35 Lux 'M' on the M9

[tashley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But that's why we read your threads, Tim! You get the bugs worked out for the rest of us.

 

Glad your second copy is better!

 

Thanks Howards, you're a gent!

[Advertisement]

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

[wlaidlaw]

I had hoped, now that Leica had pensioned off the focus target bed-sheet with the cross painted on it, in favour of a computerised dual slit interferometer, that the days of mis-adjusted lenses coming out the factory might be behind us. Is it that the focus demands of the M9 sensor are still beyond the abilities of the lens makers to provide a consistent product for some of the lenses? I know when I discussed the inconsistency of the previous 35 ASPH Lux during a visit to Solms, it was hinted that this lens was so difficult to make and adjust, that this was what led to the range of the lens' abilities. One of the elements was required to be positioned to within 2 microns or less, which was right at the lower limits of their tooling. It may be this still applies to the Mk2 version.

 

Wilson

[tashley]

I had hoped, now that Leica had pensioned off the focus target bed-sheet with the cross painted on it, in favour of a computerised dual slit interferometer, that the days of mis-adjusted lenses coming out the factory might be behind us. Is it that the focus demands of the M9 sensor are still beyond the abilities of the lens makers to provide a consistent product for some of the lenses? I know when I discussed the inconsistency of the previous 35 ASPH Lux during a visit to Solms, it was hinted that this lens was so difficult to make and adjust, that this was what led to the range of the lens' abilities. One of the elements was required to be positioned to within 2 microns or less, which was right at the lower limits of their tooling. It may be this still applies to the Mk2 version.

 

Wilson

 

That's very interesting WIlson. Of course, with the old lux and presumably despite design changes with the new one, they have to try to position the focus right at the front of the DOF wide open so as to allow it to drift back with shift as you stop down. That must be really tough to do. But my first lens was pretty Lomo like, just like no one had given a damn and certainly if anyone had bothered to take a few frames with it they'd never have let it out the door!

[wlaidlaw]

Tim,

 

Given the fairly sporting pricing of the lenses, you might have thought that they could get some guy to stick each one onto an M9 (maybe an old ex-development one) and take three or four photos (say 2 apertures, 2 distances) with it. If they could hook it up so that it was tethered to a big screen, so much the better. If he was taking the same group of things each time, he would learn within less than a day, to spot a problem in seconds. I assume that Leica just does not do this, or else they could not have allowed out lenses like my Noctilux that went for an overhaul and coding in 2007 and came back 2 meters out in focus at 8 meters, the new Summarit 75 that was out almost as much or the 50 Summicron just last year, which appeared to have the wrong pitch thread on the focusing barrel (in focus at infinity but back focus increased progressively and massively, as you focused at closer distances). The only new lens I have bought from Leica in the last 5 years, which has not required adjustment or replacement out of the box, was the WATE. Over the same period, three new lenses from Zeiss - all perfect. As I posted above, I had hoped this was the past and the bright new future was 99% perfection in lenses - maybe next year ;-}}

 

Wilson

[tashley]

Tim,

 

As I posted above, I had hoped this was the past and the bright new future was 99% perfection in lenses - maybe next year ;-}}

 

Wilson

 

Yup, and they'll be couriered to the UK by flying pig...

[tdtaylor]

Tim,

 

Given the fairly sporting pricing of the lenses, you might have thought that they could get some guy to stick each one onto an M9 (maybe an old ex-development one) and take three or four photos (say 2 apertures, 2 distances) with it. If they could hook it up so that it was tethered to a big screen, so much the better. If he was taking the same group of things each time, he would learn within less than a day, to spot a problem in seconds. I assume that Leica just does not do this, or else they could not have allowed out lenses like my Noctilux that went for an overhaul and coding in 2007 and came back 2 meters out in focus at 8 meters, the new Summarit 75 that was out almost as much or the 50 Summicron just last year, which appeared to have the wrong pitch thread on the focusing barrel (in focus at infinity but back focus increased progressively and massively, as you focused at closer distances). The only new lens I have bought from Leica in the last 5 years, which has not required adjustment or replacement out of the box, was the WATE. Over the same period, three new lenses from Zeiss - all perfect. As I posted above, I had hoped this was the past and the bright new future was 99% perfection in lenses - maybe next year ;-}}

 

Wilson

 

I'm with Wilson on this one. My WATE and brand new 50lux ASPH are the only two lenses that have been on focus when I unboxed them. Even my M9 was off 4-5cm when it was unboxed- off to Leica it went- twice . I'm just excited to have an M9 and several lenses that all work together- taken a lot of effort on my part for $17k of equipment to work.

[tashley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm with Wilson on this one. My WATE and brand new 50lux ASPH are the only two lenses that have been on focus when I unboxed them. Even my M9 was off 4-5cm when it was unboxed- off to Leica it went- twice . I'm just excited to have an M9 and several lenses that all work together- taken a lot of effort on my part for $17k of equipment to work.

 

I know the feeling: when I have a setup where it all works together, I am loath to add to it in case I break the spell - which is usually what happens!

[Jamie Roberts]

Hey Tim,

 

I'm glad you have a mostly functioning 35 now I still use my chrome 35 Lux ASPH without major focusing difficulties, now on the M9, but the M9 itself is even more sensitive to maladjustment than the M8 in my experience. Getting my 50 Lux and 35 Lux to more or less (much more than less, actually) to agree was tricky

 

But anyway, I'm very happy to hear you've got a keeper at last!

[tashley]

Hey Tim,

 

I'm glad you have a mostly functioning 35 now I still use my chrome 35 Lux ASPH without major focusing difficulties, now on the M9, but the M9 itself is even more sensitive to maladjustment than the M8 in my experience. Getting my 50 Lux and 35 Lux to more or less (much more than less, actually) to agree was tricky

 

But anyway, I'm very happy to hear you've got a keeper at last!

