Coding the new CV15: Round 2

[photolandscape]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks to everyone who responded to my previous post on this subject. To repeat my situation: I have a new CV15 Super Heliar with B+W 486 UV/IR filter. It therefore needs to be coded. I purchased Bo Lorentzen's excellent coding template and coded the lens to have it recognized as a 21mm lens. I first coded the white marks, then the black. I have checked and double-checked the marks against Carsten's coding diagram. When I heard that the white marks aren't needed, I removed them. Initially I made the black marks with a extra fine point black Sharpie. I did a second coating with the pen to try to be sure the marks are dense enough for the camera to read. When that didn't work, and I read somewhere that someone recommended flat black marks, I touched the black marks with Testor's flat black paint. I have checked and checked the alignment of the coding sensor on the camera mount and the marks on my lens, but after all is said and done, the camera never recognizes the lens. It does, however, always recognize my coded 90 Elmarit, 28 Elmarit ASPH, and my old CV15 with Milich adapter with code marks in place.

 

I've run out of further solutions and would love to hear from anyone who can think of something further I could try.

 

Thanks.

[Advertisement]

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

[carstenw]

Can you post a photo of the markings? Perhaps someone can spot a problem.

[jlm]

i haven't seen the new CV flange, but i understand it has a continuous groove around the mating surface providing a recessed area for the coding marks.

 

a potential problem is that the illumination from an individual photodetector is not masked from it's neighbor with such a groove.

 

in the old days, i found that the CV adapters that had a relieved area around the outside of the mating surface allowed ambient light to leak onto the detectors confusing the code reading

 

you didn't mention it, but you are getting the 28mm framelines, right?

[RobertW]

Can you post a photo of the markings? Perhaps someone can spot a problem.

 

Excellent idea. Could you post a picture of the markings?

 

Here's a picture of the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 coded using Black Nail polish in the indentation on the bayonette mount.

 

Works fine, with no light leakage etc, however this is a Zeiss mount and I don't know if the CV has deeper recess, in which case, just add more paint to the recess.

 

 

Best Rob

[epand56]

Photolandscape, when I bought my new 15 Super Heliar, i've coded it and it was immediately red. What can I say is that Bo Lorentzen coder, that I have, works very well because of the larger holes, but it is a little bit more tricky to allign because it is not as tight on the flange as the M-coder. This means that you have to take particular care in alligning the coder. After that, I marked the one only black dot (elmarit 21 pre asph) with a normal felt pen and after that I removed the coder and covered the mark with dull black modeler paint with a very small brush. The mark must be large enough to be red but not to partly overlap the mark aside.

[Fotogo]

Thanks to everyone who responded to my previous post on this subject. To repeat my situation: I have a new CV15 Super Heliar with B+W 486 UV/IR filter. It therefore needs to be coded. I purchased Bo Lorentzen's excellent coding template and coded the lens to have it recognized as a 21mm lens.

 

I've run out of further solutions and would love to hear from anyone who can think of something further I could try.

 

Thanks.

 

Greetings Photolandscape. I have self coded all of my CV lenses and initially experienced similar difficulties as you described. This nature of this problem prompted the design of the M-Coder.

 

When marking my lenses, one of the more subtle problems that took some time to discover was the reflectivity and thickness of the black marks. As you pointed out, flat black is best. In the factory setting, Leica can apply the paint to their lenses with perfect consistency. Finding out how to manage some level of consistency at home with just a few lenses is the challenge.

 

I learned that when I retouched my marks, and built up a few layers of ink, that the results were unpredictable. In my opinion the thicker marks may create some reflections due to variations in the surface of the black ink or paint.

 

I use my little M-Coder as a template. It is interesting to note, that I find no need to increase the size of any of the black marks made with the 0.9mm ink pen tip. The M-Coder template openings are 1.4 mm wide and 2.5mm high. The 6 template openings are arranged in a straight line, which is the same orientation as the M8 sensors. It may be the case that by increasing the size of your black marks, you are inadvertently marking a part of the adjacent area. I am sure you thought about this, but I mention it for others to consider.

 

Please try some smaller marks and just one layer of ink. You already described your control of the radial positioning of your marks; so that aspect is under control. The recessed grooves on the Voigtlander lenses make this process so much better. The marks are protected from rubbing away with lens changes.

 

I hope this may be useful. Here are a few shots to show the coding of my new CV 15mm f/4.5 VM Super Wide Heliar. I coded it two ways, first as a Tri-Elmar 16, 18, 21, and then as an Elmarit 21mm f/2.8. Both codes worked fine with the smaller marks placed in a straight line as provided by the M-Coder.

