andybarton Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share #41 Posted July 1, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't know what's going on there, to be honest. I seriously think that they've lost the plot. I am actually wondering whether they have taken on a load of new staff who haven't the skills and experience to make these cameras to the quality that they should be made. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 1, 2011 Posted July 1, 2011 Hi andybarton, Take a look here MP 0.58 viewfinder. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jplomley Posted July 1, 2011 Share #42 Posted July 1, 2011 I am actually wondering whether they have taken on a load of new staff who haven't the skills and experience to make these cameras to the quality that they should be made. Having just laid down the coin for an S2 and 35 Summarit-S, your statement Andy scares the hell outta me. Guess I will find out next week if the QC issues on the M product line reach into the S as well...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share #43 Posted July 1, 2011 The M line and the S line will be staffed by a completely different team, I'm sure. I was speaking with Rolo about you this lunchtime - I hope your ears were burning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted July 1, 2011 Share #44 Posted July 1, 2011 Well, my vision went blurry at around 8:00 am this morning EST. What were you gentlemen drinking Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share #45 Posted July 1, 2011 English Breakfast Tea. What else? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted July 1, 2011 Share #46 Posted July 1, 2011 I'm sure Rolo informed you of my angst regarding the S2. Was a tough decision Andy. Had to sacrifice both M7's, a Mamiya 7II kit, a Coolscan 9000ED, one of my M9's, and two M lenses. All I will be left with is one M9 with 21/35/50 M lenses and the S2 with 35 Summarit-S Asph. Hope to add the 70mm before the fall for a nice 28/50 "equivalent" combo. Kept all of my 4x5 equipment as in my evaluation the S2 is not quite up to drum scanned 4x5. I expect the S3 will be if they increase the pixel count and/or reduce the pixel pitch. Apparently the S-lenses were designed to handle sensors with 5um pixel pitch, even thought they do not yet exist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 1, 2011 Author Share #47 Posted July 1, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm sure Rolo informed you of my angst regarding the S2. He did, but I am sure that you won't regret the decision. Have fun with your new kit! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted July 1, 2011 Share #48 Posted July 1, 2011 If your interested Andy, my blog on the S2 at Leica just went live: An Evaluation of the Leica S2 in White Mountain National Forest and Olympic National Park Cheers, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnloumiles Posted July 1, 2011 Share #49 Posted July 1, 2011 If your interested Andy, my blog on the S2 at Leica just went live: An Evaluation of the Leica S2 in White Mountain National Forest and Olympic National Park Cheers, Jeff Stunning work Jeff, I'm a fan of your work. The river face on is my favorite, color rendition is spectacular. Best of luck with your new S2 and I look forward to seeing what you come up with! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiZZ Posted July 1, 2011 Share #50 Posted July 1, 2011 So how do you figure out the RF is out of alignment without looking at the prints? =D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted July 2, 2011 Share #51 Posted July 2, 2011 Seriously? Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiZZ Posted July 2, 2011 Share #52 Posted July 2, 2011 Bear with me. I have an M2 and it seems to be working fine, but I'd like to know for future reference. Will the patch not be in the center? Will I notice it when I focus and compare the distance marker on the lens to the actual distance? Will I find out on my prints because they'll all be out of focus? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 2, 2011 Author Share #53 Posted July 2, 2011 When the viewfinder goes out of alignment, the two focus patches never get to coincidence. It is still possible to focus, but it's much more difficult. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnloumiles Posted July 2, 2011 Share #54 Posted July 2, 2011 Bear with me. I have an M2 and it seems to be working fine, but I'd like to know for future reference. Will the patch not be in the center? Will I notice it when I focus and compare the distance marker on the lens to the actual distance? Will I find out on my prints because they'll all be out of focus? As Andy said they never quite align, but the discrepancy would have to get to a point of being badly misaligned before you saw your prints come back to you out of focus. A more common issue would be a picture taken rather close to the subject with a longer lens wide open. It might end up that the part of your subject you meant to be in focus drops out and another piece of the subject in front or back of the desired focus point is sharp. Oh and this was a perfectly valid question so thanks for bringing it up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted July 3, 2011 Share #55 Posted July 3, 2011 I have found, that there are Leica M bodies, which stick and seem to work forever and there are M bodies (it doesn't matter, how precisely set), will be off regularly. I have a M6 classic, which has been my first Leica, which works perfectly since I set the RF for a 50 Lux shortly after I bought it. Vertical has always been spot on and still is. There has been no need for a second adjustment ever since. A M7, I bought later also second hand is twitchy. Horizontal is fine since once properly set up, but vertical went off regularly every few months - always to an amount of enough annoyance, to stop using the M7. It is my favorite film body though, as for quick … until it's shutter stuck (waiting in storage, to be sent off for repair). A MP, bought second hand in seemingly unused condition has been always spot on from day one and continues, to be perfect. My M8.2, bought second hand needed infinity and close up correction. Vertical setting always spot on. The camera seems to decide for new setup needs on a yearly schedule ;-) Otherwise, this is a very tough and reliable camera. My M9, bought new, has been off in close focus out of the box. A quick setup and it works beautifully - let's see, how long it sticks ;-) Today, I found, that the M9 doesn't flash synch @ 1/180 :-( This means a trip to Solms at my convenience. Otherwise, I am happy with the camera so far - no data for reliability so far though. I feel, that with the "loosing RF setting bodies" something in the assembly of the RF has not been locked down properly, making them easier to knock out. Andy, be patient with the camera - have Leica adjust it a few times and demand a RF rebuild, when your patience is stressed. After such, I guess, it will be dead on reliable for many years to come. I for one calculate for at least one yearly RF checkup and setting, if needed for lightly used bodies. For daily used bodies, this should be looked after at least before every important outing. It lies in the nature of the RF design, to go off at your inconvenience ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FiZZ Posted July 3, 2011 Share #56 Posted July 3, 2011 Am I the only one who is disappointed by these RF failures? I'd expect Leica to have a higher standard of quality control. To hear a few problems, any to be honest, is disappointing. My first range finder was a Yashica GSN Electro, and it was in storage for over 10 years, caked with dust and what not when I bought it off the guy (12 dollars!!!) and I had no problems what so ever with the range finder. I'm thinking that the quality control off the assembly line has dropped remarkably. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted July 3, 2011 Share #57 Posted July 3, 2011 Am I the only one who is disappointed by these RF failures? I'd expect Leica to have a higher standard of quality control. To hear a few problems, any to be honest, is disappointing. My first range finder was a Yashica GSN Electro, and it was in storage for over 10 years, caked with dust and what not when I bought it off the guy (12 dollars!!!) and I had no problems what so ever with the range finder. I'm thinking that the quality control off the assembly line has dropped remarkably. Please also take into account that many users here (myself included) write about RF misalignments in a quality, that would be very, very hard, to effectively see, using film and no exotic lenses like a Noctilux, 75 Summilux or 100mm f2 lenses. The focus misalignments, I am reporting and fixing by myself indeed are almost all on a niggle level - a level, where it becomes critical, to shoot a f1 lens close up, wide open with reliable repeatability on a digital Leica M. This (shooting a f1 lens wide open) is NOT a task for an average beginner or all users of Leica M cameras. Most people use 35/2, 50/1.4 or alike, while some feel the tickle of adding a 90/2. Focus misalignments on the quality, I am referring to become visible in mis focussing wide open, as seen in 1:1 views on a computer screen. Visit any gallery with fantastic photographs of high profile photographer's work and find indeed photographs, which are not focussed pixel correct ;-) I think, the majority here is nitpicking (again … myself included). There is absolutely understandably a certain expectation, that the new Noctilux f0.95 rangefinder coincides @ infinity perfectly AND shoots 1:1 pixel sharp closeups with the newly acquired M9, to view blown up on the screen. To be frank, this is simply not a realistic expectation. During the age of film, super fast lenses (not meant for mortals) where matched to camera bodies by very experienced handy specialists @ Leica or otherwhere. Don't think, that even with much raised quality and tighter tolerances of current production an unrealistic situation will establish itself opposed to physical laws. I am extremely happy with the very high performance of my Leica bodies and lenses. I try, to understand the technical limitations and am willing, to acquire the skills and tools, to be able, to set the RF's myself, as needed (just having finished matching three of my lenses to a newly bought M9 + RF checking across three bodies and my critical lenses - perfect activity for the hot and humid inhumane climate over this weekend in Shanghai). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted July 13, 2011 Author Share #58 Posted July 13, 2011 I am pleased to say that I spotted this on the "Repair" page of Leica's Website this afternoon 13.07.2011 Shipment in process. With a bit of luck, it will be here on Friday. Which would be absolutely perfect timing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted July 13, 2011 Share #59 Posted July 13, 2011 Bear with me. I have an M2 and it seems to be working fine, but I'd like to know for future reference. Will the patch not be in the center? Will I notice it when I focus and compare the distance marker on the lens to the actual distance? Will I find out on my prints because they'll all be out of focus? Hi Fizz The best test is a star like Sirus, there should not be a double image, either vertically or horizontally as you focus to infinity. White cottage several km away next best. If you use a fast lens like /1.1 best to send the M2 away for rangefinder and body collimation, otherwise less critical. Was a problem (even) with film when lots of people had the f/1 Noct from '79 or so... Take a shot of a ruler at 45 degrees to lens axis at 1.5 m... Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted July 14, 2011 Share #60 Posted July 14, 2011 Hi Fizz The best test is a star like Sirus, there should not be a double image, either vertically or horizontally as you focus to infinity. White cottage several km away next best. If you use a fast lens like /1.1 best to send the M2 away for rangefinder and body collimation, otherwise less critical. Was a problem (even) with film when lots of people had the f/1 Noct from '79 or so... Take a shot of a ruler at 45 degrees to lens axis at 1.5 m... Noel Spot on. I use a fixed reference of a building, which does have a beautiful white LED lighting strip from ground to top and is perfect for infinity reference. The angled ruler for checking close focus is my preferred tool as well. Here is a tip: I use a 1000mm stainless steel ruler, which has black lettering. I additionally mark a certain position with two 45º angled black strips of tape. I then light the ruler in a way, to almost white out the shiny metal surface. This creates a very high contrast between the the black lettering and two focus marks and the shiny metal surface, so that even the venerable 50 Lux ASPH shows clear magenta and green edges, to precisely read the focus plane from the files. Another important thing, many people don't think about is, that not all focal length, less so all different lens designs should be collimated with the same infinity or close focus performance. I have a more than 50 year old 50mm Sonnar (50/1.4 Nikkor LTM), which does show significant focus shift by design and is not optimized in design, to shine at infinity AND close focus. It does have a unique design, in that it can close focus up to ~0.45m - a genuine feat for a rangefinder 50mm lens back in the 50s (even Leica didn't design such features until the much later introduced 50/2 DR). I adjusted the Nikkor with it's internal shim and a precise mounting shim, so that it coincides spot on perfectly with my Noctilux close up, wide open, suffering infinity focus slightly. This lens could be adjusted, to render infinity remarkably defined and sharp (astonishing for this old lens), but I do not have the interest in doing so. This goes for ALL lenses. they do not necessarily have the same infinity setting due to manufacturing tolerances (rangefinder cam), but need an individual setup according to their intended use. In short: know what you do or better leave it to a specialist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.