algrove Posted August 25, 2011 Share #41 Posted August 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Are your photos in focus? Disregard. Are they not ? Have it adjusted. And the lenses. I READ A LOT ABOUT OWNERS SUGGESTIONS FOR OTHERS WITH FOCUSING ISSUES TO EITHER HAVE THEIR M9 "ADJUSTED" OR ALL THE LENSES OR BOTH. THEN I READ ABOUT OWNERS WHO SENT THEIR LEICA GEAR TO LEICA USA WITH DISAPPOINTMENT SINCE THEY HAVE TO BE RESENT FOR MORE ADJUSTMENT. WHO HAS HAD THEIR M9 OR LENSES ADJUSTED AND WHY ARE YOU PLEASED WITH THE RESULTS WHERE EVER YOU SENT THEM? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 25, 2011 Posted August 25, 2011 Hi algrove, Take a look here Infinity Focusing/rangefinder accuracy (merged). I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted August 25, 2011 Share #42 Posted August 25, 2011 Why are you shouting? Or is just your capslock stuck? Anyway, to answer your question - I had one or two old lenses that were off. Sending them of for coding and adjusting by Will van Manen, one week turnaround and perfect. The camera has always been perfect, once I dropped it and the vertical was off. As I was close to Zoetermeer, I took it in and got offered a nice glass of white wine whilst I waited for it to be fixed -20 minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted August 25, 2011 Share #43 Posted August 25, 2011 All modern Nikon AF lenses do focus beyond infinity and have no fixed collimated infinity anymore. This is a technical solution, paired with possible in camera focus calibration of the AF system for individual lenses, that works nicely (from close focus to infinity) and in fact also saves Nikon some money as of a less tight tolerance being needed, to adjust the lenses in the factory. Back to Leica RF: I see this all as a common issue, where every user either needs to get over it, learn how to adjust the RF by themselves or have a technician pair lenses and bodies at their convenience. When I bought my M9 new, it came off out of the factory. I didn't complain and didn't even bother, to go back to the shop, but instead, moved on and calibrated the RF myself, as with my M8.2, M7, M6 and R-D1. Interestingly, my MP is the very only Leica RF, I have bought, which focusses spot on out of the box ;-) I was very happy, to find that out back then. RF adjustments are easy standard procedure for any serious user with a brain and enough dexterity skills, to operate a pen and produce a readable, handwritten letter. British cars should come out of the factory without electrical problems, Italian cars should rust less and rattle not so much after the first year and German cars should come from the factory with a bit more beauty, but we all knew that before buying any of those right? I went through dozens of different lenses of different makes and vintages. Some where spot on, some where off, many of the off ones could be easily adjusted myself, some I didn't bother and let the adjustment be done by a specialist. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 25, 2011 Share #44 Posted August 25, 2011 Umm - did Leica adjust these lenses to the new " digital" tolerances or are those " film" lenses that still need attention because of the wider tolerance span on film? First get your body spot-on, and you will probably find that there is not much wrong with lenses after 2008. (that is when Leica got their new calibration rig) Although some lenses have been just fine, in my experience the "digital" lenses don't come set up any better or worse than the "film" lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 25, 2011 Share #45 Posted August 25, 2011 I don't know about Leica, but I do know Will van Manen uses some huge magnifier for adjusting, making the actual lens quite irrelevant. Why would that make the lens irrelevant?...You want the reference lens as sharp as possible, with the least dof, to better evaluate the image. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 25, 2011 Share #46 Posted August 25, 2011 Because, if you manage to adjust your system to within the DOF of the lens that produces the narrowest tolerance you enter the realm of diminishing returns. You are right that for instance a Summicron 90 would produce the highest precision, but if you cannot see it it is irrelevant to all practical purposes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 25, 2011 Share #47 Posted August 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) You said a "huge magnifier" makes the lens you use for the test irrelevant. That doesn't make any sense to me. The magnification you used to focus does not have anything to do with evaluating the image. The poster asked why Leica would use a 50 Summicron instead of some other lens as a reference...I don't know why that is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 25, 2011 Share #48 Posted August 25, 2011 Why don't you ask Leica and Will? I'm sure they will be able to enlighten you...And I'm even sure you are able to figure out a relationship between a magnifier and focussing accuracy. