Thanks Joakim, yes that's kind of my mood right now, identical to those bored shopkeepers
Carsten, thanks for the link back to your LCF thread. Agree with you on the 35CronIV bokeh, its good most of the time but occasionally it can be nervous. There is a very discernible color difference between the 35 Crons (warm) and the 35Lux Asph (cool). Does anyone has an explanation as to why the 35Lux has such a cool color cast? Is it the glass properties or is this supposed to be the new "color" signature that Leica designed into the lineup? Sorry if this was asked before in this thread.
I don't think the difference is primarily in the glass. There might be a small difference, possibly attributed to the fact that with film, a lens which produces a slightly warm cast might give more pleasing photos, whereas for digital, a neutral cast is more desirable, combined with in-camera profiles. In other words, older lenses designed for film might be a tad warmer. I think the primary difference is in the white balance though. Different lenses provoke different reactions from digital cameras. Many are equalized by manually setting white balance, for example.
thrice wrote:
You cannot get black dots direct from Leica.
The leica finish is about a 40% gloss.
Yeah, I can get a red one and paint it (which I think is my best bet).. It's plastic, so any type of plastic spray paint would do right?! I'm leaning towards matte finish.
Here's one from my newest acquisition - a Leica 90mm f/4 Elmar in Screw Mount (circa 1952 production) - taken from my office window overlooking Singapore's Marina Bay
carstenw wrote:
I don't think the difference is primarily in the glass. There might be a small difference, possibly attributed to the fact that with film, a lens which produces a slightly warm cast might give more pleasing photos, whereas for digital, a neutral cast is more desirable, combined with in-camera profiles. In other words, older lenses designed for film might be a tad warmer. I think the primary difference is in the white balance though. Different lenses provoke different reactions from digital cameras. Many are equalized by manually setting white balance, for example.
So would one assume that the lens detection by Leica means that it slightly alters white balance, even on manual white balance? I mean wouldn't it alter it slightly to suit the lens?
Example (true or not?): WB @ 4600k with one lens that Leica knows produces 300k warmer colors, would be 4900k, so they correct the camera to actually be 4300k so that way the lenses color shift compensates it up to the proper WB of 4600k??
I'm just trying to figure it out, since I've not tested what Leica's corrections actually do.
adamdewilde wrote:
Yeah, I can get a red one and paint it (which I think is my best bet).. It's plastic, so any type of plastic spray paint would do right?! I'm leaning towards matte finish.
The Leica dots used to be metal, a very thin aluminium or something like that, and I would be surprised if they are not still. The letters show the metal. There is a triangular hole behind the dot, for adjusting the vertical aspect of the rangefinder, with the centre being over the hole. To remove the dot, Leica just pushes a sharp tool against it gently, and it folds a bit. Something like an electrician's screwdriver should do it (be careful not to let it slip!). Then it is easy to remove. New red dots can be had from any dealer, so this is far easier than trying to remove it manually. Just get a few new red ones, paint them all, and pick the best one.
I wonder if the dot would look nice being all black, without the silver letters? It might look good on a black M.
adamdewilde wrote:
So would one assume that the lens detection by Leica means that it slightly alters white balance, even on manual white balance? I mean wouldn't it alter it slightly to suit the lens?
Example (true or not?): WB @ 4600k with one lens that Leica knows produces 300k warmer colors, would be 4900k, so they correct the camera to actually be 4300k so that way the lenses color shift compensates it up to the proper WB of 4600k??
I'm just trying to figure it out, since I've not tested what Leica's corrections actually do.
I am not sure, to be honest. I could imagine that they would not fully correct the older lenses, to leave them some of their film character, and with the 35 Cron IV, coded, I have seen that it is somewhat more magenta than the newer Cron ASPH. You can see that in many of the shots in the thread I linked. It gives a very nice look towards evening, but is maybe less desirable in the middle of the day.
carstenw wrote:
I am not sure, to be honest. I could imagine that they would not fully correct the older lenses, to leave them some of their film character, and with the 35 Cron IV, coded, I have seen that it is somewhat more magenta than the newer Cron ASPH. You can see that in many of the shots in the thread I linked. It gives a very nice look towards evening, but is maybe less desirable in the middle of the day.
Yes, I seen that, didn't know what to make of it. So in which case I could be getting better colors from my 50/2 ZM now, which might have a result on the rendering? I'm going to have to run out and test this tomorrow after my shoot, if the weather is nice. I think that's the easiest way, I'll try and let everyone know my results.
I was also thinking that all painted black would be nice. To cover the LEICA letters altogether. As long as you put a thin coat of paint, and not disturb the raise in the letters. So they're visible but not silver in color.
Luka...that ZM 18 sure looks like a special lens. Looks so....crisp. That 75 shot...is that multiple shots or just a single? It looks odd with that tree which I would think is pretty small next to that sign that looks tiny compared to it. Looks like a MF shot almost
Here's a shot of a lens that I "hard" coded today with a dremel:
100%:
It worked quite well. I marked the positions using the m-coder kit, wrapped the lens in masking tape and carefully made the grooves with the dremel operating at low speed (5000 rpm). I painted the grooves with a Humbrol black matte enamel paint. I'm not a particularly skilled at precision hand work but it was easy enough not to botch it. I coded my ZM18 and ZM25. My other two Zeiss lenses have grooves in the mount so ink coding does not rub off, so there is no need to dremel them.
Luka, your images with the 18 are really popping! I realize some of it is due to your post processing script with sharpening (so far I'm too lazy to optimize sharpening for the images I've posted), but the rendering is lovely. I really like the light combined with the curving lines of the bridge photo. My GF also added a 'wow' when she saw it over my shoulder.
Nice job with the hard coding. Both of my ZM lens have the groove so the ink coding hasn't worn off yet, but the M9 is not reading my ZM 35 f/2.8 coding correctly half the time. I have it coded as the 35 Summarit but often the info menu shows it as a 35mm f/4 (which I didn't know Leica ever made). And every once in a while the camera won't read the ink coding of either the 35 or the 21 at all... it's kind of a pain. The C1 LCC solution seems very practical and would be a nice addition to LR so I could just shoot everything uncoded and apply corrections where needed. I guess I could do it with cornerfix, but it would be nice to have it all in one app.
Carsten, are you saying that to remove the Leica dot with something like a screwdriver that it's a potentially destructive process? You imply that one 'folds' (bends?) the dot... I've simply covered it with black masking tape, though it looks a bit obvious in the right light. My GF doesn't like it... and thinks I should leave it uncovered. I guess it's part of living in Munich where everyone seems to show off status symbols left right and centre. But I just find it too bold and just want to use the camera for what it is rather than for the implied luxury. I'd also prefer it if the ZM lenses didn't have chrome rings. Actually, all black like this parked out front this morning would be great:
It's the first one I've seen here in the past 10 days, but have seen a ton of 911s.
Another couple from a couple days ago with the ZM 35 f/2.8:
Been thinking about a RF. I have some questions before I go to the shop and look a fool. What I do not understand is the lens coding thing. So lets say I have a M9 and two Leica lenses, do I have to code each time I change, or does this get done when you connect a different lens..
Please can someone explain the framelines to me. DO you get 50mm lines when a 50mm lens is fitted and for a 21mm lens - 21mm lines.
