Unprofessional Leica support . . .

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just like you can drive with half the amount of air required in one tire, most of the time...

 

I do not think this analogy holds. The lens either damages the camera or it does not. In this case it does not. The thing is that somebody when writing the manual did not know whether these lenses were a problem. Mayby that part was even written before the exact specs of the shutter assembly were known. The text in the manual is lawyer-speak intended to cover a bare anatomical part.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[earleygallery]

Come on guys this isn't rocket science. Surely the simple answer is that you can use ANY collapsible lens but just don't collapse it on the M8!

 

As Steve has said you can put some band or tape around the barrel if you're worried about doing it without thinking.

[jaapv]

Sorry James:(, I had already collapsed it several dozens of times before I discovered it was VERBOTEN I'm an anarchist at heart, I will carry on doing so....

[dfarkas]

Here is The Official Leica Information from an M8 service memo:

 

Lenses that can’t be used:

• Hologon 15 mm f/8,
  
• Summicron 50 mm f/2 with close focusing.
  
• Elmar 90 mm f/4 with collapsible tube (production period 1954 –1968)
  

Lenses that can be used, but risk damaging the camera

• Lenses with retractable tubes can only be used with their tubes extended, tubes must never be retracted into the LEICA M8.
  
• This is not the case with the current Macro-Elmar-M 90 mm f/4, whose tube does not protrude into the camera body even when retracted. It can be used without any restrictions.
  

Exposure metering is not possible with:

• Super-Angulon-M 21 mm f/4
  
• Super-Angulon-M 21 mm f/3.4
  
• Elmarit-M 28 mm f/2.8 with serial nos. earlier than 2314921
  

 

Obviously, if people are using this lens collapsed, it does work. My mistake on the "older version." It was the 1954-68 90mm Elmar, not the 50mm Elmar.

 

I hope this information finds good use.

 

David

[dfbldwn]

What is the advantage of the collapsable 50? They deliver a different look people like?

 

The combination of:

1) beautifully compact when collapsed on your film M cameras. Stick it in yer hip pocket on a decent pair of work pants (not fashionably cut jeans).

 

2) It and 75mm 2.0 APO-ASPH share the shortest throw (degrees of arc to rotate focus ring when going from infinity to 3.5 feet) of any Leica M lens I've seen, makes for fast focusing

 

3) When used at f/8, it produces the (IMHO) highest quality image available from any Leica M lens (I love my two APO-ASPHs, 90mm and 75mm by the way) that I've ever seen. For close-up portraits in available light wide open, it has a distinctive and very attractive, but by no means technically perfect, signature.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Well in Jim's defense which BTW i know very well and is a great guy and does come to this forum. He can only give you what advice is given him by leica, any advice differnce to what is adviced by Leica itself can put a customers camera in jeopardy of there camera not functioning properly. No one from leica will give advice contrary to what leica advices which they probably tested this and some may have worked and some may not have.

[ho_co]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@LCT--

Thanks for posting the shot of the two 50/2.8's.

 

That answers my question above regarding the focal length engraving: Your picture shows that the older lens has an actual focal length of 51.9 mm, and that Leica doesn't engrave the actual focal length of the new lens.

[Guest Walt]

Thanks for all the input on using the Elmarit, though I'd posted more to comment on the quality of support. For those who can't imagine why I objected to Jim's note, let me suggest how it might have gone.

 

First note from Jim:

 

"Hey I'm swamped here but I'm going to look into the issue and get back to you. In the meantime hold off using lens this because Leica seems to think there's a rason not to (even though they're coding all the new ones!). You do know that the current 90 Elmarit is usable and can be collapsed because the barrel doesn't actually extend into the camera." [Jim doesn't attach a coding chart because I didn't ask about this issue.]

 

Then a few days or a week later, Jim writes:

 

"I finally got a hold of Heinrich T. in Solms who is the guy who knows this stuff. He says that the new 50 Elmarit is, in fact, fine on the M8. Their concern is that, as the barrel wears, the lens may wobble a bit on retraction and it might leave some scrape marks on the side of the light box (which could in any case be repaired with a little flat black paint). It is not long enough to damage the shutter. The wobble wouldn't be a problem on a new lens and any wear would occur over many years of use. Thanks for using the M system and let me know if I can help in the future."

 

Visualize that. Is this an unreasonable expectation for customers spending $20,000-$30,000 on a handful of camera equipment?

