Alnitak Posted November 17, 2009 Author Share #41 Posted November 17, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) For anyone that is interested, here's a lovely example of an out of alignment rangefinder. This is what all of my lenses look like, but it most noticeable at 50mm and up, as the DOF becomes narrower and narrower. This is with the 75mm Summicron at f/2. The focus was on the crossed lines right under the tip of the pen. I could sit there and shoot this 100 times and one or two would come out OK from me moving, but the rest would look like this. For reference, those lines are one centimeter apart. The M9 is on its way to NJ for Leica to adjust. Hopefully it will be back before this weekend as I need it, but who knows. I am sure they will fix it just fine, it's just hard to be apart. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 17, 2009 Posted November 17, 2009 Hi Alnitak, Take a look here M9 Focus/Rangefinder Calibration. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
arnold kaufman Posted November 17, 2009 Share #42 Posted November 17, 2009 Yes, Jaap is right. To me, it's "vertical" and "horizontal," but I tried keeping up with the whippersnappers and got caught. (Glad to learn there's someone else who thinks the way I do. ) I even heard a museum docent comment a couple weeks back that a painting was "in portrait orientation." I'm afraid the anonymous They have won on this one. Glad your focus checks out, Arnold. It usually does, but it's reassuring to check. Howard: Thank you I know portrait from landscape when I an printing images I just didn't pick up it was the same when taking pictures.Now I know (you learn something new every day.) Arnold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 18, 2009 Share #43 Posted November 18, 2009 Now this test chart I like. The rulings are better and spaced farther apart, and the text at intervals also helps. I was not trying to pick on you A, but rather on the usual (Jackson) test chart I mentioned and assumed you were using. I just don't think the usual test chart is that legible. If you go back and read all of the focus testing threads, including the ones with samples and actual measurements discussed, there is not that great intertester agreement, if you know what I mean. A couple of threads did not even agree the sample was focused to front or back. I am not surprised there is great intratester reliability with this kind of test because of the ambiguity when the chart is read. I do not think the majority of people have been as careful with their testing. As was pointed out, it is not just a matter of making the camera and lens combination perfect at closest focus as this will not ensure accuracy throughout the range. A test at closest focus or infinity is in some sense a best case and I doubt that many users can home test accurately at, say, ten feet. To be fair, the front focus in the example you posted is a lot more than the 1/2" = approx 1cm we were discussing before. Hopefully the camera will come back as a champ, and please update. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sps Posted November 18, 2009 Share #44 Posted November 18, 2009 My turn. My new black M9 front focusses almost 2" with 7 of my 9 Leica lenses. Ironically it slightly back focusses with the other two, which I never thought looked sharp on my M8 or M8.2. I had the Leica 1.4x magnifier in place for all my focussing, and my new eyeglasses prescription on. This is my 6th Leica body, and I naively hoped this situation was isolated and wouldn't affect me. I will dissapointedly send the body to New Jersey for calibration. By the way, this is a new body (SN 381####). The M9 box was safely packaged inside a large box stuffed with foam pieces. There was no sign at all of any wear or damage on any box. I've dropped M bodies and not had rangefinders go out, so I can see no one to blame other than the factory. I'm sure once its sorted I'll forget this happened, but for now I'm just dissapointed. On the positive side, I'm seeing all the benefits others have described in terms of WB, Color, Jpeg performance and noise. The ISO button makes life so much easier. Having owned an M8, and currently owning an M7 and M8.2, I can tell you that I prefer the shutter sound of the M8.2 to the M9. Running both in discreet, the double clunk of the M9 just doesn't sound right. The recocking is higher pitched than on my M8.2. That being said, the overall noise signature, while busier, is quieter than my M8.2, so I won't complain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 18, 2009 Share #45 Posted November 18, 2009 It is a phenomen that has been documented before: despite shutters being the same type (and M8.2 and M9 are), there is quite a bit of sample variation in sound. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 18, 2009 Share #46 Posted November 18, 2009 As was pointed out, it is not just a matter of making the camera and lens combination perfect at closest focus as this will not ensure accuracy throughout the range. A test at closest focus or infinity is in some sense a best case and I doubt that many users can home test accurately at, say, ten feet. . That is true. Exact focus testing requires a collimator. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share #47 Posted November 18, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I also prefer the sound of the M8.2 shutter. It's mainly the sound of the re-cock on the M9; its a bit higher-pitched as noted. No big deal though. My M9 just arrived in NJ today. I'm hoping they turn it around quickly as I need it for a trip next week. :-( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted November 20, 2009 Author Share #48 Posted November 20, 2009 OK, update. I sent the M9 in on Tuesday, it arrived on Wednesday in NJ, and was turned around on Thursday. I followed up with calls. They never answered any emails, but the lady who takes the phone is very nice, and helped make sure I got the M9 back before I took off for a trip this weekend. Kudos to Leica for a quick repair. They do need to teach people how to use email, however. I just did a quick test here at my desk, and it's nice and spot on with the lenses I have with me. During all of my testing I did discover a few of my lenses (and I must admit to having 6 Leica lenses and 13 Voigtlander lenses!) that are off. The M9 is more demanding of the lenses than the M8.2 due to the narrower DOF on the full frame. So, a couple lenses will now be sent off for adjustment. The works statement said: "Adjust R/F. Repair Focus. Check and adjust for good working order." It then lists the three lenses they took test shots with: 35/1.4, 50/2 and 75/2. So, good news, and I am happy. Now to send off the offending lenses--one of which back focuses, and two of which front focus, and I will be in good shape! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted November 20, 2009 Share #49 Posted November 20, 2009 Given the vagaries of rangefinder calibration versus lens calibration, won't you need to send the M9 in as well as the offending lenses with the specific instruction not to change the camera's adjustment (which is fine for all your other lenses) but to make the three offenders match the camera? Chris Not that I want you to go without your M9 for any longer than necessary... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 20, 2009 Share #50 Posted November 20, 2009 no the lenses should be adjusted to standard, which won't require the camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted November 21, 2009 Share #51 Posted November 21, 2009 There really IS a 'standard'? Is it reliable enough that a lens might be adjusted to it without reference to the body it will be used on? I'd love to think you are right (you probably are), but experience and cynicism get in the way because others may not live up to that standard. Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
novice9 Posted November 21, 2009 Share #52 Posted November 21, 2009 How difficult is it to adjust the rangefinder oneself, rather than send it in? I would think it would be quite easy with the allen wrench. Anyone try to do it themself? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted November 21, 2009 Share #53 Posted November 21, 2009 There really IS a 'standard'? Is it reliable enough that a lens might be adjusted to it without reference to the body it will be used on? I'd love to think you are right (you probably are), but experience and cynicism get in the way because others may not live up to that standard. Chris sure, how could you have interchangeable lenses without a standard. Making sure that each camera and lens is "close enough" to the standard has always been the tail end of the manufacturing process. I think there was a fast Nikon rangefinder lens that was individually mated to the camera, and I'm sure there are other examples, but there was still an underlying standard in that case, too. When you home test, the error that you measure is the error for that particular lens and body combination. (And the rangefinder or lens may go out of adjustment the next week and you get a different error.) Even if you test with two different bodies in all combinations with two different lenses, you cannot determine the absolute errors in the individual cameras and lenses. You have to compare to some standard for that. No doubt you can ask Leica to pay extra attention to a particular lens and body that you send in, especially if you have some notorious lens like a 50/1.0 or a 35/1.4. But how far do you want to take the idea? Do you want to dedicate a different camera to every lens and never unmount it? (Has been done.) But I'm sure you are right, there is never any 100% guarantee that whoever does an adjustment will be perfect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted November 21, 2009 Share #54 Posted November 21, 2009 Of course there is a standard: Flange to focal plane 27.8mm +/- 0.01mm. The reality is a different matter. Early this spring I found that a used but mint 90mm Elmarit-M could not be focused to infinity, and front-focused to about one meter at 5 meters! Leica Solms wanted both my M8 and the Elmarit for adjustment; I told them not to touch the camera, and the lens