Please advise on my 90mm Summicron woes

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thank you for the remarkable 90 and 135 images. Even the thought of a shooting challenge like that has me reaching for my Nikon D3 and 600mm VR f/4.

 

My needs are much more modest; I would be happy if my 90 Cron portraits had a few eyes in focus and not every nose tip. My first approach is to assume that I as the user am the problem. But the only way I can get sharp results are to focus normally then back the focues anticlockwise a smidge so that the image in the rangefinder is now out of focus. That gives me consistent sharp images. Moreover, setting the lens to the infinity stop should render the distant horizon in focus but it does not. Focusing normally never ever gives me an in focus image. I do find the focus a bit sticky so that does not help, and of course the 50mm Noct f/1 has a really long focus throw that really helps me focus accurately. Probably several factors are conspiring against me.

 

Thanks for the memorable shots.

 

Ian

 

Ian - you're welcome ;-)

 

If the outcome of your above described working with the lens is indeed consistent and focussing errors are eliminated (bad eye sight, sensible eye position to the RF, etc), then all you describe sounds like a needed lens alignment by a technician (especially, that your infinity focus tests turn out not in focus).

 

I was very patient on my look for a 90 Cron and tried many samples, that did not work ideally with my camera.

Latest after having bought any new lens, I do my usual focus checks with it on ∞ and endless known close to medium focus distance targets including the famous 45º ruler test.

This way I also regularly check my RF settings of the digital camera bodies (still working on a reliable and quick solution for the film bodies).

 

Most of the times though, when I "think" a lens or camera is off, it turns out to by my eyes (darn computer screens all day).

 

Menos, As you well explain two points with long lenses on the M system;

 

1.- You have to make sure you concentrate on the focusing more than on the wider focals.

 

2.- The technique to shoot fast moving objects like motor sports or any other sports is to lock your focus right where you want to take the shot and wait for the subject to appear right where you want it. The M viewfinder here has an advantage over SLRs since you are able to see your subject without having to take your sight out of the viewfinder. Once your subject enters your frame just shoot. With this technique it is all about letting the subject come to you instead of you chasing the subject.

 

Your point 1 is very true indeed, as I too concentrate, to be less sloppy, when focussing a longer/ faster lens ;-)

 

Actually, I have tried a lot with the focus trap technique, when starting to shoot F1 with manual focus. All my tries have grossly failed - especially with the fast moving sports cars at Le Mans, taking quick turns in chicanes.

 

At Le Mans I gave up on that technique and have developed a true "continuous focus correction technique" with manual lenses - I really adjust focus constantly, while panning the shots! Only that way I got the shots.

 

One big reason for my failure might also be, that the dof of the 135 APO and 90 Cron wide open is barely a car's width deep - even at the distances I shot! You just have to really focus and not snap away at a trap point.

Anyway - this all sounds more difficult than it really is after some hours of practicing ;-) Le Mans is great for that! You won't believe my frustration during the first hour of the race in finding my setup and technique

 

I use my Le Mans technique now also with other lenses, here is a night shot on the streets of Shanghai with the Noctilux @ f1 wide open @ 1/30 − 1/45 I think:

 

"racing tricycle" | 3 people heading home after 10pm when shops have closed

 

With these fast lenses, you have to really focus!

If anything from the above mentioned points is off (RF/lens matching, eye sight, eye fitness/ strain), you really cannot get consistent shots!

It helps a lot though, to learn, how to properly set the cameras RF by yourself (having matching lenses in the first place as the basis of course).

 

Ian - the "sticky focus" of the 90 AA/ latest pre ASPH (mine) is absolutely normal!

From all 90 Crons, I tried (excl. the old, bulky ones) all had a slight stickiness (very similar to the 50 Noctilux f1 btw.). The 90 AAs always felt a bit more sticky, than the pre AAs, while I found it uncomfortable, that the AAs aperture ring is veery easy on the turn. The pre ASPH feels better balanced in this regard (which is, why I picked a pre ASPH).

You will get used to it and won't recognize it anymore.

