6bit coding 50mm lenses?

[Shootist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a 50mm 'cron and a Noctilux that I never bothered to get coded. On my M8 with the crop, I never really needed to. Is there value in getting these coded for the M9? Yes, I know I can manually set them, but I also know that if I do, I'm going to forget the next time I slap on my 35.

 

Thanks for any thoughts.

 

With the M9 there is no good reason to code any lenses. But it is up to the user to switch the manual selected lens when changing lenses or switch it to Auto when attaching a coded lens, although you could just select that coded lens in the manual section. Once you get use to doing this, always using the manual user selected lens, it shouldn't be a problem. But if you use auto for some lenses and manual for others there is a chance, a very good chance, you will forget to switch back and forth between the to options. And or forget which lenses are coded and which are not.

 

For me since all my lenses are now coded,either hand coded or done by Leica, I still might use the manual selection option for all lenses just to make sure the hand coded lenses are properly seen and corrected for. I have had the rare instance where a hand coded lens was not seen, after the first or first few shot with it, or being seen after several shots with it making the first few harder to post process.

At least with the manual selection you know your getting the correct in-camera correction.

[lars_bergquist]

Fiddling with a menu as long as my arm every time will make lens change with the M39 thread mount seem lightning fast by comparison. But, it is manual of course so it must be superb.

 

Anyone want a recipe for making your own emulsion for glass plate negs? I can supply it. Think of how macho that would be.

 

The old man from the Age of Collapsible Photographers

[sean_reid]

With the M9 there is no good reason to code any lenses. But it is up to the user to switch the manual selected lens when changing lenses or switch it to Auto when attaching a coded lens, although you could just select that coded lens in the manual section. Once you get use to doing this, always using the manual user selected lens, it shouldn't be a problem. But if you use auto for some lenses and manual for others there is a chance, a very good chance, you will forget to switch back and forth between the to options. And or forget which lenses are coded and which are not.

 

For me since all my lenses are now coded,either hand coded or done by Leica, I still might use the manual selection option for all lenses just to make sure the hand coded lenses are properly seen and corrected for. I have had the rare instance where a hand coded lens was not seen, after the first or first few shot with it, or being seen after several shots with it making the first few harder to post process.

At least with the manual selection you know your getting the correct in-camera correction.

 

Coding is definitely the easier and more convenient way to go *unless* one wants to deliberately mis-match lens and code (to weaken or strengthen the corrections).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Fiddling with a menu as long as my arm every time will make lens change with the M39 thread mount seem lightning fast by comparison. But, it is manual of course so it must be superb.

 

Anyone want a recipe for making your own emulsion for glass plate negs? I can supply it. Think of how macho that would be.

 

The old man from the Age of Collapsible Photographers

 

I'm not sure of your point?

[jaapv]

With the M9 there is no good reason to code any lenses.

I beg to differ. Wideangles are significantly corrected for optical vignetting.

[luigi bertolotti]

As people get more and more experience with the M9 I think some will find that they want to either strengthen the in-camera corrections for a given lens (go down a focal length using the manual selection menu) or, more likely, weaken those corrections (go up a focal length).

 

Some may be happy as is but the room to tweak is going to be useful for us.

 

That's my idea too... manual lens setting is a fine option for many reasons; ok,, one must remember that manual IS manual... and this by definition makes the operations less quick and with more things to remember to do; probably they could indeed implement in firmware some routine like "IF is set to manual AND lens code recognized THEN re-set to Auto" (unless re-set to manual done again..----> LOOP...)...but I'm not sure it will be a feature appreciated by anyone: so as it is seems to me a rather good way.

[Shootist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I beg to differ. Wideangles are significantly corrected for optical vignetting.

 

Please explain what is the difference between having a coded lens attached to the camera or a uncoded lens attached to the camera and selecting that lens in the manual lens selection option.

Are you trying to say that the manual selection option does not do the same correction as if the lens was coded? If that is true then just take the manual selection option away. It is of no use.

 

Actually this is at least the second time you have made a reply to one of posts that in mine and others opinion is totally factual stating that I am wrong and that you disagree.

