Hair coming out in chunks - new 35mm 1.4 backfocus

[d_brown]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I received the 35mm Zeiss Biogon from Tony Rose this morning.

 

IT FOCUSES PERFECTLY, near, far, wide open and stopped down.

 

I now have 3 bad Leica 35s that I consider unusable. Anybody interested?

Hope others have better luck than me!

 

Well, it's off this afternoon to continue shooting my project again, IN FOCUS.

 

Dale

[innerimager]

Tim- I'm really sorry to hear about this, especially as I recommended the 35 lux to you. I just ran a simple test and my point of focus was correct at 1.4,2.0,2.8,5.6 and 8. It is possible for the lens to work on an M*. Sure sounds like the same lens may have come back unfixed. best....Peter

[wattsy]

I just ran a simple test and my point of focus was correct at 1.4,2.0,2.8,5.6 and 8. It is possible for the lens to work on an M*. Sure sounds like the same lens may have come back unfixed. best....Peter

 

That's good to know. It would be annoying to have a £1.8k lens that can only be focussed reliably at F1.4! Maybe they sent Tim my dodgy 35/1.4 by mistake.

[R.Costello]

Dale & Tim

 

I hate to read posts like this as the pain is palpable that you folks are going through.

 

I am sorry anyone has to go through this and I have had the same experience with my D2X and Nikon was able to fix it. I am new to the M8 and have both a 35 Lux ASPH and a 50 Lux ASPH and I did my own test of those two lenses today out on the front porch, Camera mounted on a Gitzo G 1325 / Arca Swiss Ball Head. Mounted each lens, focused on a cedar 4x4 post with texture about 20 feet away (with handrails in the picture extending towards me for comparisons and trees 45-ft and more trees about 80 yards distant. I put the camera on (A) and starting with f1.4 took successive shots at each full aperture stop down through f16.0. Eight shots in all with each lens.

 

 

The focus remained dead on throughout my tests (focused on the post) as the background and foreground in each successive shot 'grew' in focus as it should. I can say that this camera and these lenses are just fine. I have taken a total of 507 images to date. All that were taken properly were in focus and where I intended the focus to be. The misses were my error. I am 73 years old and wear glasses and reading glasses. I have two pare of glasses one with a bifocal so I can read quickly when needed and use those glasses when doing photography.

 

I could post some images if anyone needs to see them.

 

Richard Costello

[innerimager]

Here's that simple test I felt compelled to do in a few seconds at the office. The point of focus was the same on the upper left of the pillow. I do think 1.4 is slightly sharper, but they are all in focus. User error in exact positioning hand held and refocusing is certainly contributing to the small differences I see. What do you think? best....Peter

[jaapv]

I think it might be possible to imagine some differences peering at a screen at nose-distance. In print, however? None at all.

[innerimager]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree

[carstenw]

Ooog...this sounds strange. Shouldn't be that far off IMO.

 

My 35 1.4 focuses just fine throughout the aperture range, but I had to adjust the distance arm to get me on the money wide open (all my lenses). Didn't have to send the camera back though.

 

But if the short focus adjustment is off, you need Leica service to adjust that.

 

Jamie, with my M8 and both my 35/2 Asph and 50/1.4 Asph, I focus perfectly at distance, and acceptably at medium distances, but at close distances, they are both focusing past the point where I carefully focused.

 

I also noticed that at least on my M6, and I suspect also on my M8, the vertical alignment of the focus patch is good at distance, but the closer I focus, the further off it is, vertically.

 

Does anyone know if the vertical focus patch adjustment also has a close and far adjustment?

[NickR]

Hmm. Makes me think about the whole hexar Rf focus issue. Was it simply a case of people paying more attention to hexar images because they expected to see a problem. I mean, if this is happening with the M8, it must also occur with every other M mount camera, n'est-ce pas?

[eronald]

Mine is off too, I noticed it yesterday when photographing Pascal Meheut. I think it' only at close distances. It's a pity but the look of the lens makes up for it. Focus on the bridge of the nose for the eyes and you are ok.

 

Edmund

[wlaidlaw]

Tim,

 

While not wishing to rub salt into the wounds, Zeiss say their ZM lenses were designed to minimise focus shift with aperture change. After I got my Biogon 35, I thought "yeah yeah - probably marketing BS". I ran basically the same test you did but using domino tiles and a table tripod and was pleasantly surprised that I could detect no focus shift from f2 to f22. I can't believe that the Biogon should be that much better in this aspect than the triple the price Summilux. I am sure there must be something wrong. The Biogon 21 mm has a bit more focus shift but well within the DOF and picture pixelated before you could zoom to get a really noticeable problem. Have you checked how accurately the Lux is focussing at a variety of distances without altering the aperture?

 

Wilson

[innerimager]

one more from the office, I noticed it is sharper throughout. Good luck Tim, keep us posted....Peter

[tashley]

Thanks to all for advice, symapthy and thoughts!

 

I have been travelling since posting this yesterday so scuse me for tardiness!

 

I just arrived at a shoot and the 35 lux is royally scr&$£d! It has less focus than Britney.

 

It's not my M8 RF adjustment, other lenses are fine. It's the lens. The lens I need cos 35mm is the point at which without 1.1 you can go wide with a filter and not get serious cyan. The lens I paid over 2000 euros for (am I sane? And that was discounted!) and have had replaced once already.

 

So what's going on?

 

1) Other people have 35 lux's that work properly

2) therefore a properly produced and tested 35 lux can work properly

3) therefore I'm on my second dodgy one

4) therefore Leica has a serious QC problem which on a lens this price is inexcusable. Frankly they could have Erwin Puts calibrate each one personally for that.

5) Yes they have flu in Solms, yes they are stressed by 'issues'

6) Despite being a sympathetic type, I wish I had packed my 5d for this trip instead. I don't say that easily.

 

So here I sit, with hoods that don't fit cos of filters and filters stuck in with sellotape and lenses that don't focus (basic requirement!) and 1.25 magnifiers and Capture 1 (what did any of us do to deserve that?) and cyan and glue and string and a 20,000 dollar bag of stuff that can't give me a wideangle shot that is in focus, has no magenta and does not display cyan shift.

 

And you know what? It might JUST be worth it... but I am getting slowly less convinced!

 

Thanks again all. You are troopers.

 

Tim

[wlaidlaw]

Thanks to all for advice, symapthy and thoughts!

 

I have been travelling since posting this yesterday so scuse me for tardiness!

 

I just arrived at a shoot and the 35 lux is royally scr&$£d! It has less focus than Britney.

 

It's not my M8 RF adjustment, other lenses are fine. It's the lens. The lens I need cos 35mm is the point at which without 1.1 you can go wide with a filter and not get serious cyan. The lens I paid over 2000 euros for (am I sane? And that was discounted!) and have had replaced once already.

 

So what's going on?

 

1) Other people have 35 lux's that work properly

2) therefore a properly produced and tested 35 lux can work properly

3) therefore I'm on my second dodgy one

4) therefore Leica has a serious QC problem which on a lens this price is inexcusable. Frankly they could have Erwin Puts calibrate each one personally for that.

5) Yes they have flu in Solms, yes they are stressed by 'issues'

6) Despite being a sympathetic type, I wish I had packed my 5d for this trip instead. I don't say that easily.

 

So here I sit, with hoods that don't fit cos of filters and filters stuck in with sellotape and lenses that don't focus (basic requirement!) and 1.25 magnifiers and Capture 1 (what did any of us do to deserve that?) and cyan and glue and string and a 20,000 dollar bag of stuff that can't give me a wideangle shot that is in focus, has no magenta and does not display cyan shift.

 

And you know what? It might JUST be worth it... but I am getting slowly less convinced!

 

Thanks again all. You are troopers.

 

Tim

 

Tim,

 

I have every sympathy with your post but happy to see it nevertheless, as it now demotes me down to second position in the "Angry Person" league.

 

Wilson

[tashley]

Tim,

 

I have every sympathy with your post but happy to see it nevertheless, as it now demotes me down to second position in the "Angry Person" league.

 

Wilson

 

 

Thanks Wilson - strange that we both live in Sussex - there must be something angry in the water!

 

Tim

[tom0511]

TIm,

I understand how you feel.

3 of my lenses had to be sent in so far (35/1.4asph, 28/2.0asph,50/1.4asph) because of inaccurate focus at small distances. The lenses focus fine now, but not all perfect.

The 50 focuses perfect.

I agree that a lens for this price should be focus fine from the first moment.

I just think that film is more forgiving + with film people dont look at 100% views.

So probably Leica has to adapt and maybe they have to change their quality testing.

 

Plus I think we have to accept that focus accurancy with fast lenses can be a bit critical with rangefinder cameras.

 

Now on the other side when you finally got your stuff working, its a joy to use and delievers great image quality.

Dont give up. (BY the way, when I still was using Canon 1D I had to sent in my brand new 24-70/2.8L because it showed back focus problem, so its not only a Leica thing)