 

Thanks Jamie - now you no longer need fear that I'll sneak in in the dead of night and steal that peach from you!

[Jamie Roberts]

Thanks Jamie - now you no longer need fear that I'll sneak in in the dead of night and steal that peach from you!

 

 

The offer of a pint still stands though, Tim, if you ever find yourself this way

[tashley]

The offer of a pint still stands though, Tim, if you ever find yourself this way

 

Done, and ditto!

[jonoslack]

I still use my chrome 35 Lux ASPH without major focusing difficulties,

 

There was obviously quite a lot of variation in the focus shift - Peter Markowich (who posts here) has a titanium one he's been testing to destruction, and it's obviously not a significant issue - can it be the tolerances of which Wilson speaks? Incidentally, the titanium one also is brass bodied (as far as I know) and is therefore rather heavy.

 

Two pints is always a sad affair; mind if I tag along?

[wlaidlaw]

My 35 Lux is a chrome one and it is noticeably heavy but other than that, along with the MATE by far my favourite lens. I was very worried when I had it coded, that it would come back like my Noctilux, in need of further holidays in Solms but it was fine. Jono - I think you have now sold the Noctilux that used to be mine, haven't you?

 

Wilson

[jonoslack]

My 35 Lux is a chrome one and it is noticeably heavy but other than that, along with the MATE by far my favourite lens. I was very worried when I had it coded, that it would come back like my Noctilux, in need of further holidays in Solms but it was fine. Jono - I think you have now sold the Noctilux that used to be mine, haven't you?

 

Wilson

 

HI Wilson

Yes indeed - over a year ago now (doesn't time fly). The times I wanted to use it (pubs etc.) I was frightened of dropping it, and it was rather big. Still, it served me well, I shot a whole wedding in a pub with it (the official photographer turned up rather . . . erm . . . distracted!), and it worked fine.

It served me well, as I don't have the slightest desire for a new Noctilux (which would otherwise be the case). Experience tells me that big heavy lenses get left at home!

[lars_bergquist]

Grrr ... As of today I have a v.2 Summilux-M 1.4:35mm ASPH (could not Leica shorten their lens monickers a bit -- there seems to be a bit of redundancy in them?) but I have no M9. It is in Solms with a cracked sensor filter!

 

The old man with expensive habits

[PeterGlaso]

I'm with Wilson on this one. My WATE and brand new 50lux ASPH are the only two lenses that have been on focus when I unboxed them. Even my M9 was off 4-5cm when it was unboxed- off to Leica it went- twice . I'm just excited to have an M9 and several lenses that all work together- taken a lot of effort on my part for $17k of equipment to work.

 

I bought a 35 and 75 summicron, and are waiting for an M9. No previous experience with rangefinders - never tried one. A bit scared by all these stories of defective gear.. I would probably not have ordered one if i had read this thread first. A big investment for me - and now i pretty much expect it to give me nothing but worries!

 

Peter

[wlaidlaw]

I bought a 35 and 75 summicron, and are waiting for an M9. No previous experience with rangefinders - never tried one. A bit scared by all these stories of defective gear.. I would probably not have ordered one if i had read this thread first. A big investment for me - and now i pretty much expect it to give me nothing but worries!

 

Peter

 

Peter,

 

I think you should be OK. These seem to be two of the lenses, that over the years, Leica seem to have learnt to make properly. I recall few reports of bad ones of these.

 

Wilson

[pklein]

PeterGlaso: Digital is more demanding than film with respect to camera and lens adjustment. The M9 (and M8) are not really "defective," by and large. Digital M cameras require more precision lens alignment and tighter tolerances than film ever did, sometimes taxing the limits of the equipment used to do the aligning. All of my lenses were fine with film. But a couple of them required adjustment with my M8. And fast 90mm lenses sometimes hit the limit of what can be done.

 

Focus shift is simply a physical property of fast lenses. Again, the digital sensor is much less forgiving than film. So a lens like the original 35 Summilux ASPH seems less good on the M8 or M9 than it did on film at middle stops. You can complain, sell the lens, or do what I do--try to use it mostly at f/1.4, f/2 and f/8. When used at middle stops, I focus on people's noses instead of their eyes.

 

DSLR users that use fast lenses have the same issues, but the anti-aliasing filter is a great equalizer, so they often don't notice them. And some DSLRs have a focus correction function, allowing the users to calibrate their lenses individually. Leica M cameras are not autofocus, so that can't be done.

 

None of this excuses the lack of good quality control of lenses coming out of the factory. But that can be remedied under warrantee. Not ideal, but eventually you will get it all right, and presuming you like the rangefinder way of photographing, you'll be happy.

 

The point is that if you want rangefinder focusing and the astonishing level of detail you can get with a digital M, you have to accept that you may need to send your lenses in for adjustment. I use DAG, and once he's adjusted my lenses, they are as good as they can be. The good news for you, as Wilson just said, is that the lenses you ordered are not the ones that usually have problems.

 

--Peter

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[tashley]

 

The point is that if you want rangefinder focusing and the astonishing level of detail you can get with a digital M, you have to accept that you may need to send your lenses in for adjustment. I use DAG, and once he's adjusted my lenses, they are as good as they can be. The good news for you, as Wilson just said, is that the lenses you ordered are not the ones that usually have problems.

 

--Peter

 

I agree absolutely, that really is the long and the short of it. I just wish there was an equivalent to DAG in London, because deciding that a piece of gear needs to go back to Leica means that there will be a) a long wait and no guarantee that it will be any better when it returns, though on that latter point I have been much luckier than many...