35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, calibrate or not?

[adli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

 

I have bought a 35 Summilux pre-ASPH. I know it suffers from focus shift, but I would expect it to be in focus wide open?  My specimen is front focusing on the wider apertures, but I am unsure whether this is within the expected tolerance? Attached is a series shot at the Spyder lens calibrator at apertures from 1.4 to 8.0 (increasing ISO to compensate for decreasing aperture). The lens will mainly be used on analog cameras, but occasionally on my M10 as well. Would this lens benefit from calibration or is this within Leica tolerances and a calibration would not improve anything?

 

regards,

Arne

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[luigi bertolotti]

I suppose that your tests were made at 1 meter (minimum focus distance) : do you think to use it often next to this distance ? I ask this because in my opinion the behavior of your lens does not show a strong front focus... and looking at the writing (Spyderlenscal) I recognize a typical signature of the old Summilux pre asph when you gradually close from 1,4 to 4 (i have two of them... one is really VERY old - 1.765.xxx) : I think that expecially on analog Leica, at distances from, say, 2,5m onwards, you don't feel problem of focusing; personally, I would send the lens for calibration only if a general CLA from a good lab is also advisable (glass cleaning, general tightening etc...) : the Summilux 35 is a someway "precious" lens and it probably deserves it.

 

By the way : the problem of focus shift of the Summilux 35 indeed is usually referred to the first Asph version ("pre-FLE") and it arose mainly with the advent of digital Leicas... the classic "Old" Summilux has never been regarded as a particularly sharp lens... and with film certain details about focus shift were much less clear than with the normal pixel peeping that one does on PC screen..

Edited April 1, 2017 by luigi bertolotti

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[adli]

Hi Luigi,

 

Thanks for the advice.  The test shots were made at 110cm. I tend to shot a lot of portraits which is at close focus, the rest more landscape at 10-15 meters or longer.

 

Btw, I have noticed that even though the focus scale stops at 1 meter, the focus ring can be turned to around 0.9m?

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[luigi bertolotti]

Well.. apparently not so different from my ones (the black one has been CLAed-calibrated): if you have a trustable lab next to you, I think that an inspection could be Worth (or, anyway, after you have used the lens in practical usage... can be you are satisfied with it, end point)

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited April 1, 2017 by luigi bertolotti

[luigi bertolotti]

btw.. variants of lenses Always intrigue collectors... I never noticed that the position of feet/meters scales was inverted during old Lux 35 life... your item is surely younger than my black one (is 2.290.126)

Edited April 1, 2017 by luigi bertolotti

[adli]

Hi,

 

Mine is 3.375.248, apparently from 1985.

[Frase]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First thing I would do is compare pics at f1.4 and f2 between live view and rangefinder focusing that will tell you right off what the problem is, as far as I can see its nothing to do with focus shift which shouldn't be a problem with that lens.

From the pictures it does look like its front focusing especially at f2, I have the similar age lens the focus was off (long story) two different repair shops tried and failed to fix it as they thought it was the rangefinder cam that was wrong, I eventually fixed it myself by changing the shims in the front of the lens. Once the lens is disassembled its quite easy by trial and error to fix even easier if you have live view.

 

Here's mine wide open

15fbpicwideopen35lux_1 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

 

crop

 

15fbpicwideopen35lux_2 by f4saregreat!, on Flickr

Edited April 1, 2017 by Frase

[adli]

Hi Frase, I think my pictures speak for them selves, no need to check live view. They were all taken at the same distance at different apertures.

[pico]

Luigi's comments are right-on. I'm on my third 35mm Summilux (pre-asph), the other two dead due to damage during news coverage in the Sixties. I persist with the lens because wide-open it has a special character which goes away at F/2 to make it much like a Summicron. Two lenses in one.

 

In my opinion, your test shows good results, but you should know that at longer distances it behaves differently to better outcomes . Don't muck with it. You have a good one. Enjoy!

 

I can find no point of focus in this picture, probably because it was shot at 1/15th at F/1.4.