[Advertisement]

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

[howard_cummer]

Hi Ian,

Somewhere I read that DAG said if you focus your 90 APO from infinity back to the focus point you will get a different result than if you focus from the minimum focus distance out to the focus point you want. I don't know if it is true or not but I had my 90 APO adjusted by Leica and then by a local tech in Hong Kong and I still couldn't get it to focus properly in the near distance on my M8 so finally I sold it and now use the 90 Elmarit with which I don't have any problem. As you have learned from the discussion your mileage may vary but that was my experience.

Howard

[Guest]

Somewhere I read that DAG said if...

I don't know if it is true or not but...

 

Sorry Howard, this is not taken out of context, your post is right here.

 

We'we just seen here Le Mans race cars in perfect focus with CONTINUOUS MANUAL FOCUS snapped with an M8 + 90CronA / 135Apo Telyt.

 

At the same time Leica makes the clear statement NOT TO USE the Apo Telyt AT ALL on the M8. I can think of all the people in sales and customers care being s&t about complains. It can be done, but only by few. Which way could they communicate this to the frustrated customer, who is a gentleman rightly commanding full respect? Could be the legendary DAG (is this his name?) is not only the perfect technician, but also good at cheering people up, when the big fish took the bait off the hook?

 

By no means can I perform the trick ( yet ). Coming from 28mm I've recently graduated to 35CronA, hoping to become just as proficient with my 50LuxA next year and don't want to spend on a 35LuxA (old) as a stepping stone. Yes, I have a 75Cron, 90CronA and 135Apo, but beyond testing them on a quiet Sunday, in full sun shine, off a tripod and with a 1.4 magnifier, alternating in this setting my M8 with a M6TTL 0.85, there still is plenty of room to grow

 

No Steinway with any guarantee nor a golf club set with Tiger features available, I'm afraid.

Maybe just consider the time spent by millions on the golf course or by just as many for a lifetime at the piano.

 

PS. Go, Dirk Steffen, GO!

[menos I M6]

Slowly, slowly, …

 

Please rethink … I did pick my 90 Cron from about a dozen different samples, I tried over a few weeks (basically everytime, I saw a sample in stock in a shop, I asked, if I could check it on my camera).

The 135 APO has been checked, as closely as I could in the shop.

 

I then (and this is important) went, to adjust my camera's rangefinder, to match both lenses as good, as I could to the body for their usage for motor sports and night shots.

 

I am pretty sure, Leica does not recommend, to tinker with the RF settings.

I also am pretty sure, that with the good reputation, Don Goldberg from DAG has as an experienced Leica technician, that he clearly could make a better setting to it, when shipping all three items to him and asking for a setting for the specific purpose. That means, optimized wide open from 2m - ∞, whereas my ∞ is a fixed radio tower at a certain distance from my apartment, I match all my cameras and lenses to, which might be very well different to Leica's or Don Goldberg's or anybodies ∞ ;-)

 

Incidentally, I have found, that my specific RF setting fits the new 35 Lux ASPH and a second hand Noctilux spot on at minimum focus and normal focus distances. I am still working on a solution, to replicate this exact RF setting to my film bodies.

 

And again, I can not stress enough the importance of a good sight and of course some practice, to get warm with the gear - this is not rocket science and I am certainly not some wonder child ;-)

 

It is too bad btw, that Leica decided against the 135mm frame lines in the M8, and I would be interested in Leica's position towards it. Is it true, they recommend against using the Telyt on the M8 (I could imagine, that Leica indeed understates here due too many innocent customers complaining about bad matching between M8 and 135mm lens)?

[jaapv]

Leica even warn to stop down the 135 apo two stops on the M9!

They seem to be very pessimistic about the focussing skills of their customers.

[menos I M6]

I didn't know that Jaap - might be the reason, the 135 Telyt can not be bought new 6-bit coded !?

I feel now a bit stupid, having bargained the price by 100 EUR due to the missing 6-bit coding on my sample.

 

Were exactly Leica states this?

I have only found a short comment of Erwin Puts, citing the same here:

Apo-Telyt-M 1:3.4/135mm | Products | TAO of LEICA

 

It really is a shame, as I truly love the 135 APO - it is very lightweight, super sharp, detailed, easy to focus (not as sticky like the super fast Leica lenses, but more alike the wonderful 90 Elmarit-M), …

 

If I only could get to visit more motor sports events over the year :-(

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

They are not rash enough to say it out loud - "go and learn focus you fool:D:p" of course, Leica being Leica will have considered the theoretical implications of focussing accuracy and indeed 135 mm is slightly beyond optimum on a rangefinder. I fell for the "not possible on the M8" in 2006 :mad: and sold my Apo-Telyt, now I use the Tele-Elmar, which is quite good as well. I may upgrade to the Telyt at some point....

