edwardkaraa wrote:
Zeiss recommends to code it as 24/2.8 asph. You may want to input the profile manually and see if it works for you.
I believe that the early ZM18 was issued with a mount that brings up the 24/35 (35/135) framelines and as such could not be coded as the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-ASPH since it requires the 28/90 framelines. I'll have to try out the 24/2.8ASPH code and see what the results are, but I've been quite happy with the 21/2.8 results.
The M8/8.2 required both the framelines and the 6-bit code to identify the lens. I'm not sure what happens when a lens code is entered on the M9 or M240 that conflicts with the expected framelines.
CVickery wrote:
I believe that the early ZM18 was issued with a mount that brings up the 24/35 (35/135) framelines and as such could not be coded as the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-ASPH since it requires the 28/90 framelines. I'll have to try out the 24/2.8ASPH code and see what the results are, but I've been quite happy with the 21/2.8 results.
The M8/8.2 required both the framelines and the 6-bit code to identify the lens. I'm not sure what happens when a lens code is entered on the M9 or M240 that conflicts with the expected framelines.
On the M9 when set to no-detect, I don't recall having an issue using any preset on any lens I mounted. But this was a long ways back, I rarely use alt lenses anymore, so maybe I'm wrong.. Although I really don't think it's an issue as I do remember that I ran tons of tests back in the day.
Bijltje wrote:
Edward, do you also know how they recommend to code the 50/1.5 c-sonnar?
Zeiss believes no corrections are necessary for lenses 50 and above so there are no recommendations.
Any of the 50/1.4 lux profiles should be fine as Manoj mentioned. Corrections for such lenses are really very subtle so different profiles will not make much difference anyway.
CVickery wrote:
I believe that the early ZM18 was issued with a mount that brings up the 24/35 (35/135) framelines and as such could not be coded as the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-ASPH since it requires the 28/90 framelines. I'll have to try out the 24/2.8ASPH code and see what the results are, but I've been quite happy with the 21/2.8 results.
The M8/8.2 required both the framelines and the 6-bit code to identify the lens. I'm not sure what happens when a lens code is entered on the M9 or M240 that conflicts with the expected framelines.
My experience with the M9 is that you can manually input any profile you choose regardless of the framelines. I am not sure about the frameline effect on 6-bit coding though but I don't think Leica M bodies are that smart.
Anyway, you can get a replacement mount from Zeiss that brings up the 28/85 framelines. I ordered one for my 25/2.8 and they gave it to me for free.
Charlie, I have the Summarit 90 and think it's decent. A bit of CA, but that cleans up. I liked it for the combination of a bit more speed than the Elmarits as well as size/weight... Though when doing landscape type shots, I rarely shoot it near wide open, so an f/3.5-4 lens would also be OK, so your upcoming CV results interest me too. The 90/4 macro would be super for its size/weight, but the price is a major detraction.
Gary, what about trying the CV15 and cropping accordingly? It's about half the price of a ZM18 and smaller too... Here are some shots I did just now, quick and dirty to see what the edge shift is like. My feeling is it's possibly better than on the M9, though I haven't used this lens on the M9 with the more recent firmware versions...
There's definitely edge colour shift...
Coded as 21mm f/2.8 non-ASPH:
Uncoded:
Coded as above:
Uncoded:
Here's one that was cropped to what I thought might be about 18mm...
The first four were at f/8 and focused at infinity, where color shift will be the worst. The last one was around f/11, also focused at infinity.
Lens sharpness, at least with my copy, degrades somewhat over the outer 10-20% of the frame, so cropping it a bit would only help that aspect. My feeling is the 15 doesn't have quite the micro contrast snap of the ZM18, though I haven't used that lens extensively.
Edit: if anyone wants to try the DNGs for the first scene, I've put them in a zip on Google Drive.
Some photos while out in the woods yesterday with the M240:
First two with 21SEM, last two with 28 Cron
Again, sorry if these are a bit crunchy in the tree branches, etc...
Michael: So far the M240 has been a pleasure to use. It retains the ergonomics and heft of the M9 that I think we all love, but is much closer to the fluid operability of a modern DSLR/mirrorless camera. The extra fps makes a huge difference to me as the camera is ready that much sooner. And the sound of the shutter recock is a vast improvement. I added a Thumbs Up, which I also have on the M9, and it helps a lot. The new thumb rest on the M is OK. Better than nothing like on the M9, but with the Thumbs Up I feel my grip is a lot more secure and stable. I haven’t yet tried the new M grip, but probably won’t since the Thumbs Up works well. The only problem with the Thumbs Up is when I want to use the EVF, and I guess here the Leica grip has an advantage.
