Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/08/22
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alastair, I sincerely hope that this is indeed a conclusion. :-) Conclusion means "Th-th-th-thats all folks!" :-D Jerry Alastair Firkin wrote: > Thanks Henning: cornerfix may be an answer for the 21 till I get the thing > coded: no time before Paris now. I might "toy" with my coder set again. > Marty suggests some pens don't leave your sensor black and blue. What are > coded rings? There is "bugger" all room between the mount on the lens and > camera for any intervening code bar. > > --- henningw@archiphoto.com wrote: > > From: Henning Wulff <henningw@archiphoto.com> > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] I have come to this conclusion > Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 13:22:12 -0700 > > My experiences: > > I now have coded the WATE, the regular Tri-Elmar, the 21 ASPH, the > 28/2 and, because I sent it in for other reasons anyway, the Noctilux. > > I also have coded rings from John Milich for the 15, 21 and 25 CV. > > As far as I'm concerned, lenses 28 and wider should be coded, and > 35mm are on the bubble. I used filters on all lenses, all the time. > The 12CV has a filter, but I use CornerFix to correct the cyan corner > issue. I leave UV/IR lens detection on for all lenses, but with the > above exceptions I don't have any lenses of 35mm and longer that are > coded. No problem, and obviously lens detection does nothing on my > uncoded 75mm lenses. > > Trying to use post production and narrow band desaturation to reduce > the effects of the IR contamination only fixes things partially, and > never as successfully as coding and and lens detection. It's a colour > issue as well as resolution issue. On the other hand, Cornerfix works > very well and is quite easy to use in combination with LR. I > recommend getting it for borrowed wide angle lenses that you can put > a filter on. I'm just borrowing Tom A's 28/2 Ultron (which seems like > a very good alternate to the Summicron, and much better than the > 28/1.9) and I'll be processing the pictures with Cornerfix if they > contain evenly lit areas or things in the corners which have to have > quite accurate colours. Most pictures won't need the treatment. > > I would also like the option of selecting the lens in a menu, but > coding and lens detection is definitely the preferred method in the > end. > > The frame selection of the Tri-Elmar makes sense as the relevant > frames are in the camera and so are important for film and digital. > Focal length detection is only necessary for the digital correction > on the M8. I guess they could have built it in, but considering the > complexity of the TE, increasing the cost and complexity of the WATE > and possibly size obviously outweighed the benefits in their minds. I > tend to agree. > > BTW, if you leave the lens detection at the default position (18mm) > the errors at 16 or 21 are not very large > > > At 8:14 AM -0400 8/22/08, Leonard Taupier wrote: > >> Hello Alastair, >> >> First let me congratulate you on your winning the Leica-Dior contest >> and your new M8. That is quite an honor and attests to your >> excellent photographic skills and photos. >> >> Now on to your conclusions, #2 in particular. >> First, if you have lenses 28mm and wider and you want to shoot >> color, get them coded and get the filters. Without coding and with >> or without filters the purple cast or the cyan corners are difficult >> to get rid of. If you don't care about accurate colors then don't >> worry about it. >> >> Always use filters. Your photos will be sharper, especially with the >> non-APO lenses. IR and visible light focuses at a different point >> and with the high IR sensitivity of the M8 it might make a >> difference depending on the light source. The differences may be >> subtle but we don't spend $3500 for a lens and then get soft photos. >> >> I would always use a filter on the 35mm lens, coded or not. I have a >> coded 35mm Summicron ASPH and the 35mm Summilux ASPH not coded. Both >> have filters and I have no problem with color casts with either. >> >> Use Leica brand filters on the ultra wides, primarily the WATE and >> 21mm Elmarit Asph. The difference in the color correction with >> different brand filters is noticeable in the corners. I have no >> problem with Heliopan, B+W or Tiffen on 35mm and longer lenses. >> >> Cheers, >> Len >> >> >> On Aug 22, 2008, at 1:18 AM, Alastair Firkin wrote: >> >> >>> I am home with the flu and my new M8, so its time for some playing >>> around. >>> >>> 1. if you have a UV/IR filter on the lens, make sure you have the >>> Lens detection/UV/IR "on". This applies to all lenses 50mm and >>> greater. The 35 is touch and go >>> >>> 2. if you are using a wide angle, and it is uncoded, do not use >>> the UV/IR filter. This probably includes the 35mm. It is counter >>> productive to put the filter on a wide uncoded lens, and you are >>> probably better off to use black/purple shift to correct any black >>> clothing in the image (given that you don't mind purples going >>> black) >>> >>> 3. do not use the wide TE with the lens detection off unless you >>> remove the IR filter. >>> >>> 4. the 21 asph can be used without an external viewfinder (as >>> reported by Gene) as long as you don't wear glasses, the FOV will >>> equate almost exactly to everything you can see in the viewfinder >>> outside the frames: in some ways its more accurate than using the >>> frames, which have such a huge latitude that I find them annoying. >>> >>> 5. the 21 asph is a great lens, and I really should have it coded >>> :-( Leica should really have allowed us to choose the lens from the >>> menu rather than force coding: but I suspect this is where they are >>> just collecting a bit of "cream". Also, the TE brings up the >>> appropriate focal length when coded: why could not the TEW. >>> >>> Oh well >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Alastair >>> >>>