[ianspector]

They are not rash enough to say it out loud - "go and learn focus you fool:D:p" of course, Leica being Leica will have considered the theoretical implications of focussing accuracy and indeed 135 mm is slightly beyond optimum on a rangefinder. I fell for the "not possible on the M8" in 2006 :mad: and sold my Apo-Telyt, now I use the Tele-Elmar, which is quite good as well. I may upgrade to the Telyt at some point....

 

Perhaps I need a little more education on this subject. I assumed that the only factor affecting the difficulty of focusing accurately was the depth of field; the shallower the DOF the more brutally the lens will punish even the slightest mis-focusing. After all, the rangefinder patch stays the same size. Thus I wonder where they rank (at a given distance), for example is the 75mm at f/1.4 the hardest as it has the shallowest DOF, then the Noct .95, then the 90. Is the 135 shallower than the 75? I am trying to establish if the problem is I, and that just because I can hit the correct focus on a wide open Noct nine times out of ten, I still may not be good enough to hit correct focus on the 90 at f/2 any times out of ten.

 

Ian

[jaapv]

As the RF base is a constant on a rangefinder, the effective accuracy decreases with the focal length. Or rather stays the same, increasing focussing difficulty with the longer focal length. At some point an SLR, where the measuring base increases with the focal length, will overtake a rangefinder, with an M camera somewhere between 90 and 135 mm, depending on viewfinder magnification. That is independent of aperture. However, DOF does cover focussing sins, making errors less obvious It does not take the focussing throw into consideration. . It was this point that I was referring to as Leica's theoretical considration.

[menos I M6]

Ian, it might be easy, to do an armchair analysis on your issue, but from what has been written by you, it really makes a "bad matching lens" to your camera very likely - be it a optical/ mechanical character of the 90mm or just a bad collimation or, …

 

If your other lenses are fine, if you have no issues with your Noct, than it is strange, that you won't get good shots with your 90mm. I find my f1 Noct easier to focus spot on @ f1 than my 90 Cron @f2 btw - dof calculations aside - it is just, what I feel about it.

If it really turns out, that your 90mm is off, I found it always easier, to sell the particular lens and source another sample, that matches my camera.

 

This has nothing to do with selling careless "bad samples" btw - this is just the character of the technical limitations of the rangefinder system. You really have to handpick your lenses to match your body, lenses and eye.

[newyorkone]

I don't know about other people's experiences, but in my search for a M90mm, I bought 3 different 90AAs and none of them focused properly at portrait distances. I tried 2 different 90/2.5s, one new, one used ... and neither focused properly at all distances. The M9s I use properly focuses all my other lenses ... including a 50/0.95 and 75 LUX.

 

One fairly knowledgable seller told me that DAG told him the 90AA can be calibrated to focus wide open at close distances, or mid-distances, but not both. This seems to match your recent recalibration experience where Leica seems to have calibrated for closer distances.

 

I finally gave up my search (what a huge PITA buying, testing, and returning lenses).

 

I now have a $800. later model M90/2.8 that focuses perfectly at all distances, is sharp as a tack, has that 3D look, and produces beautiful Bokeh.

 

Sometimes Newer isn't the best path to Better : -)

 

 

I have a similar situation as the OP but with a 75 lux. All my other lenses, including a Noctilux, focus perfectly on my M9 so I am reluctant to send the body in. The 75 lux, even after sending the lens to Leica NJ for 6-bit coding and calibration, focuses OK from close distances, but completely misses at medium and long distances and tends to front focus. I love the fingerprint of the lens when I nail the focus but that's not possible at medium and long distances without me having to adjust for the front focusing. It is so frustrating.

 

I'm using the 1.25x magnifier, my eyesight is 20/20 and I've tested using a tripod so I think I can pretty much rule out user error.

 

I'm wondering if I should send the lens back to Leica NJ or pay to have it adjusted by DAG.

