"new" M lenses

[trph_2000]

Anyone have more information on the lens changes on new models to make them sync with the M8 and what might be involved in retrofitting "old lenses"?
Leica says that all glass sold as of 1 July will be M8 compatible.

 

[merciful]

I thought all the lenses made since 1953 were compatible with the M8. Is this yet another reason not to buy surfacing?

 

[IGMeanwell]

I thought all the lenses made since 1953 were compatible with the M8. Is this yet another reason not to buy surfacing?

They will... but the new lenses will have the metal contacts that will take care of metering, iso control, aperature, flash capabilities etc

older lenses just won't meter or have some of the more advanced controls

Same thing with Nikon DSLRs, Canon DSLRs, and Pentax ... you can use the old lenses they just will make it a completely manual camera (except its output which will be digital)

 

[merciful]

Right, right: should've thought of that, thanks. I'd be a bit disturbed that a lens might not work with the camera's metering, though. If a lens meters with the M6 (for example) shoudn't it do so with the M8?

older lenses just won't meter or have some of the more advanced controls

 

[IGMeanwell]

Right, right: should've thought of that, thanks. I'd be a bit disturbed that a lens might not work with the camera's metering, though. If a lens meters with the M6 (for example) shoudn't it do so with the M8?

Unfortunately I don't think anyone can answer that question ... Leica hasn't released how its going to meter

so possibly the metering has nothing to do with it and the 6-bit coding is more for the in camera processing

I assume the older lenses will not have the ability to do the special anti-vignetting and anti-chromatic aberrations ... basically the camera will know what lens is being used and make changes that the camera thinks its need to produce the best image.

 

[Ben Z]

I'm hoping the coding won't do anything I can't do in Photoshop, because I couldn't afford the M8 and getting my lenses refitted too.

 

[neilsphoto]

I thought I read from Leica that the whole point of the extra contacts were to transfer lens data, focal length, apeture etc to the image file, EXIF data. I really don't care if my image file tells me it is a 50mm lens or not.

I'd believe all metering functions will work fine and I think Leica so much as said so.

 

[ampguy]

no

no

The M8 has 6 sensors. Each new (or retrofitted) will have a black or white patch in one of the 6 positions giving up to 64 combinations.

It's a very primitive system, and very likely 3rd parties will find a way to retrofit what is not on the already approved list.

I thought all the lenses made since 1953 were compatible with the M8. Is this yet another reason not to buy surfacing?

 

[John Rountree]

Sorry, but you are wrong about the Canon lenses. Any Canon EF lens will work on any Canon Dslr without losing any of the meter, focus, TTL flash, or any other features. Of course the old breach mount FD lenses will not work, but then they can not be mounted on any of the cameras in the EOS line.

 

[jaapv]

Right, right: should've thought of that, thanks. I'd be a bit disturbed that a lens might not work with the camera's metering, though. If a lens meters with the M6 (for example) shoudn't it do so with the M8?

Leica stated that the coding is "for the more advanced [electronic] functions." and all older lenses will be "fully compatible" That seems to be a clear indication that basic functions like focussing and automatic exposure will be available on the M8. It is hard to see how a system like the M system could function otherwise. The coding of the lens does not communicate with the camera i.e. it does not transfer the aperture used, although there are some tricks using an extra light-sensor in the camera conceivable. It merely enables the camera to identify the lens used and add that to the exif and to apply specific parameters to the in-camera processing and possibly to the post-processing in the computer.

 

[phototone]

I would assume that just like the Kodak DSLR's, the Leica M8 will have a database of lenses in the firmware, and the coding will (among other things) automatically set the camera to optimum for chromatic aberration and vignetting elimination for that particular lens. This is a problem with digital cameras with larger sensors and without a anti-aliasing filter (such as the M8). Probably, in fact, no doubt, positively, the M8 will have a way for you to manually "set" the camera for an older Leica brand lens to optimize the image capture. The big question is, will third-party lenses, such as Voigtlander and Zeiss have entries in the database.

With my experience with the Kodak SLR/n, and 14/n, Photoshop is unable to completely remove artifacts caused by the interaction of particular lenses and the sensor, if the camera is not set for the particular lens in use. So it is important that the camera have some internal image processing just to optimize the lens/sensor combination.

The Epson RD-1 has an anti-aliasing filter over the sensor, and the sensor is APS sized and of lower resolution, therefore the "need" for optimization is less.

 

[Mark Norton]

It costs €95 (about $125) to update the lens. In effect, you get a new lens mount with the 6 black and white dots - pits milled into the back surface of the bayonet and filled with paint. I've got 8 lenses back at Solms at the moment being converted. It's a neat solution because there is no space inside the lens mount to put contacts.

