New lens is front focussing

[sakthorp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a M9 with 35 and 50 summicrons and they are spot on with focussing. I tried a 75mm Summarit and it focussed spot on but I decided to ultimately purchase the 90mm for the better fit with my lens line up. Unfortunately the 90 Summarit is front focussing so I did a quick check with my LensAlign and confirmed it. (Focussed on the '0')

 

I love that the M9 is simplistic in it's feature set but right now I would appreciate a micro-adjust feature. I guess I will ask for a replacement and hope it performs a bit better. If not, I am wondering how the process works for service. Will I need to send in the M9 and lens or will they also need the other lenses as well? Just curious......

 

[carcam]

Glad it's not just me. My 50 Summilux focuses perfectly at 1.4 and up but I tried 3 90's and had to return them all. They all front focused on my M9. Two were new Summarits and 1 was a like new Elmar-M. I gave up (for now).

[sakthorp]

YIKES!

 

I suspect that if you auditioned three copies, your body must need calibration???

 

The 75mm I tried was exceptional, so I'm hoping my body works well with my replacement lens. While I don't often need a long focal length, it's handy to have in the bag for portraits and travel.

 

Wish me luck

 

Glad it's not just me. My 50 Summilux focuses perfectly at 1.4 and up but I tried 3 90's and had to return them all. They all front focused on my M9. Two were new Summarits and 1 was a like new Elmar-M. I gave up (for now).

[likalar]

Glad it's not just me.....

 

LOL! I'm sure it's not intended, but basically you're saying that you are happy that others are having 90mm focusing problems?

 

Larry

[mwilliamsphotography]

I went through three 75/2s ... two used and one brand new. None focused correctly. My M9 is spot on ... I know this because the Nocti is on, the 35/1.4 is on and Lux 24 is on.

 

I then tried to get a 90/2 ASPH. No luck.

 

My dealer sent me a 75/1.4 6 bit, last production German to try ... focuses dead on the money. I now have a 90/2.8 last version that's perfect also.

 

When you get them right, hold onto them for dear life.

 

-Marc

[sakthorp]

Hearing this is unfortunately not encouraging. Is the issue with the lenses being manufactured out of normal tolerances or is it a 'body to lens' calibration issue?

 

I'm new to Leica. If a consumer sends a lens in for calibration, is there ANY doubt that they can adjust it to perform?

 

 

 

I went through three 75/2s ... two used and one brand new. None focused correctly. My M9 is spot on ... I know this because the Nocti is on, the 35/1.4 is on and Lux 24 is on.

 

I then tried to get a 90/2 ASPH. No luck.

 

My dealer sent me a 75/1.4 6 bit, last production German to try ... focuses dead on the money. I now have a 90/2.8 last version that's perfect also.

 

When you get them right, hold onto them for dear life.

 

-Marc

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hearing this is unfortunately not encouraging. Is the issue with the lenses being manufactured out of normal tolerances or is it a 'body to lens' calibration issue?

 

I'm new to Leica. If a consumer sends a lens in for calibration, is there ANY doubt that they can adjust it to perform?

 

It's often the combination of calibration being out a bit on the body and a bit on the lens; together, they fail to make music together 90s are notorious for this, especially older ones.

 

I had a 50 Lux ASPH that just wasn't performing on my M8 (though all the other lenses were good). I sent that lens to Leica and they adjusted it "for the M8." It came back perfect.

 

So I'd suggest sending the 90 in if all your other lenses are good and let them adjust that lens.

[ho_co]

I agree with Jamie. IMHO there's no reason to exchange the lens; a replacement may be no better.

 

Just send the lens to Leica with a note that it doesn't focus accurately on the M9. They'll check and adjust the lens. Or, if they feel the lens is working properly, they'll ask you to return the body with the lens.

 

Since you've already got two lenses that are spot on, it's unlikely that the body needs any adjustment.

 

 

The idea of a 'micro-adjust feature' has always seemed a cop-out to me. The manufacturer is asking you to do the final calibration of your lens. In the case of Leica, that day might come. But so far, we can still let Leica fix their 'not-quite-rights.'