[carcam]

I had a similar experience with my M9 and 90mm lenses- f2, f2.5, f2.8 and a few examples of each. Tripod, different f stops, etc. and I got a focus shift with every one that was too annoying to trust. So I gave up and got a 90 macro elmar and love it! Because it's f4- everything is in perfect focus if the light is ok. And it's very small and light. I know it's not the camera because my 50 Lux and 28 Summicron have always been spot on. Good luck and if you can find the perfect 90 AA get it but make sure it's perfect on your camera too.

[menos I M6]

I had a similar experience with my M9 and 90mm lenses- f2, f2.5, f2.8 and a few examples of each. Tripod, different f stops, etc. and I got a focus shift with every one that was too annoying to trust. So I gave up and got a 90 macro elmar and love it! Because it's f4- everything is in perfect focus if the light is ok. And it's very small and light. I know it's not the camera because my 50 Lux and 28 Summicron have always been spot on. Good luck and if you can find the perfect 90 AA get it but make sure it's perfect on your camera too.

 

The problem with solving RF alignment and lens matching issues with preventing fast aperture lenses all together is, that this doesn't solve the two problems, these fast lenses were made in the first place:

- you won't get more light (as you experience with the Elmar)

- you won't get the background seperation, you might look for:

 

These 3 shots were all made BEFORE I decided, I want a faster tele lens for the Leica M.

Reasoning was at the highest priority more background separation and less busy background rendering:

 

"boss clown at Shanghai EXPO 2010" 90 Elmarit-M f2.8 (latest)

 

"servant clown at Shanghai EXPO 2010" 90 Elmarit-M f2.8

 

"visitor at Shanghai EXPO 2010" 90 Elmarit-M f2.8

 

I loved the light and compact Elmarit-M (still keep it).

It is light, compact, veeeery sharp across the field - even wide open and quick and easy to focus.

 

It is not nearly a 90 Summicron though - that one sees quickly after trying a 90 Cron (a good sample though).

 

The 90 Elmarit-M has one quality above the 90 Cron - insane resolution already at f2.8:

 

"framed" M8.2 | 90 Elmarit-M

 

The 13x19 print has NO moire and you can clearly read the cinema programme hung out in the bottom left window on the right wall - even the details of the scene up left are detailed and clear - no distortion, no soft edges - clearly superior to the 90 Cron. The very fine detailed line pattern leading to moire in the down sampled JPG is fine, sharp absolutely clearly in the print (or 1:1 on screen for that matter).

 

All of this of course only, if the lens matches the camera. Don't give up on these magnificent lenses - make 'em work!

[ianspector]

You are making me seem so intolerant by my giving up on the 90 Cron after only buying one lens, I am amazed at how many of you have bought multiple copies before either finding one that works or not and buying another 90. I bought this lens new, so even if I am lucky and get 80% of my money back I am probably dropping £500 per try. Unlike in the US we don't really have the concept of sending stuff back after 30 days or even 90 days. Additionally, these lenses are quite difficult to find new. I will get Leica to sort it as best they can without the body and then sell it with half its passport left so that if the new owner has a problem they have a chance to send it in with their body and end up with the 90 that I never had. I do regret not taking a test roll on my MP before sending it back to Solms.

 

I had no idea that my experience was seemingly common, and the users here that got a well matched one on a first attempt seem to be in the minority.

 

That 90 Elmarit "framed" is outstanding by the way.

[menos I M6]

Ian - don't give up on that Cron!

As it happened, I received my 50 Lux back from Solms today ;-) Yay!

 

It had a CLA (was loose and had focussing issues on several bodies) from Leica, and it does look spot on on first inspection of some test shots.

 

It looks, Leica does a good job on setting lenses spot on even without bodies!

You might get a good sample back after adjusting - think positive ;-) - and thanks for the comment ;-)

It is a laaaarge glass facade in a major shopping center in Shanghai. I am there almost once a week and never looked up to it. There I was standing in heavy rain under a small roof and looked up the first time and this was shown to me - it just all came together ;-)

[Guest]

I do regret not taking a test roll on my MP before sending it back to Solms.

I had no idea that my experience was seemingly common, and the users here that got a well matched one on a first attempt seem to be in the minority.

