lars_bergquist Posted September 19, 2011 Share #1 Posted September 19, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Has anybody (except those comrades who get to fondle pre-release lenses) actually seen the new 21 Super-Elmar? And if not, does anybody know what is holding it up? The old man ("But behind my back I hear / Time's wingéd chariot drawing near ...") Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 19, 2011 Posted September 19, 2011 Hi lars_bergquist, Take a look here Where's the 21?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Wolfgang Esslinger Posted September 19, 2011 Share #2 Posted September 19, 2011 I bought one from a well-known dealer in Germany so I guess it wasn't a pre-release one. It worked very smooth and at first I didn't notice anything wrong. Only when I read about the problems did I check myself and then called Leica. They told me to return the lens but did not say what the mistake was. Only said it might take longer to correct it (I wanted to use the lens a few weeks later on holiday). I had not yet paid for the lens so I am free to spend the money elsewhere. The lens has since disappeared from dealers' lists so I am not sure whether we will see it again (other lenses which have not been available for months are still listed). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tgray Posted September 19, 2011 Share #3 Posted September 19, 2011 Tom A on RFF has one. He got it about a week ago and has started to upload some pictures from it on his flickr stream. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmith Posted September 19, 2011 Share #4 Posted September 19, 2011 Lars, "but at my back I always hear....." Alwyn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 19, 2011 Author Share #5 Posted September 19, 2011 Lars, "but at my back I always hear....." Alwyn I stand corrected. Clearly, Alzheimer's winged chariot is also in the race. But apart from that, what the devil was the problem? The echoes have not reached me. LB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmith Posted September 19, 2011 Share #6 Posted September 19, 2011 It's from Marvel's "to his coy mistress" whom he is trying to get to go to bed with him before they both get too old. A later passage goes " The grave's a fine and private place But none, I think do there embrace". Alwyn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share #7 Posted September 20, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's from Marvel's "to his coy mistress" whom he is trying to get to go to bed with him before they both get too old. A later passage goes " The grave's a fine and private place But none, I think do there embrace". Alwyn The Elizabethans were not too sure about their spelling, but I think the accepted version is "Andrew Marvell". And again, what was the problem with the Super-Elmar? The Duke of Malfi Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted September 20, 2011 Share #8 Posted September 20, 2011 I have heard not a peep from my dealer here in the US, and his last comments from 4 weeks ago were "still waiting on Solms to sort out the problem(s)". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
asmith Posted September 20, 2011 Share #9 Posted September 20, 2011 What I have heard is that the withdrawal is because of some problem with the focussing. Lars you are quite right about the usual spelling of Marvell; I was just careless. Alwyn Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Fluff Posted September 20, 2011 Share #10 Posted September 20, 2011 And again, what was the problem with the Super-Elmar? My dealer sent their entire allocation back without even being asked - they opened one and tried it on a body and found the focussing was very stiff, like something was binding, even though it was perfect when unmounted - then found every one of the batch was equally problematic. It beggars belief though, given how long Leica have been making M-mount lenses, that this should occur - and clearly given the delay, it's not easily fixed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted September 20, 2011 Share #11 Posted September 20, 2011 Lars, the 1st batch of SEM 21 was recalled due to a problem af abnormal stiffeness in the focusing : some early owners said (see some thread hereby... search for "SEM 21") that indeed noticed the problem, but preferred to keep it because the stiffeness became less evident after using it for a while (this could be both a real or a psychological effect); strangerly, someone said that stiffeness was felt with the lens on the body, but not on the lens alone ( edit : see now it's reported also in the above post)... . Puts' item (June) apparently didn't show the issue . "The lens has an impeccable finish and operates with the Leica-typical combination of silky smoothness and solid.." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 20, 2011 Author Share #12 Posted September 20, 2011 Well, thanks. Errare humanum est and all that, but such a lapse is strange from Leica. Well, I hope I will have mine before Christmas. The old man Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
