Rangefinderproblems on new M9s

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

ie - that paragraph you copied there was written by someone with a lot to learn at that point in time. The other thread is better to read because it is where I am at now with it in terms of a lot more experience.

 

Yep--understood. And I'm sure I have a few surprise still to find; I'm still testing (and since posting have found a small problem with the Solms-verified Nocti, but only with the Nocti, so I might leave it. Or I might make the adjustment. As I said in the other thread, I'll leave the beer till afterwards )

[Julian Thompson]

Well if you were going to find an issue then I guess the Nocti would be the one !

 

Of course, Brett touched on something in the other thread which was the DOF issue - you need to factor this in, in terms of making alllowances for the slight focus shift as you open the aperture.

[Jamie Roberts]

Well if you were going to find an issue then I guess the Nocti would be the one !

 

Of course, Brett touched on something in the other thread which was the DOF issue - you need to factor this in, in terms of making alllowances for the slight focus shift as you open the aperture.

 

Nope--I'm testing at f1... between f1 and 2 is all I care about on the Nocti. I have another 50 for other apertures

[gwelland]

I sent my M9 and a bunch of lenses off to Dag for entire outfit calibration.

 

In my case the M9 was apparently in need of rangefinder adjustment for close focus, although infinity was fine. That's a relatively new, unmolested camera so essentially that's how it left the factory.

 

The rangefinder was out but testing of my lenses showed that my 21/1.4 was on the money, as was my 90/2.8 Elmarit. My 35/1.4 & 50/1.4 both had to be corrected which matched my experience with those lenses (plus these were the only ones I'd bought used recently other than the 90/2.8 which had recently been to Leica for coding).

 

So, count me in as another M9 user who needed rangefinder adjustment. Looks like a trend to me.

[jplomley]

IMHO, any camera being distributed through Leica USA should undergo a secondary inspection. A second pass at quality control if you will. There is just no excuse for a $7K camera to require a rangefinder adjustment out of the box. No excuse.

[lct]

IMHO, any camera being distributed through Leica USA should undergo a secondary inspection. A second pass at quality control if you will...

Agree but the second control should be done by the dealers themselves as some problems like RF misalignments are often caused by handling or carriage actually. My dealers would have never sold be a body before checking it seriously in the past. Looks like some of them are not competent enough to do the least quality control before delivery any more.

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

IMHO, any camera being distributed through Leica USA should undergo a secondary inspection. A second pass at quality control if you will. There is just no excuse for a $7K camera to require a rangefinder adjustment out of the box. No excuse.

 

Hey Jeff--I gather some people's don't need adjustment out of the box... but here on the forum you're going to hear about the ones that do

 

Mine was among them, though I have to say I could have lived with it as delivered... it wasn't that far out. But I do like to have optimal sharpness for a whole range of sometimes older lenses, and I'm not sure how Leica can second guess any given lens collection.

 

Instead of having a second level quality control, I'd much rather Leica invent some equivalent of "self lens adjust" for end users that 1) isn't scary as heck and 2) is easy to manage. Maybe that means developing some tooling; I don't know, but I'd pay for it if it was simple, repeatable, and effective.

[Leicakillen]

IMHO, any camera being distributed through Leica USA should undergo a secondary inspection. A second pass at quality control if you will. There is just no excuse for a $7K camera to require a rangefinder adjustment out of the box. No excuse.

 

I totally agree - there is no excuse to deliver 60 000 SEK cameras that are not OK in this sense. Quality control has not been working properly at Leica.

But please remember we have TWO problems as a Leica user - the body AND the lenses. Hopefully the bodies/rangefinders will be in better shape. But we all expect to be able to use all of our old lovely Leica lenses on our new M9 bodies. But a lot of the old (some new as well) lenses also needs adjustments for perfect focus. IMHO I think that is a bigger problem.

My new M9 had a front focus - the body went to Solms for adjustments, came back still focus problems with my 6 lenses (among them a new 50/1,4 ASPH) - and body and lenses are now back to Solms. My learning - do send body AND lenses together for adjustments.

BTW - is it expected that this adjustments of lenses are free of charge???

 

 

Regards from Stockholm

 

/Anders

[gwelland]

BTW - is it expected that this adjustments of lenses are free of charge???

 

If the lens is under warranty then I'd expect so. Otherwise, I very much doubt it.

[thrice]

Mine is one of those that needs no adjustment with any of my lenses (not just Leica). However, I agree that QC should be tighter or shipping should be more closely controlled, wherever the problem is caused. I get nervous thinking a firm bump will throw my rangefinder alignment out!

 

They should just mark the boxes as glass and fragile. I guess it might be the constant vibration that does it while in flight or on the road, probably unavoidable in that case.

