thighslapper Posted October 22, 2010 Share #1 Posted October 22, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Despite the correct diopter correction for me that renders all the frame precisely in focus I still seem to have a problem with the central focussing area being slightly out of focus even when the images are perfectly aligned. There is some vertical misalignment which seems to be contributing a bit to this but that doesn't account for all the appearance. Presumably the eyepiece takes images from two completely seperate optical pathways and superimposes them so I assume something is adrift in the focussing path..... or am I just being overcritical and this is a feature of all rangefinders with the central image never being as crisp because of the 'split image' effect of the optics....... On a seperate note I have checked the focussing of all my lenses (all current production) and have not been amused by the results...... at 2 - 2.5m wide open...... 135/3.4 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 3" 75/2 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 2" 50/1.4 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 3" 50/2 - subject in focus - back focusses minimally, if at all 28/2 - subject in focus - back focusses minimally 18/3.8 - subject in focus - possibly back focusses but it's impossible to tell really.... The variation suggests it's not just the camera but a combination of both..... Leica already confess that the focussing accuracy with the 135 + M9 is iffy, which I can accept ..after a fashion... but I am distinctly p***d off with the 75 and 50/1.4 which are often used wide open and at short distances specifically and need to be spot on. It explains my failure to get most of my portrait shots in focus..... A 4% error at 2m with optical equipment is awful. Ok, so wide apertures accentuate the problem, but short distances often means indoors which usually means low light....... duh..... This was all done with the normal eyepiece and then with piggy backed 1.25 and 1.4 eyepieces (to ensure precise focus) with multiple shots, refocussed on each occasion and varying the distance from 2-2.5m. Results are consistent. I'm sure the reply is going to be 'send the whole lot back to Solms'. We are however dealing with expensive high end precision optical equipment and if Leica can adjust this lot so they all match and work correctly (which this forum suggest they usually can) then it does beg the question of how both cameras and lenses leave their factory with this degree of misalignment in the first place...... It took me 5 minutes to run these tests and the results were instantly obvious. 5 minutes in the manufacturing process of both the M9 and a 50/1.4 must be miniscule. I suspect Leica are relying on testing 'machines' and not humans. Perhaps they need an old man with a 'reference' M9 and a set of 'reference lenses' who actually takes real photos with the new bodies and lenses and actually looks at them...... Anyway it's a nice sunny autumn day so I am off to take photos ... even if they are out of focus..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 22, 2010 Posted October 22, 2010 Hi thighslapper, Take a look here Focussing Issues. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
vanhulsenbeek Posted October 22, 2010 Share #2 Posted October 22, 2010 I do not know where you are based, but my Amsterdam, Netherlands, dealer sent my M9 - 6 months after purchase - to Solms, together with my 75 Summi and 90 MElmar. Whole lot came back adjusted and CLA-ed, and I did not pay a cent. (My dealer has a free shipping policy during the waranty period, provided the complaint is warranty based) The focussing is much better. I will not say perfect, because my eye's aren't and I hate testing and pixel peeping, but most close-ups with the 75Summi are now spot on. Obvious that I have little reason to rant Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted October 22, 2010 Share #3 Posted October 22, 2010 Focussing problems appear to happen in the longer focal ranges as you show in the table. With shorter focal lengths it is hard to see due to the depth of field. So if I look at the regularity of your observations (all long lenses in the same direction and comparable distance and the short lenses less of a problem), I would blame the camera adjustment. Most likely infinity adjustment (see threads on that issue). If the focus error happens repeatably in the same direction, it should be fixed. By the way: infinite adjustment can be seen easily by focussing the 135/3.4 on something very far away (planet Jupiter is high in the sky tonight or a building at at least 1 km) and see when you overlap perfectly, the scale of the 135 mm is not quite at infinite and the picture you make not quite sharp. If you than take the picture by simply rotating to infinity without looking at the overlap in the viewfinder and the picture is (much) sharper, it is the infinite setting in the camera which is off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share #4 Posted October 22, 2010 Thanks Lindolfi...... Images at infinity as set by the lens are fine...... In the viewfinder the images cannot be made to coincide at all.... so your are right...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted October 22, 2010 Share #5 Posted October 22, 2010 I do not know where you are based, but my Amsterdam, Netherlands, dealer sent my M9 - 6 months after purchase - to Solms, together with my 75 Summi and 90 MElmar. Whole lot came back adjusted and CLA-ed, and I did not pay a cent. (My dealer has a free shipping policy during the waranty period, provided the complaint is warranty based)The focussing is much better. I will not say perfect, because my eye's aren't and I hate testing and pixel peeping, but most close-ups with the 75Summi are now spot on. Obvious that I have little reason to rant Can I ask how long did the readjustment take? Also, does this happen because of knocks or do RFs go out of alignment for other reasons? I havent had a RF before and may get the M9, I would like to know what I am dealing with... CJ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted October 22, 2010 Share #6 Posted October 22, 2010 3 weeks. This problem has little to do with knocks etc. Search this thread for a comprehensive answer by SJP. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted October 22, 2010 Share #7 Posted October 22, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry! SJP's post is in another thread, very recently. Just do a search! