If I'm staying out of Cap One and working in Lightroom/Camera Raw I've been using a combination of Brush tool or Gradient and picking a color opposite of the shift
in very low amounts (4-8) Generally does the trick but aggravating nonetheless and creates additional work.
As I'm up in Montreal, snow and ice is a reality for 4-5 months of the year so the M9 is proving to be a disappointment in this regard.
Unfortunately, i drank the 'M' Kool-aid and am having difficulty kicking the habit.
Originally, the 28 2.8 asph but has been dumped as it is near impossible to color cast correct in some situations despite being fantastically sharp and small.
The 28 2.0 is twice the price and twice the size but does not perform as well in a landscape application where f11-f16 might be needed for hyperfocal reasons.
Settled on the 24 2,8 asph. Much better colorcast response but still a nuisance. I've even seeing some cast with 35 2.0 and 50 2.0 but modest but, as Eleanor mentioned,
not apparent on many subjects/scenes- except where I live and shoot much of the time
Spent the day printing out close to 30 17 x 22's of various tests between my M9 and my 5DMkll with 24 shift and a few Zeiss wide primes.
End of the day using the same sharpening routine and amounts (despite all the claims of sogginess due to anti-aliasing filter with 5D) there is absolutely
no apparent fine detail/sharpness advantage to the M9. Form factor,yes. Portability,yes but no sharpness advantage. Ease of getting a wide file to print is easy advantage to 5D.
Anyhow, apologies to all for steering the thread away from the core Medium Format topic.