[stealthman_1]

I've pretty thoroughly evaluated four lenses on mine.

35 f1.2 Nokton - perfect

40 f1.4 Nokton - perfect

75 f1.4 Summilux - waaayyyyy off, serious front focus, like way serious, like infinity is at 60 feet off. Like it might be the lens off, but I've never had a problem with it on film.

90 f2 Summicron - perfect

50 f1.4 Summilux (Non-ASPH) - haven't really seriously shot it, but I think it might front focus a bit.

By the way, my 12mm f5.6 looks fine:D:D:D, just some good old vignetting (no red edge so far, but I haven't shot a white wall.)

I haven't looked at my 21 Lux or 35 Cron (IV) or any of my vintage lenses.

[Guest mc_k]

Mine is one of those that needs no adjustment with any of my lenses (not just Leica). However, I agree that QC should be tighter or shipping should be more closely controlled, wherever the problem is caused. I get nervous thinking a firm bump will throw my rangefinder alignment out!

 

They should just mark the boxes as glass and fragile. I guess it might be the constant vibration that does it while in flight or on the road, probably unavoidable in that case.

 

my guess is inaccurate rangefinders and lenses do not usually come from shipping...there is too much variation in the lenses, which I'm sure is not from shipping. Adjustment issues have always been a part of photography, and probably it is the responsibility of both the photographer and manufacturer to deal with it.

[Revdockj]

Graham,

Any idea what "entire outfit calibration" at DAG will cost? I've just discovered my M9 (and lenses?) are front focusing.

 

Ken

[gwelland]

Ken,

 

I sent you a PM on the work that DAG performed and price. It's probably not fair to quote the prices here because it's entirely up to DAG and subject to change etc. Don is pretty responsive to email so drop him a line at dagcam@chorus.net and he can provide a quote.

[pico]

The real problem is not the adjustment of the M9 - Leica have great equipment for this and great expertise. Nor is the adjustment of lenses built after 2006 problematic - Again, Leica does know what they are doing. The crux of the matter lies in the fact that the accuracy of focus was far less in the film days. Not only is film far less critical than a sensor, ....

 

All the messages concerning bad focus have scared me from the M9.

 

Regarding accuracy - I've never in over forty years had an M body that failed to focus properly. That includes seven different M bodies - one M2, four M4 and two M7s) and several lenses, but mostly the early 35mm Summilux and first batch of 75mm Summilux.

 

So, why do you claim that film does not require as much focus accuracy as digital?

[lct]

...why do you claim that film does not require as much focus accuracy as digital?

Usual answer is film is more forgiving as it has more thickness and curve to it. Now claiming that current focus accuracy problems have nothing to do with Leica's quality control sounds somewhat difficult to conciliate with statements according to which same problems disappear when the RF is properly adjusted IMHO.

[pico]

Usual answer is film is more forgiving as it has more thickness and curve to it. Now claiming that current focus accuracy problems have nothing to do with Leica's quality control sounds somewhat difficult to conciliate with statements according to which same problems disappear when the RF is properly adjusted IMHO.

 

QC is clearly poor.

 

Could the problem be the placement of the sensor?

[lct]

If you ask me this question i will tell you that there are 2 causes to the problem: QC and QC. I mean QC from Solms and the dealers as well as some RF problems come from carriage and handling IMHO. My 2 digital RFs (Epsons) are much more 'demanding' than Leicas as the base length of their RF is much smaller. However both are spot on even with the Lux 50 asph at f/1.4. Both had RF misalignments when i got them new though and i have to adjust one of them myself once or twice a year.

[ppolla]

If you ask me this question i will tell you that there are 2 causes to the problem: QC and QC. I mean QC from Solms and the dealers as well as some RF problems come from carriage and handling IMHO. My 2 digital RFs (Epsons) are much more 'demanding' than Leicas as the base length of their RF is much smaller. However both are spot on even with the Lux 50 asph at f/1.4. Both had RF misalignments when i got them new though and i have to adjust one of them myself once or twice a year.

 

I agree it is the QC....

...are you saying that once rangefinder is adjusted you still need to adjust it once or twice a year? how can that be?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wlaidlaw]

When I first got my M8 some 3 and a bit years ago (doesn't time fly), the infinity roller was very easy to move and needed tweaking every month or so. If you were ever clumsy mounting a lens and banged the roller, it would need adjusting afterwards. I asked Leica to tighten this at the upgrade stage and it has not needed adjusting in the year and a half since. My M9 has been fine in the first 6 months. My M4 had its first adjustment since 1967 a few months ago when it had its first service. I hope it will be OK for the next 40 years - very likely to out-last its owner!

 

Wilson