[Leica] I have come to this conclusion

[glehrer at san.rr.com (Jerry Lehrer)]

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
>>>
>>>