returned tack sharp. (After nearly eight weeks -- I mention this to encourage others in the same situation.) I have not had a chance to check my new M9 with my longer lenses yet. The weather has been such that you need a hell of a flash to check anything at more than five meters, in fact. But I did recently try it with a Noctilux 0.95 wide open at two meters, and it was smack on. Now of course the Nocti may have been off by just the amount needed to compensate for a camera error in the opposite direction ... The old man from the Age of Tape Measures Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted November 22, 2009 Share #55 Posted November 22, 2009 How difficult is it to adjust the rangefinder oneself, rather than send it in? I would think it would be quite easy with the allen wrench. Anyone try to do it themself? There are three adjustment points, the wheel is for infinity, but should be adjusted together with the other two for middling and short distances, which can be found behind the red dot. As they all influence the other two, it is a bit of a lucky dip to give just the one in the roller wheel a twist with the Allen Wrench. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SullyPCV Posted November 24, 2009 Share #56 Posted November 24, 2009 Just remember that Leica tests and adjusts the rangefinder for three different distances (see the photos of the M9 production line Luigi mentioned) and previously did the same without electronic assistance. Leica specifically recommends against this home remedy, since adjusting for one distance (with the cam-tracker and Allen wrench) can throw the camera out for other distances. OTOH, as mentioned here, many folks on the forum have done well with the Allen key adjustment. Howard! Good to see you are still kicking. I just had an M9 returned for front focus. I've used the Infinity adjustment many times to tweak an otherwise "virgin" rangefinder into alignment. The other adjustments can be checked at 1 and 15 meters and seldom need to be adjusted unless the camera has been disassembled by someone who doesn't know what they are doing. If you are ever in Austin, come by and say hi. Jerry Sullivan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrbelmuda Posted May 12, 2010 Share #57 Posted May 12, 2010 Hi guy's, just a note to say that my brand new M9 in australia was received with rangefinder out of calibration, infinity out of focus, and can you believe the local importer does not have a qualified M9 service tech and is talking of sending the M9 back to Germany for a 6 week turnaround?? I am hoping that there may be an alternative. Love the camera, worried about the support though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anguish Posted May 12, 2010 Share #58 Posted May 12, 2010 Just got a note from the company saying turnaround time for US is "at least two weeks." This was unacceptable to me for a simple rangefinder adjustment due to a short drop. I found a pro shop in Calif that's been in biz 48 years and the M9 is there now. Turnaround - next day shipping. Yes, possibly voided my warranty, etc. But I can't be w/o my M9 and it seems unreasonable to have to ship it over the pond or wait at least 2 weeks. I could send it to Solms, pay air, pay extra for rush, etc. Somewhere along the line I had to make what seemed like a commonsense decision. Why can't a pro camera repairman make this simple adjustment, I ask. I guess I'll find out. One on the shoulder, one in the bag, one in the shop... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
piblondin Posted May 12, 2010 Share #59 Posted May 12, 2010 Just got a note from the company saying turnaround time for US is "at least two weeks." This was unacceptable to me for a simple rangefinder adjustment due to a short drop. I found a pro shop in Calif that's been in biz 48 years and the M9 is there now. Turnaround - next day shipping. Yes, possibly voided my warranty, etc. But I can't be w/o my M9 and it seems unreasonable to have to ship it over the pond or wait at least 2 weeks. I could send it to Solms, pay air, pay extra for rush, etc. Somewhere along the line I had to make what seemed like a commonsense decision. Why can't a pro camera repairman make this simple adjustment, I ask. I guess I'll find out.One on the shoulder, one in the bag, one in the shop... What's the place in CA that you ended up using? Thanks! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
57andrew Posted May 12, 2010 Share #60 Posted May 12, 2010 As a new Leica M9 owner and only having used a 1959 M3 before all this out of alignment stuff spooks me. I have the 0.95 Noctilux and now feel I need to do some serious testing as I do get images at MFD that don't look tack sharp to me but I have been assuming it is a) inexperience and/or my ageing eyes (I wear variofocals). On the other hand this shot of my elder daughter at her mum's birthday dinner (taken in the evening without flash) looks good. It says F1.4 but my Photoshop CS4 doesn't seem to register F0.95! I get all sorts of odd exif data if I shoot wide open. Andrew (worried) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.