wattsy Posted August 6, 2012 Share #41 Posted August 6, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) FWIW, I've owned two of these FLE lenses and both have the 'rattle'. My previous version 35 Summilux also made the same noise. I've always assumed it is normal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 6, 2012 Posted August 6, 2012 Hi wattsy, Take a look here 35mm Summilux FLE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted August 6, 2012 Share #42 Posted August 6, 2012 Well...... twenty years of fast jets and firearms! But no, I use control samples performed by two teenage children with acute YOUNG musically trained ears in a quiet environment when analysing M lens rattles. Not one of my lenses has any detectable noise. None, nada, zip not even a gnats whisper. Give it a proper shake with the front of the lens pointing down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 6, 2012 Share #43 Posted August 6, 2012 Why would I want to aggregate my lens and "give it a proper shake"? Maybe that's why yours rattles because you shake it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 6, 2012 Share #44 Posted August 6, 2012 It should only be stirred... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil U Posted August 6, 2012 Share #45 Posted August 6, 2012 Shake N Vac (1979) Classic UK Ad - YouTube Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted August 6, 2012 Share #46 Posted August 6, 2012 Lol Shouldn't this be in a sensor cleaning thread? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted August 14, 2012 Author Share #47 Posted August 14, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Just received my 35 FLE back from Leica. By the way, I mailed it 8/1012, with their return label that they emailed me, and got it this morning 8/14/12. That is 3 business days! Nice job of customer service. :D:D 1) Leica NJ fixed the loose hood problem. They obviously changed the o-ring to a larger diameter and also sent back a new hood. 2) The lens does not rattle now. The history is: This lens is among one of the first 35 FLE lenses made in 2010. As new, it had a just detectible rattle, about as much as any other lens I had. I returned the lens 2 months ago to have the front of the lens barrel and the aperture ring replaced from a scrape accident with a wall. The lens came back to me from NJ and had an obvious rattle like something was terribly loose inside. Now the lens is dead quiet. So, all I can conclude is that Leica can do something that 100% fixes what ever is loose inside this lens. All is well and I hope this information helped others... and Geoff - I will use the lens hood from now on. - The odious member that can be stirred but not rattled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted August 14, 2012 Share #48 Posted August 14, 2012 Glad to hear that story. As they say, a happy ending. Now let's get back to creating images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted August 14, 2012 Share #49 Posted August 14, 2012 Good news that it is all sorted out now and quickly. Now shoot it a lot and fall in love. Mine is very early production too. The tinkle free, tight hooded batch apparently. Mine proved to need focus calibration in the end which I hadn't even noticed. That says some thing about the way I was using it I guess. It's spot on now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 11, 2012 Share #50 Posted September 11, 2012 I have recently received my FLE, bought used from Red Dot with 1 year Leica warranty still on it. It's in mint condition late serial number, which makes me suspect it hasn't been abused. It rattles faintly when shaken. I didn't even notice it until I read this thread actually. Still it works like a charm. What an incredible lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted September 11, 2012 Share #51 Posted September 11, 2012 The rattle is normal. Yes, the lens is really very incredible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 12, 2012 Share #52 Posted September 12, 2012 This thread started as a lens hood discussion, and continued as a lens rattle discussion. Permit me to return to the original subject. Ten minutes ago, I finally unscrewed the hood from my lens and put an 8x magnifier to it, something we should have done long ago. But first I want to tidy up the semantics a bit. Most lenses with this new type hood are delivered with a protective, inner-threaded metal ring that goes on the external hood thread of the lens, if you don't use the hood (which you should). This metal ring is not an O-ring. 'O-ring' is a technical term for a ring made of elastic materal, usually neoprene rubber, used as a seal to keep a fluid inside some kind of plumbing hardware. In a good hardware store you can buy them in various standard sizes. The protection ring that comes with the lens is something that you unscrew the first time you fit the hood, and then you put it inside the lens case and forget it. The investigation revealed to me that, unless my rheumy old eyes fail me, there are also two rings somehat similar to O-rings, not much more than a millimeter thick, one in the hood and one on the lens. The hood ring is located abutting the slight step where the threading ends. It is a continuous ring and probably held there by friction plus some adhesive. The lens ring too sits where the treads end, but because of the axial step that stops the hood's turning, this ring is a split one. As you screw the hood in, you feel an increase of friction during the last 30° or so before the stop, and this is where the two rings come into contact. When you reach the stop, this friction is enough to secure the hood. Obviously, if either of the two rings are missing, there will be little or no friction, and nothing to keep the hood from unscrewing when the evil spirits are so minded. So the two rings are properly speaking friction rings. Split rings of steel are also used, as you know, as friction rings to lock a nut on a bolt. This is probably where the idea originated. The old man from the Screw-Ball Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted September 12, 2012 Share #53 Posted September 12, 2012 The protection ring that comes with the lens is something that you unscrew the first time you fit the hood, and then you put it inside the lens case and forget it. The lens is sold with the hood already fitted. The "protection ring" is hidden (along with a standard E46 plastic lens cap) under a foam insert inside the leather case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 12, 2012 Share #54 Posted September 12, 2012 The lens is sold with the hood already fitted. The "protection ring" is hidden (along with a standard E46 plastic lens cap) under a foam insert inside the leather case. I found this rather cool and James Bondish. Took me a second to see the hidden compartment at the bottom in the leather case. I have used the lens on occasion without the hood. Not that it is a big lens but without the hood it is, imho, a little bit easier to use because there's virtually no finder blockage. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 12, 2012 Share #55 Posted September 12, 2012 The Summitar lenses (if I may be allowed to mention these non-U optics) come with the protection ring in place, and no hood, which you must buy separately. And though the 35mm FLE is somehat less prone to flare than its predecessor, it is by no means immune. I remove the hood only when I use a polariser. The old man from the Age of the 3.5cm Elmar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted September 13, 2012 Share #56 Posted September 13, 2012 I found this rather cool and James Bondish. Took me a second to see the hidden compartment at the bottom in the leather case It's true - I had the lens about 3 months when I discovered the extra cap. I had no idea it was there! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
insomnia Posted September 13, 2012 Share #57 Posted September 13, 2012 Anyone tried to fit it on another 46mm lens with similar hood (24 and 21 Elmars)? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 14, 2012 Share #58 Posted September 14, 2012 Both the 21mm Super-Elmar and the FLE use the same 12465 hood. I don't know about the 24mm Elmar. The old man from the Age of Photography Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted September 14, 2012 Share #59 Posted September 14, 2012 The Wiki lists the 12465 hood for the 35 FLE and the 24 E-M. Edit: Perhaps we should add a reference to this hood in the entry for the 21 S-E. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted September 15, 2012 Share #60 Posted September 15, 2012 I have often reflected that the literature mostly ignores the question of hoods. A lens hood is really no negligible matter. Leica data sheets should list (correctly!) the hood type and number, and handbooks should do the same. The hood, being in harm's way, is really the most needed spare part for a lens. So thanks for the info on the hood of the 24mm Elmar. It is of course clever of Leica to use the same hood for several enses, but it is nothing new. The engraving on my old orphaned 12585 hood says "1:2/50; 1:2.8/50; 1:3.5/50; 1:2/35; 1:2.8/35; 1:3.5/35". The old IUFOO/12575 did fit all lenses 90mm or longer with a E35 filter thread, and is still delivered with the 90mm Macro. The old man from the Age of the IUFOO Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.