Coded Lenses - Did you do it?

[Richard Marks]

Sorry, Richard, theoretically B&W should be slightly sharper with filter, as the IR part of the spectrum will be shifted out of focus.

I agree theoretically about the IR shift, but in practice the extra layer of glass is another 'flare' trap which degrades quality and also there is inevitably some visible spectrum diffraction also. So I really am not so sure.Surely allegedly the reason Leica did not put the IR filter on the front of the sensor was for extra sharpness?

Regards

Richard

 

[jaapv]

The IR part will be four to five stops down, so well within the dynamic range. I think that degradation "wins" . But I also think you will need some rather sophisticated measuring methods and controlled circumstances to prove the point either way.

 

[Cindy Flood]

Dave,
I have not sent any of my uncoded lenses into Leica for coding. I just don't think it is worth the time away that it takes. I did just send my 75 lux to DAG for calibration and had him send the flange to John Milich for coding...as it cost very little to do that and only takes about 2 weeks. I do make sure that when I buy LTM adapters that they are version II so that if I need to get them coded I can.
There are some people who never use IR filters and you may not need to if you are mostly doing black and white. I found that when I shoot landscape, foliage looks better with the IR. Also, of course if you use the M8 for weddings, which I have, the filters are needed for color work (or a lot of post-processing).

 

[Richard Marks]

The IR part will be four to five stops down, so well within the dynamic range. I think that degradation "wins" . But I also think you will need some rather sophisticated measuring methods and controlled circumstances to prove the point either way.

My experience is 'sharper without' for black and white using nothing more scientific than gut feeling on simple observations. Id rather take pictures than do laboratory experiments with cameras! I think we are all at least agreed that if Dave does get an M8 ("One by one they are moving over" JAAP November 2006?) that just for B and W IR filters are not essential but sooner or later he is going to need some for colour work.

Richard

 

[dcsang]

Thanks for the info Cindy and Richard (and even you too Jaap) 😉

I'm still doing some more research (not so much on the IR filter thing but on other items I want to be sure about before putting in an order for the camera) but I appreciate you guys letting me know what your personal experiences are with the M8.

Thanks,
Dave

 

[kingsley244]

I used a dremel like tool and coded 3 of my lenses (trielmar, 35/2 and 50/2). After overcoming the initial fear, it is a breeze. Anyone will be able to do it.

 

[Cronilux-M]

I didn't bother. Nothing I'm going to do is that important eh?

 

[borrel]

Odd that no one here mentions EXIF (embedded exposure information) as a reason for coding their lenses. I have coded all of mine (Leica, CV and Zeiss) with the coding template, a small, handheld modelmaker's chuck and a 1.5mm drillbit drilling indentations deep enough to retain black ink or enamel in all 6 positions. That way I can change the coding if necessary just by cleaning out the indentation with the drill and recoding as necessary. Useful as new firmware recognizing more lenses is released and the coding can become more precise. Viz the ZM 21/2.8 Biogon that was not registered unless the framing lever was pushed during exposure. Now EXIF will tell me ISO, shutterspeed AND lens focal length of each and every shot. When I carry a GPS and the M8's clock is set correctly, HoudahGPS or similar software can be used to encode near exact geoposition into the pictures.

- Børre

 

[gutguido]

I haven't had the M8 that long but I've shot quite a bit with it now, using all uncoded Zeiss lenses.

On the downside, if you share your lenses with film bodies as I do (Ikon), then mucking with the mounts to bring up the proper framelines on the M8 is not necessarily a good thing. It may also affect resale value, if that bothers you (doesn't bother me any). Finally, it costs money to get new mounts or have your existing mounts milled, plus the cost of the filter(s).

So I haven't made up my own mind yet as to what to do. I have a bunch of Leica UV/IR filters enroute (two from Leica, one from the 'bay). I think I'll start out by using the filters and trying out CornerFix (on Mac). I can usually tell what lens was used, so neither the EXIF info nor choosing the profile in CornerFix should present a problem.

The only lens I have that's "mostly" for the M8 is the 4/18 Distagon. It's also the widest lens I have, where the IR effects and cyan drift are most pronounced. So I may bite the bullet and order up a Milich mount and a B+W 58mm filter. I doubt I'll go the extra mile and get a Leica 55/60 filter and step ring, but we'll see.

All around, the whole business is a pain in the ass... But all certainly fixable. 😉

Sorry, noobish questions from moi ... 😀

Do you mean that the coding is needed to bring up the relevant frame lines on the M8 ... ? If so, is this something that needs to be done for non-Leica lenses only?

What's the reason why the cyan drift would be the more pronounced the wider the angle of the lens? And just to be clear, that's something which is separate from the coding (i.e. the fix is the filter, and the coding would not have anything to do with that)?

Thanks!

 

[rycm]

I am betting that the future M9 will make coding and IR filter redundant. So I will sharpie my lenses for now with th e coding kit, and invest in a few filters.

 

[Gerald Grevrend]

O only own a M6, I do not (yet) need to code my lenses 🙂

 

[jaapv]

I am betting that the future M9 will make coding and IR filter redundant. So I will sharpie my lenses for now with th e coding kit, and invest in a few filters.

IR filter maybe, but a digital camera will need to be able to read the lens in any case, especially wideangles. It corrects optical vignetting and light fall-off on the sensor due to the angle of incidence as well.

 

[gfspencer]

Odd that no one here mentions EXIF (embedded exposure information) as a reason for coding their lenses. - Børre

I boxed my three lenses Saturday and they will be off to Leica on Monday.

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

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

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

Probably the only lens that needs to be coded is the 35mm but I wanted the EXIF information.

By the way, I have the coding kit but the black dots keep wearing off so I decided to let Leica code my lenses and be done with it.

 

[CaptZoom]

I boxed my three lenses Saturday and they will be off to Leica on Monday.

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

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

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

Probably the only lens that needs to be coded is the 35mm but I wanted the EXIF information.

By the way, I have the coding kit but the black dots keep wearing off so I decided to let Leica code my lenses and be done with it.

The EXIF data is the only reason I'm considering coding my lenses. But it's not a high enough priority to get it done any time soon.

 

[swoop]

I have an M9. I find my images actually look better without the lens selection enabled.