Sorry if at some time I have ruffled your feathers but please read my posts completely and try to comprehend what I am trying to saying before you reply with a "I disagree", "I beg to differ", "You are totally wrong" or "That is hogwash" post.

I know some of my posts do not come out correctly or coherently at

times but I do try very hard to post factual information based on personal experiences and extensive research reading and thinking.

 

Thank you.

[lars_bergquist]

Very simple, Sean. There are some things that machinery, mechanical or electronic, does better than I can. Like metering absolute light levels. I want to be relieved of chores that are either too difficult (assessing light, e.g.) or trivial. For instance, the M changes finder frames all by itself when I exchange my 35mm for a 90mm. I prefer that to a manual lever, which I will sooner or later forget to set.

 

Then there are some things that I do better, or faster, than any automation. Like taking pictures, meaning seeing them, composing them and judging tricky lighting. And, of course, pressing the shutter release at the most appropriate moment. I want to do these things myself.

 

Transmitting lens code messages to the in-camera processing thingums is one chore I want to be relieved of. If you are super-finicky, then off you go to your PhotoShop, because you are using DNG exclusively in any case. Just as with film -- did you call for a camera that would do your darkroom dodging and burning-in for you already when you clicked the shutter? I did that by the cosy light of the darkroom lamp.

 

For us others, the factory corrections are quite acceptable. Photography is not painting. Fine points like one percent darker or lighter in that corner may be measurable now, courtesy of Adobe, but that does not mean that they are terribly meaningful. Technicalities do not make the picture. Beyond a certain bottom line, which Leica do secure for us, thank you, content makes the picture. Now I'll go out making some pictures, if I find some content that rings a chord in me.

 

The old man from the Age of Hands-On Printing -- photo, letterpress and offset.

[sandymc]

Thank you Sandy for expanding on that for me. I must educate myself further there then. I think I interpreted from Stefan Daniel's interview that they had not implemented those opcodes anyway?

 

That's correct. In the sense of having a profile, the M9 DNG has an embedded color profiles, but does not use the DNG 1.3 system of opcodes to correct for vignetting; Leica has continued to do whatever corrections are required by changing the actual image data.

 

Probably a good idea as, so far as I am aware right now, the Adobe products are the only ones that support DNG 1.3 opcodes. I think they will be a long time coming in either Apple or Phase One products.

 

But never the less, opcodes in profiles would be useful for M8/M9 users of Adobe products at least.

 

Regards,

 

Sandy

[sean_reid]

Very simple, Sean. There are some things that machinery, mechanical or electronic, does better than I can. Like metering absolute light levels. I want to be relieved of chores that are either too difficult (assessing light, e.g.) or trivial. For instance, the M changes finder frames all by itself when I exchange my 35mm for a 90mm. I prefer that to a manual lever, which I will sooner or later forget to set.

 

Then there are some things that I do better, or faster, than any automation. Like taking pictures, meaning seeing them, composing them and judging tricky lighting. And, of course, pressing the shutter release at the most appropriate moment. I want to do these things myself.

 

Transmitting lens code messages to the in-camera processing thingums is one chore I want to be relieved of. If you are super-finicky, then off you go to your PhotoShop, because you are using DNG exclusively in any case. Just as with film -- did you call for a camera that would do your darkroom dodging and burning-in for you already when you clicked the shutter? I did that by the cosy light of the darkroom lamp.

 

For us others, the factory corrections are quite acceptable. Photography is not painting. Fine points like one percent darker or lighter in that corner may be measurable now, courtesy of Adobe, but that does not mean that they are terribly meaningful. Technicalities do not make the picture. Beyound a certain bottom line, which Leica do secure for us, thank you, content makes the picture. Now I'll go out making some pictures, if I find some content that rings a chord in me.

 

The old man from the Age of Hands-On Printing -- photo, letterpress and offset.

 

Well so this just means that you will tend to use coded lenses and auto-lens detection, yes? But for those who want it, manually tweaking the lens setting will allow one to change the look of the picture recorded just as any other manual control does. I specifically see some people wanting to do this if the camera is over-correcting cyan drift for a given lens (under certain lighting).

