noimmunity
scratch my niche
Got a test roll back from a local lab of shots from both lenses on film. I don't think it shows anything but the limitations of the film I used, Superia 400 (the only C-41 film available in my neighborhood; I only keep B&W film and chromes at on hand at home). In any case, there is, to my eye, no meaningful difference in terms of sharpness on film between the ZM C Bigon and the SWH as judged by these scans.
First the SWH:
Roadside Farm
SWH on superia 400 by areality4all, on Flickr
Second the ZM 21/4.5
Roadside Farm
ZM 21/4.5 on superia 400 by areality4all, on Flickr
First the SWH:
Roadside Farm
SWH on superia 400 by areality4all, on Flickr
Second the ZM 21/4.5
Roadside Farm
ZM 21/4.5 on superia 400 by areality4all, on Flickr
Last edited:
Hi Jon -- I got my 21 C-Biogon from PopFlash in mid-2008, and it was just new enough to have the 28/90 flange rather than 50/75 ..."modified for M8". PopFlash shipped it directly to John Milich for 6-bit coding (to 011000 as a Leica 21 Elmarit ASPH), so I never used it uncoded.
Your imagination is likely as good as mine as to the uncoded behavior. IR color contamination without the UV/IR, but if that's ok, it's a nice solution. With the cut filter, cyan fringing that can be corrected in post with CornerFix, which will take out any vignetting too. This is likely to do a little better correction than the camera using the substitute coding as the Leica lens.
You might check with DAG or Milich or even PopFlash to see about swapping flanges, as I think it's not possible to machine a 50/75 to become a 28/90. Both the 21 C-Biogon (28mm equivalent on the M8) and 18mm Distagon (24mm equivalent) are magnificent performers on the M8.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Thanks, Doug.
I checked with Milich a couple of years ago. Replacement of the flange on the 21 is not as straightforward as some other lenses, and can only be done by a qualified technician (he suggested DAG).
Sounds like Cornerfix is the best approach for now.
Lss
Well-known
The story is indeed different. I have not observed the issues you have found in my photography with the CV 15 on the M8. I will run a controlled test when I have the time and see if I get noticeable image quality degradation in the corners.
semordnilap
Well-known
I have the M mount version and it seems quite sharp on my M8, though I haven't done any tests.
The only annoying thing about using the lens coded on the M8 is that every time the camera wakes from sleep it forgets which of the WATE settings you chose, and if you forget and hit the shutter it'll default to 18mm.
The only annoying thing about using the lens coded on the M8 is that every time the camera wakes from sleep it forgets which of the WATE settings you chose, and if you forget and hit the shutter it'll default to 18mm.
dotur
od karnevala
www.ivanlozica.com
It is true for the LTM version, corners are not sharp as they should be on my M8. So what, I like them soft.
1596dot2010 by dotur, on Flickr
It is true for the LTM version, corners are not sharp as they should be on my M8. So what, I like them soft.
1596dot2010 by dotur, on Flickr
ampguy
Veteran
it's great on the M8 and NEX
it's great on the M8 and NEX
LTM version is definitely more flexible. No funky color shifts like on M9. M10 should fix it.
it's great on the M8 and NEX
LTM version is definitely more flexible. No funky color shifts like on M9. M10 should fix it.
One possible factor on digital M bodies is the plus / minus tolerances of the sensor placement. An unsharp lens on one body can be sharp on another. This is especially true on M8's as opposed to the later 8.2 and 9.
You don't mention an IR filter. You will need it for best color results on the M8 or 8.2
Cornerfix software will also improve your results. See the Jeff Hapeman article here http://www.digitalhapeman.com/Digit...tra-Wides_on_the_Leica_Digital_M_Cameras.html
Of course your particular lens sample could be the problem too. If bought used, that adds to the unknown variables.
Stephen
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
The 15 mm ASPH is a great little lens. Zero barrel distortion, sharp to the edge and easy on the pocketbook.
If it's not sharp, look at the mount or the camera.
I always find it amusing to hear that a lens sucks on digital when it produces fine images on film.
Film is photography
15 4.5 ASPH on Leica M3/M7/MP on XP2
15 4.5 ASPH on Leica M3 on E-6 cross-processed in C-41.
If it's not sharp, look at the mount or the camera.
I always find it amusing to hear that a lens sucks on digital when it produces fine images on film.
Film is photography
15 4.5 ASPH on Leica M3/M7/MP on XP2
15 4.5 ASPH on Leica M3 on E-6 cross-processed in C-41.
Last edited:
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Before this thread gets consumed by THE BATTLE, I would like to remind people that this is NOT a digital vs. film thread, nor is it even a thread about the 15/4.5 on film. It is a very pedestrian thread about the 15/4.5 on the M8.
Dotur: Thanks for the confirmation (of the soft corners on the M8) from your side.