 

Only on the tripod, I'm very pleased with the focus of my three Leica M tele lenses:

2nd hand 2/75 3.4/135 and new 2/90A. All three working equally well on two M6TTL 0.85 and on two M8 with a 1.4 magnifier, as I said: doing this only when on a tripod.

 

None of the three lenses or four bodies have been recalibrated in Solms and I did not need to pick between different copies of the same lens. Being "lucky" three times makes such a coincidence unlikely.

 

I returned a 75Lux and a 90 Tele-Elmarit not because of focus issues, but because they were not sharp imo, even taking 5 shots with each on a tripod and focus bracketing.

 

Had a 90Cron non-A with a 49mm filter diameter for over ten years, that was quite compact and good but the Cron75 and Cron90A are better.

 

It's the human error I work on and it's very challenging.

 

Cheers!

[newtoleica]

Ian,

A sorry tale indeed, but I had a similar experience a few years back with Nikon adjusting a 17-55 DX for me and getting progressively so far from the mark, I eventually sold it with a promise to the new owner that I'd take it back if he wasn't happy. I heard nothing, and then went on a tour of London dealers trying 5 lenses on my D2x before finding one that focussed properly. It seems mismatching bodies and lenses are not confined to rangefinders!

Good luck with your 90 cron, I'm using a 75 cron and it's as sharp as anything, and quite small, mind you I pair it with a 35 and it might not be enough of a step with a 50.

Let me know if you'd like to meet up and test the 90 on another M9.

Regards

Brendan - another Nikon 'jumper' ;-)

[Sspector15]

Hi Ian (and company),

 

And I thought it was just me. I found an older 90mm Elmarit (the maligned 1963 version) while awaiting my M9. It focuses perfectly. Then I found a lovely Summicron III (1986) but the focus issue is mind boggling. Sometimes it seems if I focus behind the subject, then it is in focus; sometimes the opposite. I keep meaning to do a methodical test at different distances. But it is truly frustrating. Especially when one expects to take some portraits and then the eyes are out but the ears or nose are in.

 

Can Leica USA in New Jersey recalibrate the lens? And, how can they do so without the body?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[UliWer]

.... Sometimes it seems if I focus behind the subject, then it is in focus; sometimes the opposite. I keep meaning to do a methodical test at different distances. But it is truly frustrating. Especially when one expects to take some portraits and then the eyes are out but the ears or nose are in.

 

Can Leica USA in New Jersey recalibrate the lens? And, how can they do so without the body?

 

If you have completely contradictory results with focussing a lens, it's not the lens. I don't know whether Leica could do anything about this, nor whether they'd need your body. For sure the'd need your eyes.

 

I had this experience with the 2/75 - especially after I read too much in this Forum.

[bocaburger]

I mentioned on another thread that I just went through the task of adjusting my M9's rangefinder (the near-distance adjustment, followed by re-adjustment of infinity) because all but 2 of my lenses front-focused 2cm. It was a time-consuming job, but at least it's done correctly and without shipping my camera and entire lens arsenal cross country. However 2 of my lenses are still "out" at near-distance: one front-focuses, one back-focuses. Maybe if I send just those 2 I'll have them spot-on like the rest. And maybe they'll come back worse. The frustrating thing is that I've used those same lenses for years and years on my film bodies and never had a problem. Partly it might be due to the less tolerant geometry of a digital sensor, but it's at least partly due to the fact it's so easy to enlarge a digital file so much. Far beyond anything I'd ever print.

 

But it is frustrating that regardless of the potential superiority of the Leica glass and M9 sensor, my Canon 5D gives me sharper results autofocusing fast primes. I think also some of it is due to my eyesight. I can't manual-focus the 5D all that reliably, even though the viewfinder has an adjustable correction. On the M9, the magnification is below what it was on the M6, and the screw-in magnifiers cause some drop in contrast. I think I'm probably in-between Leica's diopter offerings, plus my need changes with very close-up subjects compared with distant ones. And of course there's the issue of holding myself rock-still if I'm not using a tripod. It's very hard to be sure I'm not leaning slightly fwd or back as I press the shutter, and when dealing with DOF <2cm it's critical. Thankfully my main use of the M9 is travel photography, where I'm mostly shooting in the mid-apertures.