The only thing the camera can sense is those 6 dots which other people have pointed out gives 63 combinations plus one for "not coded" (in effect all "white" dots). We do not know exactly what information the dots convey. At a minimum, it will be focal length. It could also include the maximum aperture of the lens (though how useful this would be when M lenses are manually stopped down is questionable. Most likely, it will denote the actual lens, so that the 50mm Noctilux will have a different coding from a 50mm Summicron.

The firmware and RAW plugin will likely have processing to optimise the image which will be fine tuned to the lens. That means that Zeiss and CV lenses are excluded from the party, but hey, it's Leica's camera and they can do what they want.

I think this is a tacit admission by Leica that for the best image quality, especially for wides, you cannot separate out the lens, the sensor and the image processing. They all have to work together in some sort of synergistic techno-fest. That's fine, because the M8 will ultimately stand or fall on the quality of the images it delivers.

There will be point jerry-rigging a Zeiss lens by painting some dots because the processing applied might actually make its images worse, though doubtless some people will try!

For Leica lens users, it potentially conveys real benefits but we'll have to see.

 

[Ben Z]

I agree about the "wait and see". I personally will wait and try all my Leica lenses on the camera before deciding which if any to get coded. And then, provided Dave Ellwell is amenable, I will simply order coded rear flanges for those lenses and attach them myself in a matter of seconds with a little phillips head screwdriver, rather than ship my lenses across the country and wait some interminable length of time while they sit on a shelf waiting their turn at the tech bench.

If I find that the 50 Summilux needs coding, since mine is the E43 version I will have to mill the recesses and paint-fill them myself with the same coding pattern as the E46 version of identical optical formula.

If I had to venture a wild guess I would say that 21, 28 and 35mm lenses might benefit from the anti-vignetting processing, but that's pretty easily accomplished in Photoshop. As for CA, if the M8 software can correct that better than doing it manually in Photoshop, their programmers deserve a bonus. My friends who are Photoshop mavens tell me CA many times requires different adjustments to different parts of the image, depending on a host of factors, and only sometimes could a blanket algorithm be applied effectively without input from a human examining the individual image.

 

[Macpod]

i believe all k mount pentax will meter. the m42 thread mount will have stop down metering but will still meter.

 

[jaapv]

i believe all k mount pentax will meter. the m42 thread mount will have stop down metering but will still meter.

Do you put K- mount lenses on your Leica M? That might take some force....

 

[ampguy]

yes

yes

Somewhere above it was mentioned auto metering didn't work, and I don't know what was meant by that.

i believe all k mount pentax will meter. the m42 thread mount will have stop down metering but will still meter.

 

[jaapv]

It means a Leica M is not a SLR. As there is no diaphragm coupling from lens to body is it impossible to meter without stopping down, which is moot, as one does not look through the lens for composing anyway. There have been some pretty ingenious solutions proposed for the M8 on this forum, but it would mean a comparison between TTL metering and ambient light metering with a seperate sensor, which obviously would be thrown out by using a filter.

 

[Ron F]

I don't think that Leica is going to leave their users of old lenses as high and dry as Nikon did. I'm sure we all remember back when Nikon started to discontinue support for manual focus lenses on the majority of their consumer level cameras (N75, N80, et al) and at least one of their higher end cameras (the D100, if I'm not mistaken). However, some cameras would still allow for 80/20 and spot "match point" metering and/or aperture priority (like the N70, N90, N90s, F100, F5, D1, D1x, D1h, D2, D200, and maybe a few others that I missed).

Multisegment Matrix metering in an AF camera is wholely dependent on having Nikkor lenses with electronic contacts (I think there was only one manual focus Nikon camera with Matrix metering - the FA - , but Matrix metering was only active with AIS lenses, if I'm not mistaken).

When using manual focus lenses with a flash on bodies that support MF lenses, the user was restricted to basic TTL, A (thyristor), or manual flash modes since Matrix-Balanced TTL fill flash depended on distance information supplied in the Nikkor-D series lenses (all of which were AF to my knowledge).

Realisticly, the Leica digital could support 3D balanced fill flash since the lenses focusing distance is known by the camera based on the position of the rangefinder arm that contacts the lens and as long as the aperture of the lens is dialed into the flash correctly (at least, so I assume).

 

[Palaeoboy]

That means that Zeiss and CV lenses are excluded from the party, but hey, it's Leica's camera and they can do what they want.

I think thats probably the main reason for this simple coding which in real terms doesnt do all that much. But if they hype it up enough then there will be enough doubt so that some Leica users dont fly to another nest.

 

[Ben Z]

Sort of like that bruhaha surrounding the Konica Hexar RF? You recall, where there were all those reports the RF body supposedly was designed so you couldn't focus Leica lenses on the film plane so we were warned to buy an M7 instead, yet somehow all the Hexar lenses focused just fine on the Leica film plane 😀

Touble is this coding could backfire on Leica, if people started to get the perception that it takes a bunch of secret internal software processing steps in order for the M8 to deliver acceptible image quality as what the same lenses could do un-coded on film.