Lens Coding Story - what a difference a continent makes ...

[gwelland]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes - I do know about non-Leica avenues to get the lenses coded and yes they were considered before choosing Leica, if only because of the extra warranty. I've used and recommended both DAG & Sherry Krauter and with hindsight should have followed my own advice and used one of them. I chose to give Leica NJ a try ...

 

Manual lens selection is fine in theory except that Leica broke it when they didn't allow for a coded lens to override the manual code setting. Many examples here about people running into this by mistake.

 

And the reason why the rant is here is because the M8 & M9 forums, where coding matters, are split. If there was one forum, I'd post it there.

[ho_co]

... My M8 upgrades took significantly less time than this and that included a new shutter and VF work too....

FWIW, my M8 upgrade was quick as well. But that fast-and-lovely upgrade introduced an issue I'm now asking NJ to deal with. Sigh.

 

And today I heard from Allendale that M8s sent for repairs are currently running 12-16 weeks.

 

Some things are quick, others aren't.

[250swb]

Oh yes, I am myself sometimes in so much of a hurry that I keep the lens on the body. And there is a remedy even for those who decide for a quick change: all Leica lenses built since second half of 2006 are coded. Or you may find 4 or 5 different lens types which are coded in the actual second hand market of the forum.

 

That sounds like the fine economic argument of a banker on a bonus. So can you explain in simple words why I should buy new lenses just to get the coding when at most it would cost £150 each for Leica to do it? Is it true, are you a banker?

 

Steve

[ModernMan]

In talking to Leica NJ about this it appears that the necessary parts (coded lens flanges) are available for purchase. So, I guess you could consider making the parts change yourself.

 

However, Leica pointed out that when they change the flange they also test and adjust the focus. This process is typically a "covergence by successive approximations" procedure, and involves installing shims then re-testing and re-adjusting until within tolerance. Also, note that they no doubt have (1) a test aparatus which enables quick and accurate verification of lens focus accuracy at various distances, and (2) an inventory of shims of various thickness to adjust the focus.

 

So, too bad Leica NJ is so backlogged, but no doubt of value to have them test and adjust the lens calibration as required. Also note that the price of the part alone was only slightly less than the price of the part installed and calibrated.

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Its really not that bad, the flange is replaceable, exactly what Leica does when the lens is send to them anyway.

 

I dremmel coded two of my M lenses, used the template to mark the black dots, then used a battery-dremmel to gently engrave a groove over each of the marks by pulling the bit towards the center in a slow motion, one strike for each mark.. before engraving I taped the lens with two layers of blue 3M masking tape. complete procedure maybe 4-5 minutes. the lens is now permanently coded and no longer loose the code when i rub it.

 

.

[glenerrolrd]

I have sent in a couple of lenses to Leica for coding. In all cases checked, cleaned, calibrated, re-certified, each one. I bet that took more than an hour, each.

 

I can tell you thats not the standard practice unless you paid for CLA or they decided to do it for free. I had a dozen lenses coded and I visited NJ to watch . Normal procedure is to do a mount exchange and a light external cleanup. 25% of my lenses required had to be sent back for calibration issues. The ones sent back were never put on a camera to test as they were obviously off to an extent that could not be missed.

 

I assumed as you did that the Leica process would be to a higher standard and that I would be getting an inexpensive inspection of my glass. Thats not how its done.

 

I do know that the summiluxes as a group are far harder to do . The mounts are often shimmed during final assembly to accomplish proper calibration. The mounts were in some cases inconsistent over the years making mount exchange impractical . For the summiluxes ....this can be a devil of a job and often requires testing and calibration. I had to pay major repairs for the noctilux and the 75 lux (about $700 each).

 

I had problems with all but one summilux (amazing the 35 asph lux was perfect) and only one of the other lenses.

 

I also had DAG do some zeiss lenses and the 135apo . The zeiss were easily,fast and cheap. The 135 was a b@#%^% and it took DAG three times to correct the lens for infinity focus. (this lens was fine before we changed the mount).

 

Some lenses are easy and really only require a mount change..other are difficult and can lead to complex calibration efforts. This doesn t change with the repair facility you choose.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Roger, that's disappointing to hear, particularly since one of the Leica selling points on having them code the lenses was precisely what you say they didn't do.

 

You say you watched the process, but that four of the twelve lenses were "never put on a camera to test." If I understand correctly, that would mean that you watched them put some on a camera, but not others? I'm surprised they would normally use a camera to calibrate lenses. I'd have expected at least a lens-checking jig.

 

Thanks for the rather dismal first-hand report.

 

But in my experience, customers are normally not allowed in the workroom during business hours, so at least you got royal treatment even if your lenses didn't.