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 26, 2011 Share #49 Posted August 26, 2011 ...And I'm even sure you are able to figure out a relationship between a magnifier and focussing accuracy. The one thing (using magnification to focus) has nothing to do with the other (reading a test). I tell you what, let's just agree to disagree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EJohnE Posted August 26, 2011 Share #50 Posted August 26, 2011 A sensor, unlike film, has virtually no depth. I think the rangefinder may be being pushed beyond its limits for digital. It may be adjusted perfectly, but can go out of correct adjustment far too easily. It is beautiful technology, but for digital it may no longer practical, however much you may love it. You may despise live view or EVF, but both are simpler and work well, even in poor light where the Leica can neither easily be used because of difficulty of seeing the rangefinder patch (however perfectly adjusted), and rather poor high ISO performance of the digital Ms. John. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 26, 2011 Share #51 Posted August 26, 2011 My feeling is that Leica is not calibrating the M9 rangefinder mechanism or their lenses to the tolerances required for this camera/lens pairing. What pairing in particular? When my M9 was rebuilt in New Jersey I mentioned that all I use regularly are two Summilux lenses. They focus spot-on. It's just amazing how accurate they are. Could there be a difference in genres of lenses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted August 26, 2011 Share #52 Posted August 26, 2011 It is for all of the reasons stated above that Linhof would custom cut a cam, with the lens serial number inscribed, for each of the lenses sold for its rangefinder cameras. [....] They quit doing that years ago. And when they did custom grind cams they included the camera serial number, too. Does that tell you something such as standardizing their basic design, or maybe for economic reasons they decided it wasn't worth the trouble. (They did change the back design but mismatched backs on used cameras are not uncommon.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted August 26, 2011 Share #53 Posted August 26, 2011 A sensor, unlike film, has virtually no depth. I think the rangefinder may be being pushed beyond its limits for digital. It may be adjusted perfectly, but can go out of correct adjustment far too easily. It is beautiful technology, but for digital it may no longer practical, however much you may love it. You may despise live view or EVF, but both are simpler and work well, even in poor light where the Leica can neither easily be used because of difficulty of seeing the rangefinder patch (however perfectly adjusted), and rather poor high ISO performance of the digital Ms. John. John, I disagree in several regards: I think the rangefinder may be being pushed beyond its limits for digital. I think, feasible manufacturing tolerances of current Leica M and Leica M lenses are pushing limits in regard of high speed and super high speed lenses in combination with digital high resolution sensors. One has to all fairness rule out former bigger tolerances allowed for all old production lenses - often this is one factor, when people see issues with newly bought digital cameras, mounting them even to new in box bought old stock lenses. A well matched rangefinder lens to a correctly adjusted Leica M digital body works flawlessly and very reliable. I regularly shoot very fast lenses wide open on both a M8.2 and M9 without any issues, I could not take care of. …but can go out of correct adjustment far too easily. This should not happen with normal care. I do not treat my cameras as collectibles behind glass, but carry them on a daily basis and use them. My M8.2 has been used now for about 1 1/2y heavily. It needed one adjustment, when I bought it and another slight correction of the infinity setting only about 1 year after. I regularly check my cameras and adjust, if needed (not often, as you read above ;-)). Care though, that the adjustment after a year, that was needed would not have produced an obvious fault with a slow lens as a 35 or 50mm Summicron, but with shooting a Noctilux or APO-Telyt for critical focus wide open - nothing, the average user does, as I understand from reading this forum. You may despise live view or EVF, but both are simpler and work well, even in poor light where the Leica can neither easily be used because of difficulty of seeing the rangefinder patch (however perfectly adjusted), I completely disagree here. I use different systems, Leica M, Nikon SLR and tried also the current reportedly best EVF solution - a GH-2 adapted for Leica M. The Leica M is BY FAR the most reliable, easiest and quickest to focus camera in low