 

Just like so many controls in photography, some will tweak these and some will just let the camera do its thing. Much like some will do manual metering and some use A mode on the M9.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Shootist]

Coding is definitely the easier and more convenient way to go *unless* one wants to deliberately mis-match lens and code (to weaken or strengthen the corrections).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

 

Yes Sean but for those that are just getting into Leica M digtial cameras they may have a good and wide lens selection already that they never needed or wanted to have coded for film cameras. At the cost of coding, which IIRC is now over $200 a lens, there is no good reason for them to bother with the coding.

 

Actually I think the manual selection option was also implemented so Leica would not have to deal with coding older lenses. It was not a profit generating process. Especially at the original price, around $125 US. Now if you want your older or new version lenses that were bought before the coding came into being Leica will do it but for a much higher cost. They would rather not bother, just use the manual selection option.

[jaapv]

Please explain what is the difference between having a coded lens attached to the camera or a uncoded lens attached to the camera and selecting that lens in the manual lens selection option.

Are you trying to say that the manual selection option does not do the same correction as if the lens was coded? If that is true then just take the manual selection option away. It is of no use.

 

Actually this is at least the second time you have made a reply to one of posts that in mine and others opinion is totally factual stating that I am wrong and that you disagree.

Sorry if at some time I have ruffled your feathers but please read my posts completely and try to comprehend what I am trying to saying before you reply with a "I disagree", "I beg to differ", "You are totally wrong" or "That is hogwash" post.

I know some of my posts do not come out correctly or coherently at

times but I do try very hard to post factual information based on personal experiences and extensive research reading and thinking.

 

Thank you.

Your post suggested no correction was needed to my reading. If you want to rely on the menu, in that case you are right. Many posts in this thread suggest that is not very practical in daily shooting. I amend it if you wish. BTW, I haven't used the word "hogwash"in my life, too much of an Americanism for me.

[sean_reid]

Yes Sean but for those that are just getting into Leica M digtial cameras they may have a good and wide lens selection already that they never needed or wanted to have coded for film cameras. At the cost of coding, which IIRC is now over $200 a lens, there is no good reason for them to bother with the coding.

 

Tell me about it. This was one of the many reasons I started arguing for the lens menu in 2006.

[lars_bergquist]

Well so this just means that you will tend to use coded lenses and auto-lens detection, yes? But for those who want it, manually tweaking the lens setting will allow one to change the look of the picture recorded just as any other manual control does. I specifically see some people wanting to do this if the camera is over-correcting cyan drift for a given lens (under certain lighting).

 

Just like so many controls in photography, some will tweak these and some will just let the camera do its thing. Much like some will do manual metering and some use A mode on the M9.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

You are of course free to stand on your head when taking pictures, holding reflex screens by your toes, if you would feel that this does improve your work. I don't mind. What I do mind is having my own life unnecessarily complicated by such predilections in some few people.

 

You know as well as I do that implementing all those 'tweakings' that people so sincerely are plugging would make any camera a monster with forty buttons or dials on it, and four-level menus. Those cameras exist. The availablility of Leica M cameras means that an all-auto point-and-shoot (with forty buttons and four-level menus to override the auto-everything) is not the only alternative. M may stand for 'minimalism' but that IS its raison d'être.

 

The old man from the Age of the M2

[manolo]

Once you get use to doing this, always using the manual user selected lens, it shouldn't be a problem.

For me since all my lenses are now coded,either hand coded or done by Leica, I still might use the manual selection option for all lenses...

At least with the manual selection you know your getting the correct in-camera correction.

 

I like this idea and I will use (at least at first) the camera in manual all the time.

 

and not all my lenses are coded.

[Shootist]

Your post suggested no correction was needed to my reading. If you want to rely on the menu, in that case you are right. Many posts in this thread suggest that is not very practical in daily shooting. I amend it if you wish. BTW, I haven't used the word "hogwash"in my life, too much of an Americanism for me.

 

Not sure how you got that. Second sentence in my post.

 

But it is up to the user to switch the manual selected lens when changing lenses or switch it to Auto when attaching a coded lens.

 

Thanks for the reply and I hope from now on you will read all of my posts before replying and I will make evey effort to do the same with yours.

 

Thank you.