Legacy lenses with M8

[wda]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Most threads deal with new coded lenses for the M8. Like many Leica users I have uncoded lenses which I use with my M6TTL including: 21 Asph; 35 Asph; 28-50-35 TriElmar and an old 50 Summicron and 90mm TeleElmarit. To get these coded by Leica would cost over GBP100 each. Then there is the question of ir/uv filters which, together with coding, adds quite a financial barrier to upgrading from film to a digital M camera. So, my questions are:

 

1. How many of my lenses would definitely need Leica coding?

2. Does Leica still offer any help towards the cost of coding legacy lenses?

3. How vital are ir/uv filters for each of my quoted lenses?

4. Does Leica still offer any help towards the cost of essential filters for legacy lenses?

 

In common with many UK rural-based photographers, I have no Premier Leica dealer within easy reach to discuss and trial before purchase. In fact I do not know who is my nearest Premier Leica dealer since all Milton Keynes' communications ceased long ago and dealerships have been reorganized or freshly appointed. I really wish to avoid long range impulse blind buying without trials. Any genuinely helpful advice, based on personal experience, would be greatly appreciated.

 

Regarding intended use, an M8 would be used almost exclusively for travel-related stock photography. My Digilux 2 satisfies all my current needs for family and personal pictures.

 

PS I have searched and studied threads on self-coding lenses and have mixed feelings about that solution.

[TimF]

The coding seems to be most vital with lenses below 50mm, so I'm guessing the first three on your list might benefit, particularly the 21 and 35mm.

 

You could try a program like Cornerfix first.

[stunsworth]

You may get away with the 35mm not being coded, but I'd certainly have the 21mm and Tri-Elmar done.

 

The Tri-Elmar will have to go back to Germany to be coded, so the turn around will be a little longer than if it were done in Milton Keynes.

 

Filters are an absolute must for all lenses IMHO if you intend to shoot colour. An alternative to Leica filters would be B+W 486 filters. I use a mixture of Leica and B+W and haven't noticed any problems with the B+W ones. If in doubt it's probably best to go for the Leica filters.

 

You only get free filters when you buy a new M8 - they offer 2 - and older lenses are coded at the same cost as new ones.

[Hacker]

The minimum is to have the 35 ASPH and the 21 ASPH coded and used with the UV/IR filters. Preferably, all lenses should have the UV/IR filters, but those 35mm and wider should have the lenses coded also.

[cbretteville]

Reasons for coding other than fixing cyan shift and vignetting include knowing which lens was used for a shot. Personally I like to know this, others may not care. As mentioned the lenses from 35 and below benefit most from the optical corrections done by the firmware.

 

The need for uv/ir filters depend on what you shoot and how you plan to post process. If you convert everything to B&W colour shifts in foliage and black fabrics dosen't really matter that much. If you shoot people, weddings or summer ladscapes I'd say its a must. I use filteres on most of mine, the 12 and 15mm CVs being the exception. If you buy a new M8(.2) you get two free filters. OTOH the savings on a 2nd hand M8 should allow you to buy Leica filters for all of yours. Like Steve I use a mix of Leica and B+W filters, Leica for 35 and wider and B+W for the longer lenses provided the hood fits over the filter.

 

I've self coded several lenses ant it works to a dregree, the easy ones are the LTMs that have milled adaptes as thay're just as permanent as the Leica ones in that I've used enamel paint.

 

Cheers,

- Carl

[stunsworth]

The problem with self coding with a pen is that the markings wear off very quickly - or at least mine did.

 

I have a 35mm Pre-ASPH Summilux that I hand coded, but in the end I used it un-coded as re-applying the pen marks was a pain.

[drolfe]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot daily with an old (pre-ASPH) 21mm Elmarit, 35mm Summilux, Noctilux, and a 90mm Summicron. None are coded. All but the 90 have IR filters. The color and performance of all the lenses are indistinguishable from their use on my film bodies, though the color performance of the un-filtered 90 is sometimes tricky, sometimes fine, particularly in daylight.

 

drolfe

[Guest Luis D]

The problem with self coding with a pen is that the markings wear off very quickly - or at least mine did.

 

 

This is true. I only did it to confirm I had the black marks in the proper place for the reader to see them. Afterward, I used a handheld engravure machine ($14.95 @ Home Depot) to relief those areas, and then painted them.

[carstenw]

It is not clear what you mean with "35 ASPH." There is both a Summilux ASPH and a Summicron ASPH. In my experience, documented in the thread below, only the 35 Lux ASPH exhibits cyan corners wide open. The 35 Cron ASPH is okay, and if you don't want to spend too much money on coding, you could skip it.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html

 

Btw, you don't need to ask which lenses to code. Put filters on them, set the camera to IR filter, and go out shooting. Code the lenses for which you detect cyan corners.

[wda]

It is not clear what you mean with "35 ASPH." There is both a Summilux ASPH and a Summicron ASPH. In my experience, documented in the thread below, only the 35 Lux ASPH exhibits cyan corners wide open. The 35 Cron ASPH is okay, and if you don't want to spend too much money on coding, you could skip it.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m8-forum/29964-35-lux-asph-vs-35-cron.html

 

Btw, you don't need to ask which lenses to code. Put filters on them, set the camera to IR filter, and go out shooting. Code the lenses for which you detect cyan corners.

Carsten (and other members), thank you for your helpful comments. Actually I meant 35/F2 Summicron. Sorry!

 

I particularly welcome your advice regarding testing before considering coding because the cost seems very high per lens. I now await feedback on the TE 28-50-35.

[jrgoldman]

I'm using uncoded:

 

35 Summicron M

50 Summicron

28 Rokkor CLE lens (modified by DAG to bring up the correct frameline).

 

I'm happy with the resulting color (raw) and B&W (jpeg) images. Try before spending money.

 

Jay

[gfspencer]

I gave up and decided to have my lenses coded -

 

(1) Elmarit-M 1:2.8/90mm

 

(2) Summicron-M 1:2/50mm

 

(3) Summicron-M 1:2/35mm ASPH

 

I boxed them up today and the package leaves on UPS first thing Monday. Do they all need to be coded? Probably not. But at least that's one less thing to be concerned about.

[sean_reid]

Most threads deal with new coded lenses for the M8. Like many Leica users I have uncoded lenses which I use with my M6TTL including: 21 Asph; 35 Asph; 28-50-35 TriElmar and an old 50 Summicron and 90mm TeleElmarit. To get these coded by Leica would cost over GBP100 each. Then there is the question of ir/uv filters which, together with coding, adds quite a financial barrier to upgrading from film to a digital M camera. So, my questions are:

 

1. How many of my lenses would definitely need Leica coding?

2. Does Leica still offer any help towards the cost of coding legacy lenses?

3. How vital are ir/uv filters for each of my quoted lenses?

4. Does Leica still offer any help towards the cost of essential filters for legacy lenses?

 

In common with many UK rural-based photographers, I have no Premier Leica dealer within easy reach to discuss and trial before purchase. In fact I do not know who is my nearest Premier Leica dealer since all Milton Keynes' communications ceased long ago and dealerships have been reorganized or freshly appointed. I really wish to avoid long range impulse blind buying without trials. Any genuinely helpful advice, based on personal experience, would be greatly appreciated.

 

Regarding intended use, an M8 would be used almost exclusively for travel-related stock photography. My Digilux 2 satisfies all my current needs for family and personal pictures.

 

PS I have searched and studied threads on self-coding lenses and have mixed feelings about that solution.

 

Code the 21, Tri-Elmar and the 35. The other two lenses will do as well, or better, uncoded.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[DwF]

Following this thread, I am posting this courtyard pic that I took during my recent trip to Paris. This is taken with a 21mm Elmarit M and there is no cropping (I offer as proof the sliver of an individual in the lower right who would normally be cropped or erased .

 

Sean, I've read your review of the 21s and cyan drift. I understand your choice of the current model for the review but do wish you'd included this lens which has received a bit of a bad rap from at least one influencial writer. Nonetheless I imagine that this lens also suffers this phenomenon.

 

Nothing that I have photographed with my 21 has presented a problem for me yet from this point of view but wonder whether that is what you see here in the darker more neutral look on the left side of the courtyard. I would have taken it as the natural (darker) lighting at least in this particular shot.

 

So I guess I am not ready to send my 21 off yet!.....but open to learning more!

 

david

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!

[ho_co]

david,

Sorry to drop in uninvited, but what the image shows is cyan drift. As long as you're happy with it, go for it.

 

You can clearly see the cyan discoloration at the upper left, or in the cyan discoloration of the cobblestones at bottom left. (Same on the right, of course. You'll notice that the pattern is circular and gets stronger the further from image-center you look.)

 

If this were vignetting, it would just be darker. But the color goes cyan because you're using the UV/IR Cut filter and not telling the camera that it's got a 21 with filter.

 

Try the same thing without the filter, with LENS ID OFF, and you'll immediately see what I'm talking about.

 

Or just shoot an evenly-illuminated white sheet of paper or posterboard, with and without filter. Or use another solid light color if that's easier to get hold of.

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!

[DwF]

Thanks for your response Howard

 

Now looking over other images from that trip made with my coded 28, it becomes clear. In this particular case, I took it as natural lighting thinking that that corner received less light. For most of what I have taken with that lens, it hasn't been an issue for me, but time will tell

[DwF]

Here is another that I never did anything with until now. It is clear that thereis discoloration on this one and it is/would be a problem.

 

So hopefully others with questions about "coding lenses" will see these. I welcome anyone reading to feel free and have at these

 

david

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!

[ho_co]

david--

I was afraid I might have sounded too harsh, but I'm glad you do see it!

 

Look at the education the M8 has given us! Before I got an M8, I had no idea what cyan looked like.

 

I'm sorry to say I recognize the effect from results with my own uncodable 28mm Elmarit.

 

And yes, you're right, your second shot is the same.

 

I really don't know why it seems stronger on the left side. (I think that's also the case with my 28.)

 

 

This is the kind of thing coding will prevent. Sean is right about which lenses to code: The 21 needs it first. Second priority is either the 35 or the Tri-Elmar, depending on which of those you use more often.

[gfspencer]

Howard, when you talk about "cyan drift" are you saying that the image drifts to a blue tint? Because I see blue at the corners of both photographs. That or I'm color blind.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[sean_reid]

david,

Sorry to drop in uninvited, but what the image shows is cyan drift. As long as you're happy with it, go for it.

 

You can clearly see the cyan discoloration at the upper left, or in the cyan discoloration of the cobblestones at bottom left. (Same on the right, of course. You'll notice that the pattern is circular and gets stronger the further from image-center you look.)

 

If this were vignetting, it would just be darker. But the color goes cyan because you're using the UV/IR Cut filter and not telling the camera that it's got a 21 with filter.

 

Try the same thing without the filter, with LENS ID OFF, and you'll immediately see what I'm talking about.

 

Or just shoot an evenly-illuminated white sheet of paper or posterboard, with and without filter. Or use another solid light color if that's easier to get hold of.

 

Hi Howard,

 

You just wrote what I would have said.

 

David,

 

Is your monitor calibrated? It may be that you're not seeing the same image Howard and I are seeing here. On my monitor, the cyan drift in that picture is quite obvious.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean