wlaidlaw Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #61 Posted June 21, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sometimes I wonder if I should start my own courier company. I could not do worse than the current lot. GLS has had my S3 Telyt for two days now. During that period, it has travelled 100km but in the wrong direction, north from Frankfurt rather than south and not as far as I can see, to an airport. Last week I had to send some urgent signed papers to Zurich. I arranged a pick up by UPS and paid for their overnight service. Did it arrive - of course it didn't. I therefore had to scan one by one on my flat bed scanner, over 100 pages and fax them to Switzerland. I have just had a phone call to tell me that the package arrived this morning, some 6 days late I will get my money back from UPS but not the cost of faxing over 100 pages or the three hours of my time. Two weeks ago, I waited in three days for my new Audiolab DAC to be delivered by courier. Wilson :-(( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted June 21, 2012 Posted June 21, 2012 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here Rare error in Paul van Hasbroeck's Leica History. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
luigi bertolotti Posted June 21, 2012 Share #62 Posted June 21, 2012 Imho it's typical (not the first time I do notice) that in periods of (globally speaking) economical crisis/stress, the quality level of some basic but worldwide-spread services like this show a degrading of quality standards... . (about "starting you own Courier service"... maybe JC would prefer we keep it secret... ... but me and him are thinking to start a global biz around reproductions of the 14138... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 21, 2012 Author Share #63 Posted June 21, 2012 Imho it's typical (not the first time I do notice) that in periods of (globally speaking) economical crisis/stress, the quality level of some basic but worldwide-spread services like this show a degrading of quality standards... . (about "starting you own Courier service"... maybe JC would prefer we keep it secret... ... but me and him are thinking to start a global biz around reproductions of the 14138... ) Luigi, Put me down for number 3 off the line ;-}} Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 23, 2012 Author Share #64 Posted June 23, 2012 Well my lens is now sitting in north west France, where it has been unmoving for the last 24 hours. It has had the grand tour. Having started in Frankfurt, it remained untracked for the first 24 hours, then moved 100km north, where it sat for a day. Then it moved 200km east into the former DDR where it sat for another day. Finally it reached France near Rennes in Brittany but at the diametrically opposite corner of France to me in the southern Var. I had always assumed these companies applied some sort of optimised routing to each parcel and gave it an appropriate bar code to follow that route but obviously not. Having been reading about GLS on the net, it would appear that since this company was bought by UK's Parcelforce (usually known as Parcelfarce), it has gone steadily downhill. Apparently a standard trick is to make three imaginary deliveries (where you were "out") and then either steal the parcel or return it to sender. I wish the seller had used Fedex. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #65 Posted June 25, 2012 Even though the tracking still shows my Telyt in the middle of France, it has finally arrived. I have done some comparative shots. Now it is not very sunny today, where the V2 struggles but I can see little to no difference in contrast between the two lenses. What I can see disappointingly, is that my V2 lens is noticeably less soft than the V3. I have checked with a very bright LED light and there is no sign of haze in the V3 lens. The V3 seems to focus some way beyond infinity. I suspect my Visoflex does need a small tweak, as it was optimised for a 65 Elmar at around 2 metres and not a long lens at infinity. I have noticed that the foreground is usually slightly sharper than the background. Both images below taken with lenses wide open, on a big heavy tripod and using a cable release on the Viso. Wilson Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181952-rare-error-in-paul-van-hasbroecks-leica-history/?do=findComment&comment=2048173'>More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #66 Posted June 25, 2012 Here is the very reasonable response I have had from the seller after sending him test crops from the V2 and V3 Telyts After reading your email, I have checked literature. I read nothing about changes in the optical system. According to the books, justr the mount and connection type was changed over the years, as well s the position of the aperture blades possibly. NONE of the 3 books I consulted (Laney, Sartorius, Leica Pocket Book) wrote anything about optical changes! So it seems to me, there WERE no optical changes. Do you want to return the lens? Best regards From what everyone has told me on this forum, the optical formula was changed from V2 to V3 but is there any evidence for that in any reference book or is this a piece of Leica Apocrypha? Certainly the optical cell is 10mm longer in the V3, which means it must be somewhat different. Wilson (somewhat puzzled and bemused) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 25, 2012 Share #67 Posted June 25, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Erwin Puts mentions a redesign. I don't think he tested the lenses. This Midland designed Visoflex only lens offers medium overall contrast at full aperture with .3 stops vignetting. Coarse detail and outlines are cleanly recorded with a lower contrast over the whole image area. Finer detail is clearly visible, but is of very low contrast. Stopping down to 1:8 does crispen the definition of fine detail, with a marginal improvement of the overall contrast. Stopping down to smaller apertures does not improve the recording capability of fine detail and in fact softens the edges visibly. Here we see the fact that the natural improvements of stopping down are offset by the residual aberrations. Given the modest aperture of 4.8, stopping down would be helpful only to a small extent. It has very low distortion and close-up performance is improved too. From # 2340944 a newer design with higher contrast and better definition of fine detail has been produced. Close up performance is very good. Btw, those shots look like nothing I get from mine... A nice flary situation, still handled well: Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181952-rare-error-in-paul-van-hasbroecks-leica-history/?do=findComment&comment=2048335'>More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #68 Posted June 25, 2012 Jaap, Thanks for that quote. I had found it too in my Puts' Compendium, page 182 and had sent a copy of the relevant passage back to the seller. The lens I have bought is just after the change, with a serial number of 2340983, so it must be the different design. There cannot be much wrong with my Visoflex, as the focus of my 560mm lens seems spot on. I am wondering if this is just an example of the S3 lens that is not particularly good at very long distances and that my S2 is very sharp. We all know that lenses vary. Testing the two lenses at closer distances (around 15 to 20 metres rather than 1500 metres) this afternoon, more akin to how I would be using it in real life, the situation is reversed. I particularly notice the V3 as being easier to focus with the added contrast being visible in the viewfinder. Why is life never simple? Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 25, 2012 Share #69 Posted June 25, 2012 Btw, Wilson, dont go ordering any filter adapters until you had a chance to check your lens. The handbook mentions a different thread, but I am convinced it takes 58 mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #70 Posted June 25, 2012 Btw, Wilson, dont go ordering any filter adapters until you had a chance to check your lens. The handbook mentions a different thread, but I am convinced it takes 58 mm. Afraid not. I have tried a 58mm Cokin adapter. There is what looks slightly like another smaller filter thread behind the main 66mm one but this is just a spacer with milled ridges on it. I have found UK sellers with a 14169 66mm to Series VIII adapter and a seller with a Series VIII circular polariser. Before I buy I will have to decide if I am going to keep this lens. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 25, 2012 Share #71 Posted June 25, 2012 Wilson, I have a version 3 unit which is serial number range 27139xx. I behaves very well at infinity focus and close focus. I suspect there is something amiss with the focus in your photo. I would suggest a focus "bracketing" scan test. (I assume you are using an M8 or M9 with this.) Take a number of far field pictures with the focus adjusted slightly between each pic. Analyze the pics at 1:1. Is the best focus where you thought it should be? Is it sharp? If there is no sharp focal point, then there may be an adjustment error in the alignment of the 4 optical elements. You can check that this is indeed the v3 optics by unscrewing the heads of both units from their helical mounts (they were designed for this) and comparing them side by side. The v3 head will protrude more on the back side. For example, the adapter for the focorapid used the smaller mount thread of the lens head. That adapter will not work on v3 because it protrudes too far back and is of greater diameter at the last lens element. Anyway, a careful comparison of the lens heads should show differences between v2 and v3. The front filter for the v3 is a series 8 which is held in with a special Leica retainer 14169. Other size series 8 retainer rings won't work (too large). Fortunately, this ring is fairly inexpensive if you look around. KEH had some (I haven't looked recently) and they show up regularly on ebay. I bought my v3 for a relatively low price since it needed some cleaning. Fortunately, it is a relatively easy unit to service, even for a do-it-yourselfer. Mine had considerable condensation and haze on the lens elements inside. The contrast on picture taking in that state was very bad (no surprise). Simple dis-assembly and cleaning of the individual lens elements fixed it. The optics consist of 4 elements with air gap (no cemented doublets), so it is straight forward to service. The v3 unit is really a decent performer. It is much better optical quality then the 200 f/4, for example. It is worth servicing and restoring this lens. Good luck. Let us know if you are able to find out more detail on your unit. RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #72 Posted June 25, 2012 Robert, This lens is odd. The picture in the Visoflex looks good but the result at long distances on my M9 is soft compared with the V2 lens. I have tried focus bracketing with little improvement. At closer distances, the lens is definitely sharper than the V2. The Visoflex is spot on with the V2 280 Telyt and 560 Telyt so there is nothing wrong with the Visoflex set up. Given the price I paid for this lens, it was not for a DIY kit. I am not therefore, going to start taking the optical cell apart. If it is not right, it is going back. It definitely is a series 3 lens with the longer optical cell and further forward diaphragm. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #73 Posted June 25, 2012 I have been trying again, using the micro prisms rather than the split image (I am using a Nikon FE screen on my Visoflex). On the V3, the focus seems much more critical than the V2 and if you get it spot on, it is sharper than the V2, even at long distances. Also you seem to have to come up from near focus rather than down from far. When I was focus bracketing before, I was adjusting too far. On that basis, I decided that focus issues were more down to me rather than the lens, so I will advise the seller I am keeping it. It does show however than I can sell the V2 lens and advise without fear of contradiction, that for a V2 it is a good lens. