DAG does what Leica could not

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There have been many posts about the tight, "sticky" focus turn with some samples of the 50 Summilux asph. I love the lens except for that unfortunate characteristic, which mine has had since new four years ago.

 

I tried "breaking in" the lens for a year, to no avail, then sent it to Leica NJ. I've had good experiences with Leica service in the past, and have had no complaints. When this lens was being repaired, they were even kind enough to make an exception and let me talk directly to the technician who explained that, despite his efforts (including, as I recall, new grease), the lens was as good as it was going to get, and that tight tolerances were what they were in some cases.

 

I decided to just live with the lens and rather than using the tab for fine-tuning the focus, I just got used to using the focus ring. Not a huge deal, but frustrating on an expensive lens, especially compared to my other lenses which have buttery smooth focus.

 

A couple of weeks ago I was having a chat with Dale Photo in Florida and Josh suggested that I give Don Goldberg a call. (I realize that I might have exchanged my lens for another sample early on, but after waiting this long, an exchange would involve considerable cost.) I think Josh knew that Don could sometimes work magic that Leica could not. I was skeptical, but what the heck, only a call. So I did.

 

Don said that the solution would be relatively easy. He explained that Leica, for unknown reasons (perhaps cost), uses grease in their lenses that is not nearly as good as the old Leitz grease from the 60's, and even if it starts out fine, it apparently doesn't hold up well. He proposed that I send the lens to him so that he could replace the grease with the new "old" Leitz grease, which he has in abundant supply. For $100, why not?

 

I got my lens back today, exactly 2 weeks after I shipped to him, just as he estimated. It focuses perfectly, better than it ever has since brand new. And because return shipping was more expensive than he estimated, he ended up charging me only $90 for the repair. Oh, and he inspected the lens to ensure that everything else was in good order.

 

This experience did a couple of things for me: one, have a bit less faith in Leica and Leica service; and second, have great reason to deal with Don as future needs arise.

 

Jeff

[Jeff S]

Not a big deal that the mods moved this thread from Customer Service to M Lenses, but the message, and my conclusion, is much broader than the specific lens repair. It speaks to how Leica both specs and services its products, and how it communicates issues to its customers. And the level of service DAG offers.

 

Just sayin'.

 

Jeff

Edited July 10, 2013 by Jeff S

[kokoshawnuff]

I'd actually go to Don before Leica with anything that he is willing to work on (ie almost everything other than the most digital stuff)...your example is a perfect example why.

 

The Leica techs seem to often work blindly following a set of procedures that are clearly outlined, whereas Don looks at issues logically and proceeds with solutions that might never occur to Leica. I often hear of people sending a camera and lens into Leica for a simple calibration, and it being returned 8 weeks later with zero change. I've never heard of such failed results from Dons work...

[TomB_tx]

I agree about using Don when you need things done right. I've even sent him a new lens for calibration rather than have it fixed under (Zeiss) warranty, as I trust Don.

[spydrxx]

A couple of years ago I foolishly put my M4 with a 50 Summicron which was buttery smooth on the hood of my car while I reached down to pick up something in the driveway. It was a nasty windy day, and the camera crashed down, lens first onto the pavement. With a sinking feeling I picked it up and the glass was intact, but the focusing mechanism erratic (out of round or eccentric) and impossible to turn without great force. I cursed my stupidity, and after 2 days contacted Don, who told me he thought it was repairable, so I sent it off. A couple of weeks later it came back, and to my shock and delight, was as buttery smooth and precise as when it was new. After that, I knew Don could work miracles, not just repair cameras.

[CaptZoom]

DAG = dagcamera?

[TomB_tx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

DAG = dagcamera?

Yes Don Goldberg, 2nd generation Leica tech.

[CaptZoom]

Thank you for confirming.

[MarkP]

This all reminds me of my experience over the years of getting my cars serviced, although more so in the past when the engines were not all computer controlled. Other than for warriantable repairs I would take the car to get the serviced by my own mechanic who specialised in high-performance European cars.

 

It never ceased to amaze me how much better it performed after being serviced by my mechanic.

 

The car company workshops service to the book, rather than to the car.

 

 

 

ps. now I have a way too large mortgage, kids in private schools, and Leica GAS I no longer drive an expensive European car.

I've got the Subaru, but if I'm a really really good boy my wife will let me drive her Merc

Edited August 24, 2013 by MarkP

[Jeff S]

The lesson I learned (in my original post) is that, even if it's a warranty item, which this would have been had I been more timely in my complaint, Leica wouldn't have been able to fix it, but Don would have. So, I would certainly try Leica first, and once, on a future warranty repair. But if not satisfied, I would pay the money and have Don do the job.

 

I've heard equally good things about Sherry Krauter, but she only deals with film Ms.

 

Jeff

[hoppyman]

My read is that the Summilux 50 ASPH seems to have some design characteristics that were modified in later Floating Element models.

I can only speak for my specific instances and my country. As I understand it focus calibration adjustments involving only shimming with the 35 for example can be done locally (mine was) but more complex disassembly requires return to Solms. I was told that in every case for the 50 it is returned to the production line for complete rebuilding.

