georgio Posted September 13, 2009 Share #1 Posted September 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Will the non 6 bit version, (so not coded) Leica Elmarit-M 24mm f/2.8 work with the new M9, or does it still needs to be coded? Sorry to be so blund; this coding is not completely clear to me. Thanks for your advice! Geo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 13, 2009 Posted September 13, 2009 Hi georgio, Take a look here What about uncoded lenses, to be used on a M9 ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
adan Posted September 13, 2009 Share #2 Posted September 13, 2009 The M9 has a menu where you can manually select the focal length you are using, for use with uncoded lenses. It is a bit slower than just mounting a coded lens, by a couple of seconds (depends on how fast you can scroll through the list). Manual setting also puts the focal length into the EXIF data, just as coding does. The list includes all Leica lenses that a) were built in uncoded form, and were on the list of codable lenses. Plus a few others - 135mms, the 35 pre-ASPH f/1.4, etc. Your 24 is on the list. You can also shoot your uncoded 24 without manual correction and see what it does - probably vignetting and purple corners, based on how other wides are performing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgio Posted September 13, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted September 13, 2009 That's a great help, Geo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted September 14, 2009 Share #4 Posted September 14, 2009 The M9 has a menu where you can manually select the focal length you are using, for use with uncoded lenses. It is a bit slower than just mounting a coded lens, by a couple of seconds (depends on how fast you can scroll through the list). Manual setting also puts the focal length into the EXIF data, just as coding does. The list includes all Leica lenses that a) were built in uncoded form, and were on the list of codable lenses. Plus a few others - 135mms, the 35 pre-ASPH f/1.4, etc. Your 24 is on the list. ... So, Leica finally gave in, and did with the M9 what was asked for by users and what should have been done long ago with the M8 and M8.2 in new firmware. Talk about being stubborn. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted September 14, 2009 Share #5 Posted September 14, 2009 So, Leica finally gave in, and did with the M9 what was asked for by users and what should have been done long ago with the M8 and M8.2 in new firmware. Talk about being stubborn. Stefan Daniel has said that it would be difficult to add this functionality to the M8 since it was not planned for in the original design. Owing to customer feedback it was added to the new M9 design as we now know. The M9 firmware is new and not a modification of the existing firmware. Firmware changes are not trivial to implement. Saying that Leica was 'stubborn' might be characterised as unfair comment, in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammam Posted September 15, 2009 Share #6 Posted September 15, 2009 Stefan Daniel has said that it would be difficult to add this functionality to the M8 since it was not planned for in the original design. Owing to customer feedback it was added to the new M9 design as we now know. The M9 firmware is new and not a modification of the existing firmware. Firmware changes are not trivial to implement. Saying that Leica was 'stubborn' might be characterised as unfair comment, in my opinion. I don't see in what it would have been more difficult to implement than, say, the «silent shutter» that came with latest firmware. I'm not much of a digital engineer, but using the existing codes from the different lens codings and send them to the image engine via a menu instead of contacts on the mounting ring couldn't have been so difficult. When there's a will... But I'm willing to take back the «stubborn» part. Let's say Leica didn't have the time because they were developing the M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 15, 2009 Share #7 Posted September 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) By code or manual lens selection one would want to tell the M9 about that 24 so that it can correct for cyan drift, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted September 15, 2009 Share #8 Posted September 15, 2009 And if i were to use an uncoded lens, does it mean one cannot use Aperture priority? and even if one were to use manual, the camera's metering may not be accurate because whatever aperture one sets on lens will not be communicate with the camera, is that correct? i tried to ask the sales rep last weekend but he's not certain about these 2 enquiries :-P Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted September 15, 2009 Share #9 Posted September 15, 2009 Not correct, the camera exposes according to actual light coming through the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed_K Posted September 15, 2009 Share #10 Posted September 15, 2009 Thank you for the clarification, Sean, appreciate it. It's good to know that the automatic function still usable despite an uncoded lens, as i am still debating whether it's essential to go ahead with the process to send my lens to the States for coding. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.