[jaapv]

Thanks for clearing that up, Walt. This should put this matter to rest.

[colorflow]

For whatever it is worth, I do not consider Jim Butler's quoted response "unprofessional". He was quoting the official Leica position, which is probably all the information available to him at this time.

 

But you should know that the same Jim Butler appears a bit overloaded with all the e-mails he gets from us. This last week-end I had e-mails from him at all hours on both Saturday and Sunday including one at 03:51 and another at 22:21.

 

Leica was hit with an incredible workload that they did not count on. And they - the company - could have done better in preparing for, and handling this onrush. But the Jim Butlers of Leica are busting their guts for their customers and their company and it is high time that we recognize their personal efforts.

 

I second the above comment. I have received timely and helpful replies from Jim Butler at all times of the day and during weekends. He has always been professional and looked into my specific questions before replying. I don't see what the problem is in his replies to Walt. You may fault Leica for not hiring more people to help Jim, but as far as I am concerned, Jim is doing a great job.

 

Oh yes, I also just spent a ton of money for Leica equipment recently and over the years.

 

Alan

[4season]

What is the advantage of the collapsable 50? They deliver a different look people like?

 

The advantage with mine is that it's paid for! If you use the lens shade as I do, there's no great advantage to being able to collapse it, because it doesn't actually save much space versus a Summicron with it's retractable shade.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Walt i must say that i am questioning your quotes from Jim since he has no idea who Henrich is , so i asked Jim to forward his e-mails to you for me to have a look at , Like i said i know Jim very well and I found the wording strange from the quotes you have put down. Which here is exactly what he replied too and it does not match up to what you quoted as him saying . i don't think it is very professional to misquote others so at the risk of being more precise on what a Leica employee actually said than what you would rather hear. Read from the bottom up

 

 

 

________________________________

 

From: Technical Info

Sent: Tue 3/20/2007 3:15 AM

To: Walt Odets

Subject: RE: Current Elmar-M 50 mm

 

 

Good Evening,

Any lens that is collapsible, is not recommended...

The shutter could be damage from this type of lens...

Thanks... Jim

 

 

James Butler / Technical Info

 

Leica Camera Inc.

 

1 Pearl Court/ Unit A / Allendale, NJ 07401

 

Leica Camera AG - Home

 

technicalinfo@leicacamerausa.com <mailto:technicalinfo@leicacamerausa.com>

 

This message contains privileged and confidential information.

 

IF IT WAS SENT TO YOU BY MISTAKE, DO NOT READ IT.

 

Instead, please notify the sender by reply e-mail, and delete this e-mail.

 

Unauthorized dissemination, forwarding or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.

 

 

________________________________

 

From: Walt Odets [mailto:odets@comcast.net]

Sent: Tue 3/20/2007 12:24 AM

To: Technical Info

Subject: Re: Current Elmar-M 50 mm

 

 

Jim-

 

When you say "not recommended" that does not sound like "cannot be used."

For example, I know the current 90 Elmar can be used on the M8 and I am

doing that. For a professional camera more professional support is required

and that means some confidence in the customer and some detail in the

response. So, exactly what is the objection to the 50mm Elmarit? Will it

hit the sensor? Must it be attached to the camera in the extended position

and only then collapsed so that it does hit the sides? What will it do and

why is it not recommended? As a professional user of Leica cameras since

about 1965, I see Leica digging its own grave with this kind of response.

Please!

 

Thank you,

Walt Odets

 

 

----- Original Message -----

From: "Technical Info" <technicalinfo@leicacamerausa.com>

To: "Walt Odets" <odets@comcast.net>

Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 7:26 PM

Subject: RE: Current Elmar-M 50 mm

 

 

Good Evening,

I have attached a list of current and discontinued lenses that can be

coded...

Colapsable lenses are not recommended for the M8...

Thanks... Jim

 

 

James Butler / Technical Info

Leica Camera Inc.

1 Pearl Court/ Unit A / Allendale, NJ 07401

Leica Camera AG - Home

technicalinfo@leicacamerausa.com

This message contains privileged and confidential information.

IF IT WAS SENT TO YOU BY MISTAKE, DO NOT READ IT.

Instead, please notify the sender by reply e-mail, and delete this e-mail.

Unauthorized dissemination, forwarding or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.

________________________________

 

From: Walt Odets [mailto:odets@comcast.net]

Sent: Sun 3/18/2007 11:24 PM

To: Technical Info

Subject: Current Elmar-M 50 mm

 

Please advise if the current 50mm Elmar-M can be used and collapsed on the

M8.