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 22, 2010 Author Share #8 Posted October 22, 2010 Update. Emailed Leica Head Office and copied to Mayfair about this 2pm today. Email back at 3pm today from John Murphy (Mayfair Manager) Going to Leica Mayfair tomorrow to exchange the offending M9 for a new one. Will take all my lenses and laptop to check they all focus ok. I must say that despite my gripes I cannot fault Leica Mayfair for their willingness to solve problems asap !! There again they have had £16k of my hard earned cash in the last 4 months and I was pondering on a Noctilux for christmas..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted October 23, 2010 Share #9 Posted October 23, 2010 ...at 2 - 2.5m wide open...... 135/3.4 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 3" 75/2 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 2" 50/1.4 - subject out of focus - back focusses by 3" 50/2 - subject in focus - back focusses minimally, if at all 28/2 - subject in focus - back focusses minimally 18/3.8 - subject in focus - possibly back focusses but it's impossible to tell really.... ... what did you use for a target at 2.5 m? Like you said, if two lenses differ on the same camera and the test is reliable, then at least one of the lenses is off. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted October 23, 2010 Share #10 Posted October 23, 2010 ...If you than take the picture by simply rotating to infinity without looking at the overlap in the viewfinder and the picture is (much) sharper, it is the infinite setting in the camera which is off. Good info... not sure about the last, though. If Julian's description of the two adjustments is correct, the rangefinder can be off at infinity and the infinity setting o.k., or conversely the infinity setting can be off and the rangefinder o.k. at infinity. The service manual that circulates is a little vague on the details. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted October 23, 2010 Share #11 Posted October 23, 2010 Good info...not sure about the last, though. If Julian's description of the two adjustments is correct, the rangefinder can be off at infinity and the infinity setting o.k., or conversely the infinity setting can be off and the rangefinder o.k. at infinity. The service manual that circulates is a little vague on the details. There are three coupled pieces of information when taking a picture of an object at infinity. [1] The focus quality of the image (how sharp is it compared to how sharp it can be with that lens) [2] The overlap of the image in the rangefinder window [3] The reading on the distance scale of the lens In principle, you can adjust any of those three readings to be correct for infinity. [1] focus quality by trial and error, taking many images close to what it should be (not very practical so better let this one be an outcome reading rather than a setting) [2] by setting the overlap of the rangefinder images to maximal [3] by setting the lens to infinity on its scale Now let's assume you use the overlap as the adjustment variable (like we always do when taking a picture), then there are two outcome values: the focus of the image and the reading on the distance scale. Let's go through the possible outcomes and what it means [A] image is in focus, distance scale is at infinity. Most likely everything is fine. image is not in focus, distance scale is not at infinity. Most likely the rangefinder is off. [C] image is in focus, distance scale is not at infinity. Most likely both rangefinder and lens are off. [D] image is not in focus, distance scale is at infinity. Most likely lens is off Interesting to note that what is used here as a piece of information is the reading of the distance scale. Usually that is not such a good piece of information. In fact in larger manual lenses like Hasselblad 500mm, often the lens can focus through infinity to be able to handle temperature effects and wear of the lens mount for instance. Not so in Leica lenses. The fact that they can not focus (according to the distance scale) beyond infinity, shows that the design relies on high precision. Therefore it can be used as a third piece of information. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted October 23, 2010 Share #12 Posted October 23, 2010 Now let's assume you use the infinite end of the distance scale of the lens as the adjustment value (for instance when you can not find the rangefinder to overlap) Let's again go through the possible outcomes and what it means [a] image is in focus, rangefinder images do overlap. Most likely everything is fine. image is not in focus, rangefinder images do not overlap. Most likely both rangefinder and lens are off. [c] image is in focus, rangefinder images do not overlap. Most likely rangefinder is off. [d] image is not in focus, rangefinder images do overlap. Most likely lens is off To get back to the original poster: thighslapper found outcome [c] of this second list. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted October 23, 2010 Share #13 Posted October 23, 2010 I own more then 10 Leica M lenses, several of them bought new and several ones (including the 50/1.4asph) have been to Leica for adjustment more than once. IMO one either accepts some minor inaccurancies (but why buy a 50mm normal lens for over 2000 € if you use maximum sharpness due to slight focus faults or if you have to allways stop down for compensation) OR you have to be very very patient. Take some time to test lenses, and then send either camera and lenses or just the lenses to Leica. Afterwards check again. The funny thing is that my 2 less expensive lenses (35 and 75 Summarit) seem to focus most reliable. My 50asph needs to go to Leica for a third time (short distance ok, medium and infinity slight back focus), 135/3.4 I will probably give up. I can not even get consistent back or front focus so I think I can just not focus accurate enough. Now if you nail focus IQ with the M9 is so good and I like the small size and the user interface so much (for my taste) that I will continue with Leica M - however from a focus accurancy point a D700 (and the posibility to set fi ne adjustments for each lens in the menue) makes fokusing wide open much more reliable and easy. I totally agree that it seems that Leica either uses too wide tolerances for their testing or they do not test enough each camera and lens before shipping it out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shootist Posted October 23, 2010 Share #14 Posted October 23, 2010 Until you have the vertical alignment spot on, with any M camera, you really can't do a focus test and or be sure of perfect focus with any lens at any distance. So the M9 you have may be OK in all other respects, as to focusing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted October 23, 2010 Share #15 Posted October 23, 2010 IThe funny thing is that my 2 less expensive lenses (35 and 75 Summarit) seem to focus most reliable. That is helped because they are already "closed" down to f/2.5 compared to the two times wider apertures of f/1.4 lenses, giving doubling of the image distance focus tolerance at the same focal lengths. The 135/3.4 can be focused reliably within the resolution of the M9 using a 1.25x magnifier and corrected eyesight. It is the (modern) lens with the most critical focusing on the M and because of its phenomenal image quality any focus defect becomes visible. However I use the lens regularly wide open and it is no problem to focus it critically, with the exception of night time conditions combined with low contrast objects. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 23, 2010 Author Share #16 Posted October 23, 2010 Another update. Collected a replacement M9 from Leica Mayfair. Took all the troublesome lenses and focussing is definitely much improved although I will have to check again thoroughly in the next few days. I expect all the ok lenses will now be off and a selection of the previously unfocussed ones will now front focus instead of back focus ..... what joy..... They actually had spare new M9 stock so it looks like Leica have finally caught up with demand. I also notice that the zoomed in screen image on this camera seems sharper than my old one and checking focus is much easier..... I'm sure I am not imagining things. I had upgraded to the latest firmware on the old one. Have Leica tinkered with things ??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
phancj Posted October 24, 2010 Share #17 Posted October 24, 2010 Another update. Collected a replacement M9 from Leica Mayfair. Took all the troublesome lenses and focussing is definitely much improved although I will have to check again thoroughly in the next few days. I expect all the ok lenses will now be off and a selection of the previously unfocussed ones will now front focus instead of back focus ..... what joy..... They actually had spare new M9 stock so it looks like Leica have finally caught up with demand. I also notice that the zoomed in screen image on this camera seems sharper than my old one and checking focus is much easier..... I'm sure I am not imagining things. I had upgraded to the latest firmware on the old one. Have Leica tinkered with things ??? Can I ask what serial number range you have on your newest M9, the one with "a better screen"? I'm gonna make sure I get one with more problems ironed out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted October 24, 2010 Share #18 Posted October 24, 2010 There are three coupled pieces of information when taking a picture of an object at infinity. [1] The focus quality of the image (how sharp is it compared to how sharp it can be with that lens) [2] The overlap of the image in the rangefinder window [3] The reading on the distance scale of the lens In principle, you can adjust any of those three readings to be correct for infinity. [1] focus quality by trial and error, taking many images close to what it should be (not very practical so better let this one be an outcome reading rather than a setting) [2] by setting the overlap of the rangefinder images to maximal [3] by setting the lens to infinity on its scale Now let's assume you use the overlap as the adjustment variable (like we always do when taking a picture), then there are two outcome values: the focus of the image and the reading on the distance scale. Let's go through the possible outcomes and what it means [A] image is in focus, distance scale is at infinity. Most likely everything is fine. image is not in focus, distance scale is not at infinity. Most likely the rangefinder is off. [C] image is in focus, distance scale is not at infinity. Most likely both rangefinder and lens are off. [D] image is not in focus, distance scale is at infinity. Most likely lens is off Interesting to note that what is used here as a piece of information is the reading of the distance scale. Usually that is not such a good piece of information. In fact in larger manual lenses like Hasselblad 500mm, often the lens can focus through infinity to be able to handle temperature effects and wear of the lens mount for instance. Not so in Leica lenses. The fact that they can not focus (according to the distance scale) beyond infinity, shows that the design relies on high precision. Therefore it can be used as a third piece of information. This has nothing to do with my comment, which was about the usual two adjustment points, gain and offset of the rangefinder, or whatever you want to call them. Actually I'm not sure if they should be called this, because I'm not exactly sure how they work in effect, hence my comment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 24, 2010 Author Share #19 Posted October 24, 2010 Phancj....... This is my subjective impression only...... I'm not aware that there has been any change in the screen resolution... Leica would have announced this if they had changed it as it has been a common complaint. If there is any change at all it is probably the rendering of the image by the software. Serial no. of this camera is 397XXXX Anyway with a Rangefinder camera the review screen is really only to check composition, exposure and possibly for camera shake. Unless you are taking pics of moving subjects or 'zone focussing' focussing should always be ok as you are doing this manually and you have visual confirmation before you press the shutter.... Unless you are half blind, incompetent or have a dodgy focussing M9 or lenses of course ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted October 24, 2010 Share #20 Posted October 24, 2010 Perhaps you have the impression that the image is sharper on the camera screen because you more often have a correct focus now Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.