40mm f/2 Posted September 20, 2011 Share #13 Posted September 20, 2011 I inquired about this lens at the Leica shop in Munich in August and they told me that the release of this lens is delayed due to problems with the focusing mechanism. They did not know when it will be released. I guess advanced lens mechanics is more difficult to put into production than the production of optical elements. Summarits are simple mechanically and semi-available. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted September 20, 2011 Share #14 Posted September 20, 2011 Well, thanks. Errare humanum est and all that, but such a lapse is strange from Leica. Well, I hope I will have mine before Christmas. The old man I wouldn't take it as Gospel but I did hear a murmur (behind my back?) that it could be around the end of the year (2011). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 21, 2011 Author Share #15 Posted September 21, 2011 I inquired about this lens at the Leica shop in Munich in August and they told me that the release of this lens is delayed due to problems with the focusing mechanism. They did not know when it will be released. I guess advanced lens mechanics is more difficult to put into production than the production of optical elements. Summarits are simple mechanically and semi-available. The Super-Elmar focuses via a classical double helical, just like e.g. the 24mm Elmar which is, design-wise, its full sibling. There is no floating elements there, or other exotic mechanisms such as made for stiff focusing in the early issues of the 50mm Summilux ASPH. So I find this quite unintelligible. The Gnomes of Solms should have no such problems. The old man from the Age of Front Cell Focusing Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 21, 2011 Share #16 Posted September 21, 2011 If the focus ring is not stiff OFF a camera, but stiff ON a camera, presumably it is not the focus helical per se that is the problem, but some effect of the lens being mounted. Either part of the lens is touching/rubbing something in the camera - or the excess torque of the lens hanging cantilevered from its mount is causing the helical threads, or the ring and surrounding barrel parts, to be pinched. Some 35mm pre-ASPH luxes jammed when mounted on M8s/M9s - and some didn't. If the pre-production samples tested by Leica, and likely given to reviewers such as E. Puts, worked smoothly, then it seems some flaw crept in during the process of ramping up mass production (parts out of tolerance, or something missed in training the assemblers). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted September 21, 2011 Share #17 Posted September 21, 2011 If the pre-production samples tested by Leica, and likely given to reviewers such as E. Puts, worked smoothly, then it seems some flaw crept in during the process of ramping up mass production (parts out of tolerance, or something missed in training the assemblers). This is the part I can't figure out. In most Western manufacturing companies (and all I have worked for) you have a QA program, certified under ISO-9000 or an equivalent standard, that requires not just inspections on the line but also random sampling for field testing and/or destructive testing. It seems that the problem was large enough to justify a recall (as opposed to just having a smaller percentage of customers with issues send in under warranty for repair/replacement), but didn't show up until released in the market. This is very unusual for a company like Leica, who have a strict mandate on quality. I would imagine after this there will be many corrective action reports written on how and why this happened with recommendations on how to prevent it from happening again. I've written to Solms Customer Service asking for an update, but have not received a reply yet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
250swb Posted September 21, 2011 Share #18 Posted September 21, 2011 I can't imagine what the mechanical problem could be that makes the focus fine off the body, but stiff on the body, but that is what my dealer confirmed to me when they tried their allocation. I decided to opt for the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 instead, saved some money as well. Clearly somebody at Leica was resting on their laurels and it is difficult to comprehend a situation where an entire production run could be recalled for such a fundamental problem. The time it is taking to fix them is also concerning, meaning it can't be down to a simple adjustment. Does nobody at Leica use a camera, or do they only use test benches and a Nikon at weekends? Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 21, 2011 Share #19 Posted September 21, 2011 Given the utmost complexity and narrow tolerances of these designs it would not be surprising if a complete redesign of the mechanics is needed when such a problem emerges - and that may even impact the optical configuration. A major delay is not surprising in that case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StephenPatterson Posted September 22, 2011 Share #20 Posted September 22, 2011 Wow, I never considered the possibility of a complete redesign, but given the time lag since recall I suppose it is a possibility. I would have thought a subcontractor supplying a component not to spec, but if you are right it asks more questions than it answers about the Leica lens Engineering Dept and QA process. That such an error could make it all the way to release is incredible. I am really surprised this problem wasn't found in the beta test lenses supplied for field trials. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.