M Digital Lens Bayonet Coding

[Tony Rose]

More news from Germany on the New Bayonet Coding for digital M8

"The digital Leica M writes the lens data it reads off the code to the EXIF file and also utilizes this information to process the image data for optimal image quality. In the digital Leica M, this allows compensation of system-immanent vignetting customized according to the lens attached. Therefore, when using the digital Leica M, this feature results in even a slight improvement of the accustomed high image quality produced by Leica M lenses.

In flash mode the output of the pre-flash is determined by the focal length information supplied by the 6 Bit code. Dedicated Metz flash units as well as future Leica models will also be able to set their reflectors accordingly with the help of the 6 Bit coding and thus achieve optimal energy and illumination efficiency.
In order to retain system compatibility for previous and future system components, the Leica M bayonet’s basic features remain unchanged."

 

[jaapv]

If it is just vignetting compensation, which is childishly simple in post-processing and Exif info it is hardly worth the money to have existing lenses coded, imho. I must confess flash does not interest me very much, except for fill-in.

 

[Peter Klein]

Thank you, Tony!

This should reassure people who feared their uncoded lenses would not be compatible with the M8. Depending on how you work and what lenses you use, the coding may or may not be worth it to you.

One other thing--the way the statement is worded does not rule out (or in) any image processing for chromatic abberation/color fringing. My suspicion is that if Leica were going to do that, they would probably use it as a selling point, so probably not. But this is just speculation based on parsing the English translation of a German original.

--Peter

 

[ywenz]

"...Therefore, when using the digital Leica M, this feature results in even a slight improvement of the accustomed high image quality produced by Leica M lenses."

Leica is saying that the image processor can improve the quality of the image from a lens that we've been used to on the film M bodies? What great marketing...

 

[Nachkebia]

How about ZM lenses? will we be able to use them on M(ate)? 🙂

 

[Mark Norton]

Yes of course you can do this in post processing, but there will be a section of M8 buyers who do not want to mess with Photoshop or whatever. The camera will be judged on the quality of the images it produces out of the box and if this is a way of correcting vignietting before the user even sees the image, I'm all for it.

 

[jaapv]

I must confess that I feel rather doubtful about this "optimizing" as Leica calls it.
1. It is obviously a software thing,it seems rather unlikely that it will be applied to RAW files, so it isprobably a Jpeg-only correction.
2. Even if individualized for the lens, the camera cannot read the aperture and any lens aberration is highly dependent on the f-stop used. So what will they use? A general-average per lens or a wide-open correction? Either way it will be off at all other apertures.
3. Any software correction is better done in a far more powerful PC using far more sophisticated and elaborate software than in the camera. This has been true for all camera's of all brands and I do not see Leica changing that.

So it is hard to see that this feature will be more than a quick fix in Jpeg-snapshot situations- at 95 Euro a go. I don't see a reason to adapt the lenses I have. But it will be nice to have the extra in any new ones- as long as it can be switched off.

 

[J. Borger]

This is in line with a recent article in LFI magazine.
Where it is stated that the coding of lenses is especially usefull for ultra wide lenses and lenses like the 50/1.0 (another lens suffering from vignetting).
Correction for vignetting & passing Exif info .. that's it!!
So .. i will not a send a lens in ....


Han

 

[jlw]

"...Therefore, when using the digital Leica M, this feature results in even a slight improvement of the accustomed high image quality produced by Leica M lenses."

Leica is saying that the image processor can improve the quality of the image from a lens that we've been used to on the film M bodies? What great marketing...

In the sense of vignetting, yes -- and that seems like a reasonable claim.

For slide shooters who don't scan their work, correction for severe vignetting is very difficult, and for darkroom printers, it involves some fairly touchy dodging to get a natural effect.

I can see how this capability would be especially useful to people who shoot for publication and who don't necessarily have time to do a lot of post-processing on every image from a large "take."

 

[Paul T.]

I love how we don't only criticise Leica for what they do wrong, we add new fantasies of what they've done wrong, too.

Digital vignetting, for want of a better term, is caused by the sensor being less sensitive to oblique light rays than film is. The effect is NOT aperture dependent. you will need correction for this on a rangefinder with wide-angle lenses, simply because the lens is closer to the sensor. So it makes total sense to provide this in-camera. I don't see the lens coding as being some sort of cashcow for Leica, all the poor saps are trying to do is get the best quality they can out of the system...

 

[jaapv]

I love how we don't only criticise Leica for what they do wrong, we add new fantasies of what they've done wrong, too.

Digital vignetting, for want of a better term, is caused by the sensor being less sensitive to oblique light rays than film is. The effect is NOT aperture dependent. you will need correction for this on a rangefinder with wide-angle lenses, simply because the lens is closer to the sensor. So it makes total sense to provide this in-camera. I don't see the lens coding as being some sort of cashcow for Leica, all the poor saps are trying to do is get the best quality they can out of the system...

Am I being accused of Leica-bashing? A refreshing experience. Usually I get flamed for rather the opposite...😛 Of course am not talking about digital vignetting. It is a well-known effect, which for instance the RD1 corrects in the software. Leica has said that this has been corrected (I can only assume more or less) by increasing the acceptance angle of the sensor. I was talking about lens vignetting and chromatic aberration. If it were digital vignetting there would be no reason to code lenses longer that 35 mm.

