect aperture data is probably what  annoys me most about shooting with an M.  That doesn't mean, however, that it annoys me a lot.

When digitizing negatives my solution is to transcribe the info from my notebook into the caption of the digital image.  That and setting the image capture data/time to the noted values so at least the images correctly sort by date.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, marchyman said:

Nothing to do with an EVF-M, but this comment reminded me that I still use a notebook on the rare occasions I shoot film.  I find a lack of data is better than incorrect data. Incorrect aperture data is probably what  annoys me most about shooting with an M.  That doesn't mean, however, that it annoys me a lot.

When digitizing negatives my solution is to transcribe the info from my notebook into the caption of the digital image.  That and setting the image capture data/time to the noted values so at least the images correctly sort by date.

With the LensTagger LR plugin you can both correct the aperture of your digital files and add any EXIF data you want into your digitized negatives.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Smogg said:

Engineer A: They want IBIS!
Engineer B: They want rangefinder emulation!
Engineer 😄 Now they want help with eye focus too🤯
Chief Engineer: Just paint the M11 camera green, we should have that by May 3rd if the paint container arrives from China on time and the beta testers don't let us down.

I think it is quite unlikely that the engineers are the ones making these decisions. I am sure they are deeply involved in informing the executives as to what can be done and what kind of effort/budget, but I would guess the engineers are probably closer to the users' camp than the marketing team.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I think it is quite unlikely that the engineers are the ones making these decisions. I am sure they are deeply involved in informing the executives as to what can be done and what kind of effort/budget, but I would guess the engineers are probably closer to the users' camp than the marketing team.

I linked to an online interview of Leica team members awhile back, discussing the process leading up to the 35mm M APO. The marketing team had the specs, and budget, prepared and design was well under way.  Then the technical team later presented the idea, and feasibility, of adding close focus capability.  They agreed to go back to the drawing board, so to speak, and changed course to incorporate the design, which then became integrated to some subsequent lenses.  The process was described as very team oriented, with a healthy bit of debate and competitiveness.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yes, that seems completely plausible. But what I mean is that the engineering team probably is excited to do really interesting and innovative things and wants to do everything with the best quality, best practices etc, and then the other teams come in and pour a bucket of cold water on it, based on market research, budgets and practicality etc. That is all I meant by them probably being most on the side of the user. I have never met someone who is an engineer or craftsman who doesn't want to make the best things they can. On the other hand, many of the executives I have experienced are more concerned with delivering the most profitable product consumer pain will bear, even if it means compromising features and the product quality.

Edited by Stuart Richardson
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I think it is quite unlikely that the engineers are the ones making these decisions. I am sure they are deeply involved in informing the executives as to what can be done and what kind of effort/budget, but I would guess the engineers are probably closer to the users' camp than the marketing team.

Apparently the budget was only enough for a can of green paint😀

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Smogg said:

Engineer A: They want IBIS!
Engineer B: They want rangefinder emulation!
Engineer 😄 Now they want help with eye focus too🤯
Chief Engineer: Just paint the M11 camera green

Chief Lawyer: Calm down dudes i never promised anything

  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...