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted June 25, 2012 Share #74 Posted June 25, 2012 Wilson, I read just now about your first experience with your V3... and am happy to see that, in itself, it is up to the expectations.... my idea is that maybe the problem is in the Viso... it is, after all, a device that, if I remember correctly, has 3 "points of tuning" and, together with the question of screens, can give some unexpected problem with a certain lens : I have a Viso III that, simply said, is fine with all "long" lenses (280 to 800) but looks to me a bit less precise than my other (Viso II) when used with various combinations of macro devices and "short" lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 25, 2012 Share #75 Posted June 25, 2012 Wilson, Yes, sounds like the Viso is fine. Glad to hear you are able to get a sharper focus after some effort. Regarding the filter rings: The 14169 ring retains the series 8 filters on the 280 v3 lens. It is smaller than most other series 8 retaining rings. That 14169 is just a narrow retaining ring that holds down a series 8 filter under it. There is also a 14165 series 8 retaining ring for the 400mm f/6.8 and other lenses. That ring is larger and will NOT work on the 280 v3 lens. There is also a "rotoadapter" which screws into the front of the 14165 and holds a series 8 polarizing filter. That allows rotation of the polarizing filter. Nice unit, but the rotoadapter will NOT work together with the 14169 adapter. The only way I have found to use a polarizing filter on the 280 v3 lens is to loosen the 14169 retainer, position the polarizer, then tighten back down. I have not found any rotating adapter which allows easy polarizer angle adjustment. I also have not found any such adapter in the Leica price lists from the 1970s. If there is a better solution, I'd sure like to hear it. I have not found any generic series 8 polarizers that work together with the 14169 ring. RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #76 Posted June 25, 2012 Robert, My personal experience is that circular polarisers do not require alignment as much as linear ones. I have just bought a 14169. The seller of the Series VIII filter wants to send it next day DHL and as I am not in the UK at present, that is pointless. I have asked him for an alternative quote for ordinary first class post. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted June 25, 2012 Share #77 Posted June 25, 2012 Yes, 14169 is just what you need, no matter what. As for polarizer alignment, I don't find it all that necessary to fiddle much for landscape work. If one just aligns the dot/mark in the direction of the Sun, it works just fine. Or, if one just aligns the dot vertically, it is the same as looking through polarized sunglasses. That is all those glasses do for fixed orientation. The only time one really needs adjustment capability is to remove glare or reflections off glass (or water). RM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted June 25, 2012 Author Share #78 Posted June 25, 2012 My final experiment tomorrow was going to be to replace the Nikon Visoflex screen with the original ground glass but it is not in my tin of small Leica camera bits and pieces, which I have with me in France, so I assume it must be in the Visoflex box back in the UK or in another bits and pieces tin there. This will therefore have to wait. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted June 25, 2012 Share #79 Posted June 25, 2012 Hi Wilson, I find it extremely useful to use an Leica M to Sony E adapter and a either my NEX-5N or NEX-7 at the camera end of a Visoflex III to check if a given V-lens and Visoflex focus correctly. I first focus with the Visoflex and then check with the NEX camera either using focus peaking or magnification. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! The adapter is pretty inexpensive. Maybe you can get a loaner NEX camera for a few days for your tests? Just a thought. I have had all my Visoflexes III CLA'ed and the two I checked with the Elmar 65/3.5 are spot on. I should do more checking though with different distances and different lenses. Also, at the advice of Will van Manen I kept the Leitz ground glass focus screen in my Visoflexes. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! The adapter is pretty inexpensive. Maybe you can get a loaner NEX camera for a few days for your tests? Just a thought. I have had all my Visoflexes III CLA'ed and the two I checked with the Elmar 65/3.5 are spot on. I should do more checking though with different distances and different lenses. Also, at the advice of Will van Manen I kept the Leitz ground glass focus screen in my Visoflexes. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/181952-rare-error-in-paul-van-hasbroecks-leica-history/?do=findComment&comment=2048807'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted June 25, 2012 Share #80 Posted June 25, 2012 I have been trying again, using the micro prisms rather than the split image (I am using a Nikon FE screen on my Visoflex). On the V3, the focus seems much more critical than the V2 and if you get it spot on, it is sharper than the V2, even at long distances. Also you seem to have to come up from near focus rather than down from far. When I was focus bracketing before, I was adjusting too far. On that basis, I decided that focus issues were more down to me rather than the lens, so I will advise the seller I am keeping it. It does show however than I can sell the V2 lens and advise without fear of contradiction, that for a V2 it is a good lens. Wilson The Visoflex can be adjusted extremely accurately, using a collimator. Send yours to Will van Manen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.