 

 

 

 

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tim,

 

That is a very good point about the straight line and the hole sizes.

 

Im thinking that CV and Zeiss on the new flanges did put choose the diameter of the recess so that it have the best average coverage the sensors. But still a straight row of sensors and a round set of marks is clearly a tangential affair hopefully within tolerance

 

My cardboard template is in no way a replacement for the much more substantial M-coder, but the holes was designed directly from coded M lenses, so I am pretty comfortable with the positioning.

 

Strangely I have had no problems coding my CV 15mm either. But I have noticed that a good black seems to be key. the only lens I continue to have problems with is my 75lux which I have not yet stuffed white in the screw-hole.

 

I would really love to see a picture of the problem 15 in question.

 

 

Bo

[Fotogo]

Tim,

 

That is a very good point about the straight line and the hole sizes.

 

Im thinking that CV and Zeiss on the new flanges did put choose the diameter of the recess so that it have the best average coverage the sensors. But still a straight row of sensors and a round set of marks is clearly a tangential affair hopefully within tolerance

 

My cardboard template is in no way a replacement for the much more substantial M-coder, but the holes was designed directly from coded M lenses, so I am pretty comfortable with the positioning.

 

Strangely I have had no problems coding my CV 15mm either. But I have noticed that a good black seems to be key. the only lens I continue to have problems with is my 75lux which I have not yet stuffed white in the screw-hole.

 

I would really love to see a picture of the problem 15 in question.

 

 

Bo

 

Hey Bo,

Good to get to know you through this dialog sir. I must agree, the round M-mounts and the straight line sensors are a bit of a conflict. In my opinion, Leica radially milled the coding recesses on their lenses in part as a cost saving measure. Choosing size of their pockets is also more economical as they can use larger end mills with longer life and machine the pockets at a faster rate. Theirs is a nice machining solution in my opinion.

 

A row of curved marks or a row of straight marks can surely accomplish the same thing as we both recognize. When I decided to mold the M-Coder, I had to consider the flow of the material around the coding openings. I was fortunate that the smaller marks, when placed right over the sensors, work just fine. This was just another design feature based on cost / function. All great fun to discover, (when it goes well).

 

I hope Photolandscape can make his codes work. For me, it brings a feeling of gratification to see the M8 working as designed, including the use of the CV lenses.

 

Best to you sir.

[photolandscape]

Hey Bo,

Good to get to know you through this dialog sir. I must agree, the round M-mounts and the straight line sensors are a bit of a conflict. In my opinion, Leica radially milled the coding recesses on their lenses in part as a cost saving measure. Choosing size of their pockets is also more economical as they can use larger end mills with longer life and machine the pockets at a faster rate. Theirs is a nice machining solution in my opinion.

 

A row of curved marks or a row of straight marks can surely accomplish the same thing as we both recognize. When I decided to mold the M-Coder, I had to consider the flow of the material around the coding openings. I was fortunate that the smaller marks, when placed right over the sensors, work just fine. This was just another design feature based on cost / function. All great fun to discover, (when it goes well).

 

I hope Photolandscape can make his codes work. For me, it brings a feeling of gratification to see the M8 working as designed, including the use of the CV lenses.

 

Best to you sir.

 

Sorry for the delay in getting back to everyone--have been out of town due to a family emergency.

 

My new Super Heliar CV15 coding saga continues. Since my last post about my original attempts, I have gone back and removed my original coding using nail polish remover. I then took Bo Lorentzen's coding device and coded my lens once again--but this time as a 21mm Pre-ASPH using a fine point black Sharpie and several layers of ink. When I attached it to my M8.2, properly set to detect the lens and the UV/IR filter, the camera didn't recognize the lens. I began to wonder it if might be the sensors in the camera. So, I went by a camera store today, hooked the lens up to a different M8, set the lens detection with UV/IR filter detection activated, and again the lens wasn't detected.

 

So, I'm thinking something is wrong with the coding or position of the black marks. I am attaching 3 different shots/angles to illustrate the marks on my CV15. Starting to go crazy--any ideas? Thanks again for your ideas.

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!

[LeicaMSeattle]

I took a piece of paper and the exact diameter of the lens mount and marked the location of the lens mount lock cut. I took this sheet of paper and set it on top of my coded Leica lens and with my finger nail rubbed the paper over the (6) code pits while holding the paper with the mark over the lens lock cut out. This rubbing locates the pits which I followed up with an X-acto blade to cut out the slot which is the last spot when viewed from the center of the lens. slip the paper over the CV lens, index the lock notch and dab matte black paint over the slot. Let dry and it's done.

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!