LSS: I would certainly like to see some tests when you feel inclined to do them.
Semordnilap: A lot of people have been reporting success using the 15 coded as a 21/2.8 ASPH on the M8. That code obviates the whole WATE menu thing.
MCTuomey
Veteran
jon, i have an M-mount version of the CV 15, bought new from CQ, that works well on my M8. is there any particular test i could do that might help? i'm happy to do what i can.
Nikkor AIS
Nikkor AIS
The thing is, the title of the thread doesn't mention the Leica M8. Just that the 15 4.5 is a big disappointment. And considering the 15 4.5 ASPH is one of my favourite little lenses, I've got its back 
.
There are so many links in the image chain that the idea of the lens being the problem is almost laughable.
And while it's fine and dandy to say, let's not make it about digital vs. film, when the camera is part of the image chain it's kind of silly not to call the body into question.
I mean, the Leica M8 isn't really known for its stellar performance with wide angles, is it?
The other thing when buying/getting a used lens is that you have no idea of its history. It could have been dropped ...OO. Things could be out of alignment. You just never know.
And then you have the Leica M8 - perhaps it should be sent back to the factory. I hear that happens a lot with Leica digital bodies.
.There are so many links in the image chain that the idea of the lens being the problem is almost laughable.
And while it's fine and dandy to say, let's not make it about digital vs. film, when the camera is part of the image chain it's kind of silly not to call the body into question.
I mean, the Leica M8 isn't really known for its stellar performance with wide angles, is it?
The other thing when buying/getting a used lens is that you have no idea of its history. It could have been dropped ...OO. Things could be out of alignment. You just never know.
And then you have the Leica M8 - perhaps it should be sent back to the factory. I hear that happens a lot with Leica digital bodies.
Last edited:
kkdanamatt
Well-known
Once again, I must emphasize that the 15 C/V is not ideally matched with either my M8 or my R-D1, despite my having changed the adapter rings five times. Not all the rings on two different bodies could be at fault. Highly unlikely. But the 15 C/V on any film camera is brilliant. The best ultrawide dollar for dollar I have ever used. Yes, the 21 Elmarit was sharper, but at six or eight times the price?
I have no experience with the 15 C/V on the M9, so I'll leave that to others. No need to defend the 15...it is a proven winner and not originally designed for digital. Ask the head bartender for clarification.
I have no experience with the 15 C/V on the M9, so I'll leave that to others. No need to defend the 15...it is a proven winner and not originally designed for digital. Ask the head bartender for clarification.
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Mike, for the fun of it (yes, FUN!), I'd love to see a couple of landscape- or cityscape-type photos taken with the SWH on the M8 at infinity, wide open, on a tripod, etc. with both center and corner 100% crops.
I'm fully confident the fellow RFF'er who sold me the lens was a person of integrity and a damn good photographer (much better than I) who cared well for the lens, etc., etc.
kkdanamatt
Well-known
Mike, for the fun of it (yes, FUN!), I'd love to see a couple of landscape- or cityscape-type photos taken with the SWH on the M8 at infinity, wide open, on a tripod, etc. with both center and corner 100% crops.
Me too!
Me too!
Krosya
Konicaze
I think there are some quality control issues at Cosina. Having had several samples of several lenses, I can tell that - you get a good one - it's very good, but otherwise it'll be just so-so. Same goes for this lens. I used to have 2 LTM versions and one was just OK. Another was better, but still not great - I had a Sigma EX af lens for Canon that was better, and it shouldnt be the case. I now have CV 15 in M version and it's very very good. It feels more solid, plus having RF coupling also helps a lot, I believe, as I still think that while DOF does cover some focus errors, being able to focus exactly will always give you better results - even with a 15mm lens, especially wide open at 4.5.
Sample variation can be seen in CV 15 pics thread as well - some people have super sharp photos and others are just OK, unless the super-oversharpen them in PP.
So, I'd suggest - if you like CV 15mm lens - get a better made M-version and you may be very happy with it than.
Sample variation can be seen in CV 15 pics thread as well - some people have super sharp photos and others are just OK, unless the super-oversharpen them in PP.
So, I'd suggest - if you like CV 15mm lens - get a better made M-version and you may be very happy with it than.
bigeye
Well-known
Ive seen nothing but praise for the LTM cv 15mm for about 10 years.
.
.
Last edited:
semordnilap
Well-known
MCTuomey
Veteran
Twist my arm, g'head. Day job intervenes, but I've got time mid-week, will do.
MCTuomey
Veteran
Jon, here's a pic with center and corner crops at 100%. Hope this helps. I can't imagine flatter, less favorable light to show a lens to advantage - typical grey Michigan winter day. Taken at f4.5, focused at infinity, on tripod, leveled, w/ timer. No processing other than cropping, resizing, and saving for web.
Attachments
Last edited: