Rob Riley wrote:
IRCut filters are thin films, so much thinner than the glass they\'re put on that the strongest filter won\'t make the filter any thicker. If the microlens layer is thicker, then it is to do with offsets optimised for FF, not because of a heavier IRCut
M9 doesn\'t use a hot mirror, so the first point doesn\'t apply. It uses an absorption filter.
The microlens layer isn\'t thicker, it is the same. The IR absorption filter that acts as coverglass is thicker. I have that straight from Stephan Daniels\' mouth (product manager for digital M at Leica).
That\'s a great post from Joe, but the M8/M9 don\'t use an IR cut filter.
kidtexas, I think the vignette on that 15/4.5CV shot is the result of the film/developer/scanning/colour-treatment. Otherwise this sort of behaviour would be documented and have a scientific foundation. Unless you can submit such an explanation forgive me if I don\'t accept one example as gospel.
I don\'t want to get in trouble, but as I assume you\'re not a Reid Reviews subscriber i\'m going to share part of his 15mm CV review with you, here is a vignetting analysis without a filter on the lens, taken on the M8:
I\'d say that reliably puts the argument to bed.
kidtexas wrote:
As far as the M9, again, I\'ve not seen any examples of color vignetting without coding. The red left side I\'ve only seen on M9 photos WITH correction. Maybe it occurs without correction, but again I\'ve not seen it. And from what I\'ve read, the problem with the software correction is that it IS symmetrical, yet the vignetting is not, either spatial or with respect to wavelength.
I never said (or implied) red corners occur without correction.
If the sensor isn\'t perfectly aligned to the lens flange then yes, symmetrical correction profiles would cause this problem, that remains to be proven in testing or measurement.
Nov 22, 2009 at 02:16 AM
Previous versions of thrice's message #7804337 « Any M9's shipping? »
