I forget: what happens if you use an uncoded lens on an M8?

[ampguy]

links

links

Here is one that I haven't tried yet:

http://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/01/m8-coder-simple-manual-handcoding-of-m-lenses.html

Code info. is here:

http://www.digital-leica.com/lens_codes/

There is a circular PDF that I have used here:

http://www.digital-leica.com/lens_codes/template.jpg

Do you have a link to those free timplates? I have been going nuts trying to hand code. Thanks!!!

 

[bo_lorentzen]

http://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/01/m8-coder-simple-manual-handcoding-of-m-lenses.html

Note towards the end of the page there is a link for either a corel draw file or a JPG. both should be to scale.

Bo

 

[jaapv]

although I've only gone as wide as 28mm.

Only recc. I have is to use latest firmware (release about a month ago), and set properly according to lens detection, and UV/IR filter settings.

Also, test on black synthetics, if you are expecting to shoot in color and require these to come out as black without post processing.

Otherwise filters are not necessary, though lens info. will not show in EXIF metadata.

And yellow greens in foliage, and purplish Caucasian skin and green shift when you correct magenta blacks, just for starters...
How are you going to correct all that mess together in postprocessing.😕
If you can think filters are not necessary you badly need to get a calibrated monitor.

Lens info in EXIF does not show up through the mounting of a filter, but by coding a lens.

 

[jaapv]

Nothing happens, in my experience, with lenses from 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, to 75mm. I shoot blue skies, white walls, etc., just hoping to have a problem so that I too can get my lenses coded and spend some more money. Yet, to my dismay nothing happens. Or else it's so slight I don't notice. I strongly recommend you try uncoded lenses in a variety of difficult situations--though one rarely photogaphs in those situations--and see if any problems come up. If not, just keep waiting for them to appear like I do.

24 is practically unusable without coding and filter, 28 is not too good as well. With 35 (more or less) and longer you can get away with just the filter.
I guess you have been doing your experiments under lighting that does not contain too much of an IR component.

 

[jaapv]

You could be right, I will check my 35/2 film scans with the UV/IR filter again.

Back to coding and wide - I have not seen any in-camera "fixing" due to coding (assuming filters and latest settings for filter on/off are corrected for), but I'd be more than willing to code, since I can do it for free.

There is a good white paper out there on how the M8 would need to accurately guess (and it might be doing an approximation) the selected aperture, in order to apply (and not over-apply) corrections to WA lenses.

I'm glad the M8 is using the DNG spec, and not some proprietary NEF or Panasonic RAW format, as whatever they are doing with coding and certain lenses for corrections, will likely be figured out.

I'm assuming by wide, you mean wider than 28 or 35? I don't have anything wider than 28, though I'd like a 15, 21 or 24 someday, and would expect that corrections from coding, if any, are going to apply most to those ultrawides.

That is right. 28 and shorter. You would not see the corrections in the camera, as they are done before the writing of the RAW data to the RAW file, in the demosaicing and colour interpolation stage. That means the output format has no influence.

 

[johannielscom]

So, based on focal length, there seem to be three possibilities for the M8 shooter here: you either need both filter and coding, only filter or even nothing at all.

Anyone care to summarize what focal length lenses need which approach? I know it's in the thread here, but am a bit OOF myself today😱

For switching lenses from digital to film, I'm clear: screw-on, screw-off, screw-on, ...etc

 

[__hh]

I have the m-coder but have honestly found it to be too cumbersome.... the markings don't always work (or they are read as the wrong lens).... and even when I get it right, I don't really see the improvement in colour shift or effects of corrections anyway.

Be benefits (although I have not really seen them yet) aren't enough to get me to have the lenses professionally coded or get the Dremel job done myself (maybe because we don't have Dremels in Australia 🙂 ).

The marks come of and the whole cycle starts again...

I'm content with just using the filters, or nothing at all.

 

[jaapv]

So, based on focal length, there seem to be three possibilities for the M8 shooter here: you either need both filter and coding, only filter or even nothing at all.

Anyone care to summarize what focal length lenses need which approach? I know it's in the thread here, but am a bit OOF myself today😱

For switching lenses from digital to film, I'm clear: screw-on, screw-off, screw-on, ...etc

Filters on everything, coding plus filters for 35 (?), 28, 24, 21, 18,16/15 and the Noctilux.

 

[ampguy]

not seeing any of this

not seeing any of this

With UV/IR filters on all but 28, and no coding on any. Am picking up some 8x10's today to check prints.

What firmware and lens settings in menu you using that give you the color issues mentioned below?

And yellow greens in foliage, and purplish Caucasian skin and green shift when you correct magenta blacks, just for starters...
How are you going to correct all that mess together in postprocessing.😕
If you can think filters are not necessary you badly need to get a calibrated monitor.

Lens info in EXIF does not show up through the mounting of a filter, but by coding a lens.

 

[jaapv]

It has nothing to do with lens settings and firmware -it is unchanged from the beginning. The only influence is the IR content of the light. And the (non-) use of filters, obviously.