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Hmm that seems od.. (though that could be because Im about to go to sleep)

 

Mine is codes as a wate right now. works like a charm, the mark is right on the corner of the flange as shown by the blue dot.

 

 

.HEY>. LeicaMseattle - that is the perfect way...

 

photolandscape, take a look a LeicaMseattle's image, grap your sharpie and make the mark a bit wider. just for fun and see what happens.

[photolandscape]

Hmm that seems od.. (though that could be because Im about to go to sleep)

 

Mine is codes as a wate right now. works like a charm, the mark is right on the corner of the flange as shown by the blue dot.

 

 

.HEY>. LeicaMseattle - that is the perfect way...

 

photolandscape, take a look a LeicaMseattle's image, grap your sharpie and make the mark a bit wider. just for fun and see what happens.

 

Progress--my camera now sees my CV15 as a 21mm Elmarit pre-Asph. But I am getting cyan fringing. If I re-code it as a WATE and set it to 16mm, will it get rid of the cyan fringing?

[alex7075]

Progress--my camera now sees my CV15 as a 21mm Elmarit pre-Asph. But I am getting cyan fringing. If I re-code it as a WATE and set it to 16mm, will it get rid of the cyan fringing?

 

In my case, yes. Coding it as a WATE (16), I got rid of the cyan fringing. But then, the white balance needs to be corrected a little on every picture, because it tends to be too warm on the whole frame. Something that Lightroom (and maybe C1) can do with a click!

[hef]

I've tried everything....I'm thinking at this point it's the permanent marker i'm using. Or, i'm just not applying enough ink. Is there any particular sharpie or marker I should be using?

 

I would be happy with the WAITE recognition code... i've tried that several times.... even tried to line it up by marking the M8's ring under the sensors and following that all the way up. I've tried thin lines. thick, ect...

 

frustrating.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Howie,

 

Shoot me a email with your address, I have some preprinted coding strips for the 15mm which I have been testing, I will drop one in the mail for you, so far they have worked right off the bat each time, so it should remove some of your frustration pretty quickly.

 

.

[jaay]

Got my CV 15 M mount with the grove for coding today. First i tried coding it using the print and cut out template from the leica lens codes website - it wouldnt read as a WATE or 21 pre-asph. So i decided to just mark out with tape where the code reader corresponded to the lens and where the 6 marks would be read - all just using masking tape. I then coded it as a 21 pre-asph and it worked first time, then coded it as WATE and that worked first time too! Comparing the markings that worked with the coding template showed the template to be way off.

I used a standard black CD labelling pen which worked a treat.

 

Also worth noting is that only the 16mm WATE setting removed the cyan fringing, coding as a 21 pre-asph left a lot. Just shooting a sample picture in the regular way will NOT tell you for definite how much cyan colouring you're getting as it will be lighting, scene colour etc. dependent. Shoot up against a plain wall in shaded light and overexpose a couple of stops (as per method for using cornerfix) to see how much cyan you really are getting.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Jaay, Way to go.

 

Drawing the points out "have" to work, since the points are accurate.

 

You are totally right about the vignetting, I did not notice it at first, but in Death Valley with a lot of light sand greyish tones... it became a monster, that is why I changed to the wate code.

 

.

[photolandscape]

Got my CV 15 M mount with the grove for coding today. First i tried coding it using the print and cut out template from the leica lens codes website - it wouldnt read as a WATE or 21 pre-asph. So i decided to just mark out with tape where the code reader corresponded to the lens and where the 6 marks would be read - all just using masking tape. I then coded it as a 21 pre-asph and it worked first time, then coded it as WATE and that worked first time too! Comparing the markings that worked with the coding template showed the template to be way off.

I used a standard black CD labelling pen which worked a treat.

 

Also worth noting is that only the 16mm WATE setting removed the cyan fringing, coding as a 21 pre-asph left a lot. Just shooting a sample picture in the regular way will NOT tell you for definite how much cyan colouring you're getting as it will be lighting, scene colour etc. dependent. Shoot up against a plain wall in shaded light and overexpose a couple of stops (as per method for using cornerfix) to see how much cyan you really are getting.

 

Our experiences are the same. Using Bo's coding template and a standard ultra-fine black Sharpie pen, I finally got my camera to recognize my CV15 as a 21mm Elmarit pre-ASPH, but encountered major cyan fringing. I'm a little puzzled that so many people on the Forum have recommended the 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH coding on the new CV15 when the WATE 16mm setting does a dramatically better job of eliminating the cyan fringing issue. I'm just glad the WATE 16mm setting works now and I can get out and start shooting with this great lens. Thanks to everyone who helped out with this.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M