 

With thanks,

Walt Odets

[Guest Walt]

No, no, no guys. I said, let me demonstrate how it *might* have gone. This was my fantasy of decent support.

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Well Walt what may have been and what was done are all different animals. I'm sorry if I read it wrong in the first place , it just sounded off and i wanted to be sure you are getting Jim's reply correctly. Personally i think anyone of these lenses maybe used but i would not collapse them with the lens on the body . What Leica is trying to do is be safe let's face it if they did not give you the warning than there liable for the repair. It's like telling a kid not to touch a hot pan, you know there going to do it anyway but they were warned. LOL

 

Lately also the forum is a little rattled and hopefully some answers will come soon on several levels. i know there busting there butts though and really I would rather have them trying hard and making a few mistakes than not trying at all

[ken_tanaka]

Thanks for all the input on using the Elmarit, though I'd posted more to comment on the quality of support. For those who can't imagine why I objected to Jim's note, let me suggest how it might have gone.

 

First note from Jim:

 

"Hey I'm swamped here but I'm going to look into the issue and get back to you. In the meantime hold off using lens this because Leica seems to think there's a rason not to (even though they're coding all the new ones!). You do know that the current 90 Elmarit is usable and can be collapsed because the barrel doesn't actually extend into the camera." [Jim doesn't attach a coding chart because I didn't ask about this issue.]

 

Then a few days or a week later, Jim writes:

 

"I finally got a hold of Heinrich T. in Solms who is the guy who knows this stuff. He says that the new 50 Elmarit is, in fact, fine on the M8. Their concern is that, as the barrel wears, the lens may wobble a bit on retraction and it might leave some scrape marks on the side of the light box (which could in any case be repaired with a little flat black paint). It is not long enough to damage the shutter. The wobble wouldn't be a problem on a new lens and any wear would occur over many years of use. Thanks for using the M system and let me know if I can help in the future."

 

Visualize that. Is this an unreasonable expectation for customers spending $20,000-$30,000 on a handful of camera equipment?

 

So, as I thought, your "issue" is fundamentally centered on your sense of the style of response to which you feel entitled as a result of what you've spent on Leica products during the past 40 years.

 

I also often dislike the shabby style in which I sometimes feel treated by vendors. Who doesn't? In my former business we maintained a solid culture in which we treated everyone with courtesy and respect. As the years pass, and I become more of an old fart with an ever-selective memory, I catch myself becoming less tolerant for casual and careless treatment "knowing" how well "we" handled such matters.

 

But, from what I see, Leica did fine here. Jim's responses were certainly terse and rather rough hewn but they were prompt and accurate to your inquiries, Walt. In the midst of what may be the largest product roll-out in Leica's history I somehow suspect that Jim's busier than a 1-armed paper hanger...with one foot on fire...right now. Personally, I'd be inclined to offer some slack on the style points.

 

I have disdain for people who attempt to use the Internet, particularly public boards like this, to embarrass companies or to magnify otherwise petty personal gripes into public relations issues. Is that what you're trying to do Walt?

[craigrmurray]

For Chrissake, just buy another f****k lens that isn't collapsible. Is there some magic in using a non-recommended, collapsible one?

 

Sorry Leica's e-mail ruffled your feathers, as I'm sure this post will.

[lct]

... Their concern is that, as the barrel wears, the lens may wobble a bit on retraction... The wobble wouldn't be a problem on a new lens and any wear would occur over many years of use...

Looks like you knew the answer already, Walt.

In fact the tube of my 1962 Elmar does not wobble a bit but a lot now.

[earleygallery]

Once again, if the manual tells you not to collapse a collapsible lens on the M8, can you not conclude that you may use it, but NOT collapse it? Why question/argue the point?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[stunsworth]

Walt's "response" was fictional, that was perhaps not as clear as it could have been, but if you read the text carefully it was stated as such - I must admit I had to read it a second time to see this.

 

Guy, I'm _extremely_ surprised - shocked is too strong a word - that a Leica employee forwarded company emails to you at your request, especially when you were not involved in the email chain.

[robsteve]

Keep in mind that the coding on the lenses may be utilized in a future film M for things such as slow flash sync.

 

The damage to the M shutter may be from the air pressure created while pushing the lens in. If you pushed it in too quickly, one side of the shutter could have a positive pressure, the other a negative, bending the shutter blades.