But it's still good for me.

Edited April 1, 2017 by pico

[Frase]

Hi Frase, I think my pictures speak for them selves, no need to check live view. They were all taken at the same distance at different apertures.

No what I mean is live view will tell you if the lens is off or the rangefinder is.

[lct]

Your pics are too small to be sure but if your copy behaves like mine it must be calibrated to be sharp at about f/2.8. Don't be surprised if it looks softer at f/1.4 and f/2 then. It is not a sharp lens at those apertures anyway, especially at f/1.4 but that's what gives it its charm.

[adli]

Sorry, I don't get your point. How will live view be different from the captured pictures?  To my understanding, live view will show the exact same effect as the capture picture.

 

No what I mean is live view will tell you if the lens is off or the rangefinder is.

[adli]

I am well aware of the look of the lens wide open   

 

Mine seems to be calibrated at f/2.8 as you say. I was a bit surprised by this, I expected it to be calibrated for wide open, but it seems not the case. Thank you anyway, for the moment I will keep the lens as it is.

 

Your pics are too small to be sure but if your copy behaves like mine it must be calibrated to be sharp at about f/2.8. Don't be surprised if it looks softer at f/1.4 and f/2 then. It is not a sharp lens at those apertures anyway, especially at f/1.4 but that's what gives it its charm.

[Frase]

focus using live view then focus using rangefinder is the lens focus scale in the same position. From your pictures I don't think the lens is calibrated at F2.8 it seems to be front focusing at all apertures its just more hidden with the greater depth of field at F2.8.

Looking again the point of focus does change at F4.

Edited April 2, 2017 by Frase

[adli]

I think I understand your point. You mean to focus with live view and then check if rangefinder agrees? Well, it will of course reveal which aperture the the total system (lens + rangefinder) is calibrated for. But I cant see that it will give much more information than my pictures, you can derive the same information from them.

 

Btw, I do think the lens is calibrated for f/2.8, attached is 100% crops of f/2.8 and f/4.0, should be easier to view than the reduced size pictures in my original post. At f/4.0 it seems to back focus slightly.

 

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[lct]

Normal focus shift at f/4 here seemingly. With an EVF you may get sharper results at all apertures if you focus stop down. The glow will remain the same though fortunately .

[Frase]

At F4 its pretty bad, when I sorted mine I think I had it probably at F2, I find after that its quite hard to recognise where the focus point is. If it is focus shift then again using live view you should be able to see this by focusing at different apertures. As already said in the thread its not a lens known for bad focus shift.

Good luck. 

[adli]

Hi Frase,

 

In my opinion, focus shift is easier to detect if one keeps the focus fixed when changing the aperture. Anyway, with the helps of Luigi and lct I have already established that my lens behaves normal, but is calibrated to f/2.8 instead of f/1.4 which I first expected it to be.

 

Case closed from my side :-)

[TomB_tx]

I've noticed the older Leica lenses in my collection have some focus shift when stopping down, if you test carefully, and at least most were calibrated for exact focus when closed one stop from fully open. I sent two of my '50s Summicrons to DAG for CLA and asked if he would check and adjust the focus calibration. He reported that Leitz originally calibrated them at f2.8 so the shift would have less effect over the range of normal use, and said they should be left that way. If you know how they shift you learn to compensate.

Of course, film was more forgiving on slight focus shift than digital sensors, but if you calibrate for perfect focus wide open, the shift at f4 or so may be worse, and traditionally more photos were made at f4 than wide open.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Cliff S]

I'm not convinced. Sorry. I had my 35mm Lux FLE lens calibrated and its tack across all apertures. Easy to check by taking a shot at 1.4 use RF then taking the same shot using LV and focus mag and then seeing which is sharper. They're always identical. At higher apertures because DOF increases, I can decide to be less precise with RF and still be sharp.

 

If you're off at wider apertures it means, to my knowledge, it can easily be calibrated to be sharp across the range. I would send it in. Takes a month. And then you'll have a lens that you're confident in.