 

[phototone]

in digital photography, a sensor without a AA filter, such as the Leica design, and also having lenses close to the sensor, such as any rangefinder has, is going to be prone to the "chromatic aberration" phenomenon that occurs from the light hitting the sensor at a severe angle towards the edge of the sensor. This can be compensated for in the software (firmware) if the camera knows what lens you have on it. I would assume, if you do not have the "coded" lenses, then you would also be able to "set" the M8 for the lens you have mounted, via a menu. The question is, will the M8 have menu selections for ALL "M" mount lenses, such as the Voigtlander and Zeiss ones? Probably not, but will the internal database be upgradable to cover lenses not initially covered? The Kodak digital SLR's, the 14n, and the SLR/n and SLR/c having no AA filter also, had built-in database of lenses from all popular manufacturers, for correction.

It is true, that while in Photoshop CS, vignetting and chromatic aberration phenomenon are correctable in the "raw" workflow window, it would be better to have those things pre-corrected, for speed of workflow. These tools only work if you shoot raw. If you shoot JPG, then many tools are not available.

 

[jaapv]

.{about vignetting-jv}

I can see how this capability would be especially useful to people who shoot for publication and who don't necessarily have time to do a lot of post-processing on every image from a large "take."

In Picture Window Pro it is literally a 1/2 second correction. The time needed for two mouseclicks and a slider swipe. In Jpeg as well as TIFF

 

[Ben Z]

I have a big problem with Leica's statement that "In the digital Leica M, this allows compensation of system-immanent vignetting customized according to the lens attached. Therefore, when using the digital Leica M, this feature results in even a slight improvement of the accustomed high image quality produced by Leica M lenses." The vignetting caused by the angle of light hitting the sensor is a constant for each lens, so a software algorithm based on the lens type is understantable. But in order to go past simply nulling the sensor vignetting and actually lessen the vignetting the same lens has on film would require the camera to know the exact shooting aperture, as we've discussed before. Otherwise once the lens is stopped down to where it's native vignetting disappears, the software adjustment would cause the corners of the image to actually reverse-vignette and appear lighter.

If it is just vignetting compensation, which is childishly simple in post-processing and Exif info it is hardly worth the money to have existing lenses coded, imho. I must confess flash does not interest me very much, except for fill-in.

Agree 100%. This is a good-news day for me and my bank account😀

 

[Mark Norton]

I don't think Leica will have gone to these lengths if the coding does not confer some real benefits. Get real! €95/$125 is hardly a cash cow for them. It will barely cover the costs of replacing the bayonet, checking out the lens and returning it to the customer. I have 8 lenses being coded and I'm more than willing to cut Leica some slack.

Even if the processing applies only to JPEGs, it will presumably also be available in the RAW plug-in for this camera. Forget the natural vignetting of the lens, I feel certain the vignetting correction will apply only to that due to the lens/sensor combination, not the shooting aperture.

There's been a shareholders meeting today at Leica, and this is what was said about the Digital M:

"Undoubtedly, the innovation with the greatest potential for the company is the development of a digital rangefinder camera. We are planning to launch it in the second half of this year. We have already announced that it will be a ‘real‘ Leica rangefinder camera in terms of weight, size, material and design, with the decisive difference that it will take digital photos. All the originality and fascination of Leica M photography will then be available to the digital world. It was important for us to follow the principle of system compatibility. Nearly all the lenses of the Leica M system ever since its introduction in 1954 can also be used for digital photography.

However, I will not give any further details on the name, price and availability of the product today. We have learned from past experience and only make statements when they can be relied upon a hundred per cent. However, I can assure you already that the product we are creating is something really special and will give the company a lot of tailwind. At the present there are no more points in the product development process that seem unsolvable. We are well on the way to being ready to market a technically extremely sophisticated product."

It's good enough for me, and I have two of them on order.

 

[BillBingham2]

This sort of thing should not be done in the camera. It should be done on a Mac, WinTel or Linux box, much more power. You do not burn in a print in the camera, you do it in the dark room. Processing this in the camera will do nothing but slow down shooting (unless you can schedule doing this after the you are done shooting for a while).

B2 (;->

 

[Mark Norton]

Makes perfect sense to do it in the camera because the camera will be judged on the quality of the images it produces as standard with no post processing. We know that digital vignetting is a problem they have had to address and this is part of their solution.

As for speed, the Kodak sensor is only good for 2 - 3 frames a second anyway, so whether it will hold you up depends on the size of the raw buffer, the speed of the digital signal processing and how much processing is involved in adjusting the image. It's not so different from some of the other processing which is routinely applied like sharpening, moire filtering and the rest.

 

[Ben Z]

I don't think Leica will have gone to these lengths if the coding does not confer some real benefits. Get real! €95/$125 is hardly a cash cow for them. It will barely cover the costs of replacing the bayonet, checking out the lens and returning it to the customer.

Actually, given what Leica charges for even the smallest and simplest replacement part or accessory, the modest charge for this "upgrade" is one of the chief reasons I am suspicious of just how much palpable value it has. But clearly we think differently because whereas I will put off judgment on spending $5000 for the M8 and paying to have my lenses coded until someone--preferably me, but at least someone outside of Leica--has seen and used it, you are ready to lay down $10,000 plus $125 per lens sight-unseen before even Leica has issued a solid spec sheet. To each his own 😀

 

[jaapv]

My reservations won't stop me from having them coded, Mark. 😉 I'm just waiting for them to return my Digilux2, so that I will have a daily camera to carry around whilst I send in my lenses. I have a feeling they have a large number of mounts to do, as the turnaround time on normal repairs seems to have gone from three weeks to seven weeks.🙁 🙄

 

[rxmd]

given what Leica charges for even the smallest and simplest replacement part or accessory, the modest charge for this "upgrade" is one of the chief reasons I am suspicious of just how much palpable value it has.

Are you saying that if Leica is selling something for less than $BIG_AMOUNT then it must be obviously worthless?

Philipp