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

The idea of a 'micro-adjust feature' has always seemed a cop-out to me. The manufacturer is asking you to do the final calibration of your lens. In the case of Leica, that day might come. But so far, we can still let Leica fix their 'not-quite-rights.'

 

Here we totally disagree, Howard.

 

All lenses will require some tolerance adjustments--due to use if nothing else. M systems are more prone to problems due to the extreme compatibility of the mount with lenses that are older than I am and new ones as well!

 

If Leica makes any change to their RF mechanism in an R10, I for one would like to vote for some easily adjusted external way to affect the infinity and close focus adjustment on a per-lens basis, and have the system remember them--just like micro-adjust on the current dSLRs.

 

Heck--even if they just gave you some repeatable method of adjusting the existing infinity focus that wasn't trial and error for 5 hours of shooting or more that would help.

 

Of course, an electronic focus confirmation overlayed (with framelines?) on the already fabulous Leica optical RF would be super-sweet.

 

That, in combination with easier adjustments, could be used to really tweak your lenses perfectly (again, on a per lens basis would be fabulous).

 

It would certainly mean fewer trips to Solms and happier M shooters everywhere, IMO.

 

FWIW, microadjust works like a charm on my Nikon system, too.

[k-hawinkler]

LiveView at least would indicate whether there is a rangefinder focus problem.

 

K-H.

[Jamie Roberts]

LiveView at least would indicate whether there is a rangefinder focus problem.

 

K-H.

 

I don't need live-view to know if there's an RF focus problem though I suppose if there were a self check on the RF / lens in some way, you could use Liveview to check the sensor mount.

[elansprint72]

I have a few cameras where it is actually possible to look through the lens and see what is in focus- imagine that! The oldest was built before 1920, not only that, it takes stereo pictures. The newest one is "full frame" digital, can accept lenses from 8mm to as long as you like. It has no appreciable noise at 32k ISO.

I'm more than a little puzzled why it seems to be acceptable to produce equipment which is right at the top end of the price scale yet does not work straight out of the box; more than that, it seems that the mugs who buy this stuff are prepared to accept this situation as "normal" and sing it's praises.

 

Remind me again why Leica is still in business.

[tobey bilek]

They are adjusted in separate departments. Sometime you get both perfect, sometime the errors cancel and you get perfect results, sometime the errors are both in the same direction and disaster. Remember all measurments have tolerence and the tolerence stack up works for or against you. Just because the other lenses work, does not mean the body is correct, just that the stack up cancels errors. If they screw with the body, all the others may go out.

 

Digital is very critical and fast teles are critical. 90 2.0 is on the ragged edge of being made to work within design specs.. Years ago when the 75 1.4 first came out, the rep, yea they had reps then you could see and talk to and who knew what thay were talking about, recommended body and lens both be sent in to be matched.

[SJP]

Remind me again why Leica is still in business.

(1)Because they produce lenses that are better than anyone else + the rangefinder concept allows for better lens optimisation (less retrofocus design required), the image quality of the digital camera's at low ISO is unsurpassed IMHO even if somewhat noisier. Noise is not too relevant, it is about texture.

(2) Because we are all utterly mad.

 

Flip a coin or make an intelligent assessment.

[elansprint72]

(1)Because they produce lenses that are better than anyone else + the rangefinder concept allows for better lens optimisation (less retrofocus design required), the image quality of the digital camera's at low ISO is unsurpassed IMHO even if somewhat noisier. Noise is not too relevant, it is about texture.

(2) Because we are all utterly mad.

 

Flip a coin or make an intelligent assessment.

 

Apologies; I thought it was a tool to take photographs. My mistake.

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}{snipped}The newest one is "full frame" digital, can accept lenses from 8mm to as long as you like. It has no appreciable noise at 32k ISO.

I'm more than a little puzzled why it seems to be acceptable to produce equipment which is right at the top end of the price scale yet does not work straight out of the box; more than that, it seems that the mugs who buy this stuff are prepared to accept this situation as "normal" and sing it's praises.

 

Remind me again why Leica is still in business.

 

Um, ok... because Canon and Nikon still are? Top of the price scale seems not to preclude technical issues, you know?