I'm finding I use it as a 'hybrid' RF/mirrorless camera more than I thought I would. I focus with the RF, and with UWAs, compose with live view. The frame lines also seem a lot more accurate, but are wider than the actual image capture area at closer distances, which I have to keep in mind as I'm getting cropping of images that I'm not used to. But can also fall back to live view. I don’t find the rangefinder patch to be any different than the M9, contrary to what others have expressed.
While it's electronically perhaps not as slick as recent products from the major players, it at least doesn’t feel like a ca. 2001 era DSLR UI any longer. I like it a lot more than the Sony a7 cameras I demoed. With those I found the button placement was too cramped or strangely positioned and the dials were too 'soft' in their function, particularly the rear dial/rocker. What bothered me most with the Sonys was the fraction of a second delay between turning a dial and the appearance of the animation in the display to show the setting. Often I overshot the setting I wanted because of this. And the ‘clickiness’ of the rear dial in particular was way too soft. Here I’m comparing more against what I’m accustomed to with the Canon 1D series, which IMO is great in this kind of tactile button/dial feel. Where the Sonys and others are likely better is higher ISO performance, like 3200+. I haven’t shot a ton with the M240 at these settings, but the few I have, I can clearly see some banding, which is somewhat disappointing.
The only odd behaviour so far has been in live view while zoomed in. Occasionally it won’t zoom out when I half-press the shutter release and fully depressing the shutter does nothing…
In terms of PP, I find colour/tint to be fairly magenta biased. Over on LUF someone suggested LR calibration settings of +10 red hue and -10 blue hue. The latter definitely gets the magenta out of blue skies, back to the way I prefer to see them. I may have mentioned before, but where I was used to daylight with the M9 being around 5200-5400 and zero tint adjustment with most lenses, with the M240 I’m often at -20 to -25 tint (+green). Not sure if this is an Adobe problem. Maybe color calibration, as suggested by Adam, would resolve this.
Thanks for the samples Ron. The CV15 was another lens that I owned and recently traded. I try to spend as little time as possible in PP and any cleanup of magenta edges meant I wasn't happy. Even when I put in the effort, I couldn't get the photo "right" after removal of the color cast. A real good performing lens but (as you mention) the outer edges never seemed to get super sharp which was important for me. Glad to see you are enjoying the M240. Will you keep the M9?
Gary - that's understandable. I've kept the lens because it worked quite nicely on various APS-C cameras, but could see it being somewhat useful on the M too, from time to time. Hopefully others will find the above samples helpful.
I had the Tamron 17 way back when... in the film days. I thought it was OK, but my feeling is it probably won't compare to the ZM18. Others seem to like the Tokina 17. There's also the Canon FD 17/4, but images I've seen from it in the a7 threads indicate it might not be great at the edges. No idea about the OM wides, but they seem to be a popular Sony a7 option at the moment... and no so cheap, either. Charlie might be familiar with some of these.
The plan is to keep the M9 for now, as a backup. It's still very early with the M240 and I think it will take a few months to get a better feel for how it deals with various situations. The differences between it and the M9 are right now very fresh and obvious.
joe88 wrote:
Ron, congrats on your M240, ... or should we wait until you finish testing to see if its a keeper?
Thanks! Functionally it's what I was hoping it would be... But as mentioned above, time will tell how it stands up in various situations. That said, I could live with it for a while if EVF performance is improved through firmware (though I'm doubtful).
Since you all are onto Olympus, here is one with M(240), Zuiko 50 1.8, urshering in the Chinese New Year of the Horse ... my son's Tomy toy
I picked up a OM2n and the Zuiko 50 1.8 from KEH. I still have some film in the freezer to finish off and have already sold off my last Leica M film camera, so the Oly is the next best thing at a fraction of the cost. Apparently the Oly OM designer was a Leica M fan.
Since yesterday I am back at home and after getting again organized I started going through all the pictures. Had a wonderful vacation but out of 26 days I had 8 days with good light and the rest was just bad weather in many different forms. But since it is always a great experience I don't mind if I have only about 50 to 60 keepers.
Ron: I have the CV15...used to belong to Gary actually The edges are pretty bad, but can be cleaned up nicely with the Flat Field plugin in Lightroom, but there is that extra step. Coded as a 21/2.8 the ZM18 pretty much doesn't need correction. Now that I have the ZM18, my CV15 is for sale (along with the VF I bought from you).
Peter - I absolutely love this set. Your PP is spot on and not overcooked in any way. What a great looking place to photograph.
Cal - I think you should keep that pristine CV15 and sell my your ZM18….
Ron, thanks for the write up about M240. I will keep my eyes opened for one after this round of gear gather the CV15's sun star just beautiful!
Joe, tell me more about Om2n. I heard it has big viewfinder, but that is it, Want hear more. It is never late to learn new thing/tool.
Peter, absolutely beautiful! that is very tough condition for M and what a beautiful nature scene How is your Leica doing in the field, any glitch? I notice the similar behavior of M9 Ron reported at cold/humid condition.
