miss_emma_jade Posted January 25, 2011 Share #1 Posted January 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) welll, i have a fewww problems with my 11f. lets make a list, then look at a negative scan from its 5cm f2 summar. 1. it has a flare problem, as a rule I tend to shoot as open as i can, with most other cameras.it will take some practice to remember to close up the lens a little more. I dont have a lens hood that doesnt interfere with the rangefinder either, and ive been shooting this week in late afternoon sunshine. I also looked inside the lens assembly, and found that most of the black paint is missing ot flaking. i think this may contrubute to the problem. 2. it has two light marks on each exposure, on the Left hand side at the top and bottom. you can see in the picture. I guess this is shutter related, any ideas anyone? 3. the shutter speeds are slow. the 25 and B settings in particular, but im guessing a CLA would make it a lot crisper right through. so ideally, this camera needs a CLA, some lens work, a lens hood, and lots of practice to get good pictures from. I dont give up easily, and I've a few friends telling me I could buy a russian lens for it. so I guess im looking for feedback, and some ideas about whether this camera is really worth spending the money on? its in good shape really, after a clean up, and it fits my hand niceley and is a joy to use. I guess too, im asking, is if i can do any of this work myself? Ive overhauled a few of my cameras, i have an instrument trades background, and enjoy doing fine work. I did attempt a russian roller curtain shutter a while back , and its something i never want to repeat, preloading n stuff is best left to the experts. can I redo the paint inside the barrel? will it make much difference? has anyone made a presentable lenshood? I made a round one to fit it, and the rangefinder no longer works. LOL. I see now why it it has a square one. opinions anyone? EMMA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 25, 2011 Posted January 25, 2011 Hi miss_emma_jade, Take a look here 11f problems AGAIN!!!. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted January 25, 2011 Share #2 Posted January 25, 2011 The camera is one thing, the lens another one... : 1) a IIf is a not so ancient item ('50s...) and is one of the best classic Leicas in screwmount : don't forget it is one of the LAST evolutions of the classic Leica, made in a time in which Leitz had restarted to be a healthy company after the troubles of War: so it was very finely engineered: in conclusion is a camera that deserves a well done CLA and deserves to be used; add also that it is not rare, but neither one of the most common classics: to be clear, HAS a value... see, for instance, this well known dealer that has several for sale (www.leicashop.com) 2) The Summar 50 was the first "f2" made by Leitz in the '30s... discontinued in 1939... is a uncoated lens (even if some items were coated "aftermarket") for which flare is the norm and not the exception... add that it had a front element made of a very "soft" glass a lot easy to be scratched; it was made in thousands (over 120.000) and is, generally speaking, one of the less valued Leitz lenses, even if there are no few people who like to use it for its "old style" rendering. In conclusion, I think that, differently from the camera, your Summar COULD even be kept away as a historical piece and no more: there are labs that can CLA also it, including glass surface repolishing, but is up to you to evaluate if is worth... in my opinion, no. But there are lot of other lenses that can be used with satisfaction on your camera: first of all, the Elmar 5cm f 3,5, of which lot of good items are available... other nice lenses (to be used with external viewfinders) are the Summaron 35, the Summaron 28 (no cheap), the Elmar 90 (common, not costly even if good), the Hektor 135 (same as Elmar as availabilty and cost). As a luminous 50, the postwar Summitar f2 is definitely better than the Summar, and not too costly... then there is the Summarit 1,5 which if in good conditions is a surprisingly good lens (I have one, and use often on my Leica M8... ). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted January 25, 2011 Share #3 Posted January 25, 2011 Hi Emma, I think you may have a few problems evidenced by this single shot - it would be useful to see a couple more. 1. The white spots are hexagonal - that leads me to think that they may indeed be internal reflections of your partially stopped down aperture blades. However, to me they look more like the result of holes in your shutter curtains; hold the camera up to the light with the lens off and put your eye against the lens mount with the baseplate removed. Look for little stars... 2. There appears to be a band of overexposure - this may be caused by your finger being too close to the shutter speed dial when taking the picture; it is easy to do and results in the shutter running erratically. Make sure you have your fingers out of the way before assuming an erratically running shutter. 3. The shot looks badly overexposed - this may indeed be a result of a slow-running shutter. So. A CLA is probably in order. As to the lens, personally I wouldn't take it apart myself; I have done so and it is not a job I enjoy, but if it is really tatty, you don't have much to lose. I would try if you can to shoot a few frames with a different lens (maybe a shop will let you "try one out") and see what sort of results you get. The Summar is a nice lens, but I would treat yourself to a nice 5cm Elmar 3.5 for the full Barnack "experience". As to the lens hood question, there are plenty available on the secondhand market, and they are not expensive. I would go down that route rather than DIY. Hope this helps. Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 25, 2011 Share #4 Posted January 25, 2011 A Summar - especially wide open - will be affected very much by flare. Very often the lenses deteriorate so this will make it even worse. I don't think you can do much about it besides using a hood and avoiding big apertures when you shoot in the direction of the sun. Did you ever try a 3.5/5cm Elmar? Of course it's a much slower lens but usually less sensitive for flare and lens deterioration. If you see the light spots on your photos always at the same places, it's a sure sign that the curtain for the shutter isn't good any more. It can be renewed and this together with a complete CLA won't be cheap. Repairing Your camera will probably cost you more than you originally paid. Though you'll get the chance to use it again for the next 50 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted January 25, 2011 Share #5 Posted January 25, 2011 Indeed, the white spots don't seem so related to the typical diaphragm reflection... an odd position... and, btw, Summar had a 10-blades diaph... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted January 25, 2011 Share #6 Posted January 25, 2011 Just to add, the Summar is indeed a soft lens, soft glass physically which is easily damaged and leads to soft looking results, like your photo above. Nice clean Summar's are rare now, but they actually produce pleasantly sharp images, even at f2. I would suggest that your Summar is badly scratched and probably also hazy. The crazing on the inside you mention is common and hasn't affected my ones, so I think it's unlikely the bright highlights are down to that. At the same time it doesn't look like just flare and as Bill says, due to the hexagonal shapes it would suggest that it isn't shutter holes, although I somehow think it must be - easiest way to tell, do they appear in the same place on any other shots? The Summar lens could be cleaned (there's a thread here to show you how to dismantle one so could be worth a try yourself) but if the front element is badly marked it will always be a 'soft focus' lens! I think you need to send the camera off for a CLA, and possibly new shutter curtains. They can sometimes be repaired, small holes can be filled with paint even, but yours look like they could be relatively large holes. I would look for another lens. A clean Summar if you can find one, or a 5cm Elmar (easier to find nice ones), or even a Voigtlander 50mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miss_emma_jade Posted January 25, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted January 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) well almost every shot has those hexagonal dots. im thinking shutter curtain too, *gulp* the glass seems not to be scratched, it may be a little hazy. i had the elements out and shone a torch through. ive vintage lenses much worse, and they give better results. Ill post another picture, see the light points in the same place. I wonder what would be the original lens fitted to this camera, serial number 676659? is there somewhere i can find that out? EMMA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
giordano Posted January 25, 2011 Share #8 Posted January 25, 2011 The IIf didn't go into production until long after the Summar was replaced by the Summitar, so it's almost certain that the two were not sold as new together. An internet search will find a lot of information on overhauling screw-mount Leicas, including a copy of Leitz's "Leica IIIf Servicing Instructions" which is or used to be at http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/service/leica_iiif.pdf. This covers the If and IIf too. See also http://www.pentax-manuals.com/manuals/service/screw_mount_leicas.pdf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted January 25, 2011 Share #9 Posted January 25, 2011 I wonder what would be the original lens fitted to this camera, serial number 676659? is there somewhere i can find that out? Impossible to say (unless to have a precious original receipt) : IIf was listed, if I remember well, in 3 configurations : 1) Body only 2) With Elmar 5cm f 3,5 3) With collapsible Summicron 5 cm f 2 The 3rd being surely the most costly... if the original buyer was a "new to Leica" probably, being oriented to the "medium priced" IIf and not the "top" IIIf, had opted for the Elmar... but he could be a customer who wanted to add a second body... who knows ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted January 25, 2011 Share #10 Posted January 25, 2011 I wonder what would be the original lens fitted to this camera, serial number 676659? is there somewhere i can find that out? The last Summar was issued in 1939 at s/n503 600 Your IIf issued in 1954 They cannot been sold NEW together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
miss_emma_jade Posted August 24, 2011 Author Share #11 Posted August 24, 2011 just an update. Ive spent the weekend servicing this camera, then i fitted my new 50mm color-skopar to the front. new curtains, (not sure ill ever want to do THAT again!) and a book service and shutter test. spot the difference. (and yes, the film is scratched up. I didnt use enough tape on the film spool on my bulk load, then scratched it getting it out of the camera in the dark) but im pretty stoked. Untitled-6 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! EMMA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.