 

My own was bought new 6 years ago. It has been to Solms twice. From new the focus action was smooth but too firm to let me use the tab with precision. I chose to fully cycle it some hundreds of times to "break it in". The action did become lighter and I then used it normally with the tab, however at two years it had noticeable play in the movement. That is some rotation before actual movement of the focus. The technician at Solms who volunteered to check my lenses for me (my APO 75 too) when I was having my M8 upgraded told me that the "play" was very detrimental to accuracy, especially if it is inconsistent dependant on direction and amount. I had really just artificially aged the mechanism tolerances rather than "fixed" the rotational effort required.

 

As mentioned in previous posts on this "your lenses are good, we can make them better" and they did and for free. On return the 50 focus action was entirely smooth and precise and the rotation easily managed with the tab and the accuracy appeared fine in normal (handheld) use. The subtle changeover point can just be detected for the close focus mechanism as always.

 

Fast forward three more years of normal amateur use (a couple of thousand frames a year for this individual lens) and the focus accuracy was now proven out at careful testing on my M9 . I was now missing consistently in close. Believe me I reviewed every other cause for error starting with my further aged eyes. I cannot determine any factor explaining why that should have changed. It went to Solms again and now is behaving very well again. Careful bench testing at home shows it to be within a cm in close. Better than I can hand hold probably. That servicing was quite expensive. I try to mentally average it out with the previous one done for free in 2009

 

One incidental benefit with the new M now is that I can easily directly prove that what the sensor shows is happily exactly coincident with what my eye detects with the rangefinder. That is the single best new function of the new system for me.

[Jeff S]

One incidental benefit with the new M now is that I can easily directly prove that what the sensor shows is happily exactly coincident with what my eye detects with the rangefinder. That is the single best new function of the new system for me.

 

That's what I keep saying about LV, for folks who think it's an unnecessary and misguided add-on. Even if I never used it for taking pics, its use for detecting focus mis-calibration is worth every penny. One thing it can't determine, at least not without other lens tests, is whether any mis-calibration resides with the lens or the camera.

 

As far as the 50 Summilux focus turn issues, my problems seem to have been solved with just a bit of better grease. Don said that Leica's pointing to the floating element, or any other such thing, was just an excuse.

 

Jeff

Edited August 25, 2013 by Jeff S

[CalArts 99]

btw, Don is the son of Norman Goldberg http://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2012/12/m2-250-leica-few-have-ever-seen.html )

 

Skill clearly runs in the family.....

 

[250swb]

Every time I have had a sticky/notchy Leica lens, new or second hand, which must be three or four over the many years, it has been solved by undoing the lens flange and gradually tightening the screws up again in opposite to opposite order, just like torquing the head bolts on a car engine. For the tiny price of an 00 screwdriver it may save 90 dollars spent on magic grease.

 

Steve

[Jeff S]

For the tiny price of an 00 screwdriver it may save 90 dollars spent on magic grease.

 

Gosh, why didn't the Leica techs, or DAG, think of that? Especially given all the 50 Summiluxes that have been problematic. Stupid repair guys.

 

Jeff

[hoppyman]

Jeff alignment of the flange has nothing to do with sticky or overly firm focus ring rotation nor assembly tolerances/adjustments for the element groups or focus helical mechanism of course.

[Jeff S]

His comment specifically referenced a "sticky/notchy lens" and "saving $90 spent on magic grease," which was the issue and solution in my post (except that there was no magic involved, just good old stuff).

 

Jeff

[hoppyman]

Jeff my point is that the torque values of the bayonet flange fasteners have got nothing to do with sticky or notchy focus action. The properties/condition of the lubricant within the helical mechanism could certainly affect the smoothness and rotational force needed to move the focus. "Sticky/notchy" is due directly to tolerances/accuracy of mechanical components and their assemblyy and lubricant qualities/quantities/properties. The last being what your repairer was referring to I guess (and I believe that he has an excellent reputation).

Are you referring perhaps to alignment of the flange with respect to the focus plane or maybe the effort required to mount/unmount the lens with the body?

Edited August 26, 2013 by hoppyman

[Jeff S]

Are you referring perhaps to alignment of the flange with respect to the focus plane?

 

Huh? I'm not referring to a thing, other than a response to 250swb's post preceding mine. His referred to all the issues you mention, which mirror those in my original post. Unless he misunderstood my post.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[hoppyman]

Yep, you and I are talking about the same remarks.

In your post at #1 and mine at #11 we are both talking about overly tight operation of the focus ring and yours has been fixed by DAG (and mine by Solms).

I was just trying to think of any reason why anyone would associate the fasteners for the bayonet flange with the focus operation problem you and I were talking about :confused:

If the bayonet flange was misaligned or loose or wrongly shimmed it might possibly affect focus accuracy but it has nothing to do with tightness or stickiness of operation of the focus ring

 

Not to worry. I'm pleased for you that you found someone who has got your lens working exactly as you want it.

Edited August 26, 2013 by hoppyman