light (manually focussing). The only other system, that comes close to this is the Nikon D3 in AF mode - up to a certain border, where the AF system simply can't keep up with the light level. This is a light level though, where shooting a Noctilux wide open with pushed TriX @ ISO 6400 and low shutter speeds has to be used. The D3 still works, but slower than using the Leica RF. When I talk about low light, I do not mean birthday party at mom's place or overcast rainy day - I mean handheld night shooting. The EVF seriously lacks in low light with strong distractions in brightness "pumping", heavy noise, slooooooooow reaction time, lag and just being so small and low resolving. …and rather poor high ISO performance of the digital Ms. I fully agree and wait for the moment, the Leica M can claim back the performance, it inherited back in the film days - there was an advantage with fine Leitz, fast glass, using the same film as SLR cameras. The D3 with a fast f1.2 or f1.4 lens simply runs circles in low light around any digital M. I hope, this will change someday. So long, I still use pushed BW film or just a wider aperture, when possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 26, 2011 Share #54 Posted August 26, 2011 They quit doing that years ago. ... that's interesting ... So what exactly do you get now, when you get a master technika with a rangefinder? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 26, 2011 Share #55 Posted August 26, 2011 The one thing (using magnification to focus) has nothing to do with the other (reading a test). I tell you what, let's just agree to disagree. Reading what test? I've been talking about a mechanic adjusting lenses and rangefinders all the time. You know, screwdrivers and all that. What the heck are you on about?The magnifier I referred to in the post you latched on to is a focussing magnifier. I am starting to suspect you have some notion of the one my grandmother uses to read the newspaper Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 26, 2011 Share #56 Posted August 26, 2011 that's interesting ... So what exactly do you get now, when you get a master technika with a rangefinder? A camera adjusted to a fixed standard and a lens adjusted to a fixed standard. They use reference camera bodies and lenses to do that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
t024484 Posted August 26, 2011 Share #57 Posted August 26, 2011 You said a "huge magnifier" makes the lens you use for the test irrelevant. That doesn't make any sense to me. The magnification you used to focus does not have anything to do with evaluating the image. The poster asked why Leica would use a 50 Summicron instead of some other lens as a reference...I don't know why that is. I agree. If you want to adjust a RF mechanism within an accepted tolerance of +/- error Xd for various distances d, you better use a reference lens that surpasses this tolerance, preferably by a large amount. This means that a long lens with a large aperture having a DOF that is considerably smaller that the RF tolerance Xd is the better candidate to be used for this process. A large magnifier on the RF helps in decreasing the error in the setting of the distance, but does not make the lens being used irrelevant. I have the same feeling that a 50mm Cron is probably not the best possible candidate for this job. Hans Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 26, 2011 Share #58 Posted August 26, 2011 It may well be - but this is speculation- that Leica found that in terms of helicoid steepnes and focus throw the Summicron 50 gave the best results. As I said before, only Leica could give an insight in the reasons, as it is obviously no problem for them to use any lens they choose for the purpose. They could in theory even have buillt a dedicated adjusting lens based on an R long fast tele. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted August 26, 2011 Share #59 Posted August 26, 2011 "For some lenses" indicates there is an unknown problem. Could be the lens is not correctly set or the camera is wrong. Or just that the tolerence stack up works to cancel the error in some lenses and it is additively wrong with others. Lenses are set separately from the body at the factory. The only thing you can do is experiment. If you blindly change the camera and the lenses are off, then the other "good" lenses will not focus properly. Remember a man with two watches never knows what time it is. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest #12 Posted August 26, 2011 Share #60 Posted August 26, 2011 that's interesting ... So what exactly do you get now, when you get a master technika with a rangefinder? A camera adjusted to a fixed standard and a lens adjusted to a fixed standard. They use reference camera bodies and lenses to do that. Master Technika is a field camera... I have got my answer offline, but thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.