 

In fact, I think all the 32K ISO shots I've seen are pretty terrible looking, so if you've got something special I'd like to see it (RAW please). But if I wanted smeared detail beyond normal photographic standards I can always shoot a Holga with expired film and vaseline on the front element. 'Course, I can't do that in the dark, so maybe that's the point

 

Also, if you frequent any of the "why can't my high-end professional Canon camera focus" or the "why is my Nikon D3s backfocussing" forums then you'll understand that any system--no matter how good--is subject to system failures.

 

I can focus my M9 / M8 / M6 long after my Nikon D3 has died trying to achieve any kind of focus, and so even with its minor RF and lens annoyances something like the M9--with its lightweight body, optical gems of lenses, and great IQ for all reasonable ISOs, is a bargain.

 

All modern cameras that take multiple lenses have focus issues. Canon and Nikon have finally (finally) admitted it and now have microadjustments in their system; that doesn't guarantee good results with any given lens and body though.

 

So that's why Leica is still in business. Of course it's a tool to take photographs, and truthfully, my M just kicks the stuff out of anything I put on the Nikon, as high ISO capable as it is.

[sakthorp]

I'm the original poster. I received my replacement lens yesterday and it appears that it too front focusses. This copy is also not correct at infinity, I have to back it off to achieve proper focus.

 

In real life use (prints) it's doubtful it will be an issue. I'll use it for a few months and see what develops.

 

I recently ordered a 135 F/4 Tele-Elmar from Adorama. I'm more curious than anything, can my middle-aged eyes successfully focus a long focal length lens? I have a 1.25X magnifier so hopefully that will help.

 

Appreciate your replies, such good info on this site

[ho_co]

If it's not right now, it won't get better with age. (And you'll be annoyed every time you use it. ) I'd say, send it to Leica.

 

 

You know the 75 and 90 Summarits use the same focus mount; maybe some of the mounts aren't being properly adjusted for the lens head.

 

But Leica sometimes has to be shown the problem forcefully several times before they can see where something is going wrong.

 

 

Good luck!

[Jamie Roberts]

I'm the original poster. I received my replacement lens yesterday and it appears that it too front focusses. This copy is also not correct at infinity, I have to back it off to achieve proper focus.

 

{snipped}

 

Ah--I think I know what the issue is...

 

With this many 90 copies not focusing, and with your last comment, I'm beginning to suspect the infinity focus adjustment of the rangefinder is slightly off.

 

When you turn the lens all the way to infinity and you're looking at something "at infinity" do the RF images line up or do they go "beyond" each other or "not close enough" to each other?

 

If they don't line up, then the focus adjustment on the camera is off for sure.

 

You can have Leica NJ fix this or you can try it yourself. The instructions are here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/M8_Rangefinder_Infinity_Adjustment

 

Look at the pictures carefully. In my estimation, it will take you about 2 hours to get this right from start to finish.

 

Make sure your 90mm achieves infinity without backing off. Then make sure it's not front focusing. At some point, you will get both in line.

 

Then check, wide open, 3 meters and 10 meters. They should be good too. When that works, it's time to try your other lenses.

 

My bet is that all will be well at that point, believe it or not!

 

I've had to adjust my M8 for infinity focus, and that fixed a front focus problem. I got my 90 pre-ASPH cron, 75 Lux, Nocti, 35 Lux and 28 cron all working when the 75 Lux was just right at infinity. It took probably 4 hours of shooting and checking to get it right.

 

But it beat a trip to Leica and endless worry about whether the camera would focus or not (also, it teaches you how to make this adjustment in case you ever need to in the field, so it's not a bad thing to know). Just be careful

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[esquire53]

Jamie,

 

I had a similar experience with my M8 and recently got my M9 and I have a slightly different issue ...

I just had the time to run a full blown test, 1 day of my vacation .., and the 28mm Emarit; the 35mm Lux are spot on at around 2m distance, the 90mm Cron has from focus. The infinite test shows that the 28 and the 90 are off and the 35 is spot on. It is a strange combination of error and as I said different from my M8.

 

I always wonder if it is worth to go through the adjustment of the M9 myself or send it in.

I saw some comments, that the shop in Paris has a turnaround time of 7 days or so.

 

Anyway, I enjoyed all this testing time I had. I also had good fun with hand held light metering test vs M9.

 

Cheers from Brazil

 

Uwe