Jump to content

APO Summicron 50/2 ASPH: Central veiling flare / fogging


pajamies

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 934
  • Created
  • Last Reply
A few months ago i spoke with a former worker that used to build the famous Kern macro switar, for Alpa.

He owns now a photographic shop in Zurich and was very proud to tell that in his time at the factory, when a part had say an allowed variation of some hundred's of a millimeter they tried (and succeded) to fall exactly in the middle of the allowed variation.

Then he went on to say that little by little the cost of the very highly skilled workers and the aim to high benefits induced similar precision companies to hire less skilled workers and address problems after, when people would return the camera or lens for problems.

All in all the financials found it was less costly for the company that way.

I wonder if the number of glitches and returns for repair at Leica is not the result of kind of a similar policy.

 

I knew a statistition at Ford Motor Company Headquarters in Dearborn. She said that Ford did the seme thing in the late 80's to mid 90's. One of the VPs defended the decision not to fix minor problems on the production line by saying a repair of the vehicle for shoddy manufacturing was another cost center so it did not effect the bottom line on the manufacturing cost center. She then asked him what would you do when people stopped purchasing Fords? Of course he hadn't thought of that!

Link to post
Share on other sites

QA controls in factories are not a guarantee for flawless products by nature:

  1. They root in statistics which in industry mostly use parameters of some kind
  2. There is usually a level of confidence in statistical parametrical tests, which defines the probability that the result of your test is correct (often 97.5% for just upper or lower limits or 95% for both side limits, like 2.5% for each side)
  3. They take samples only and the sample sizes are often on the edge of what statistics deem significant (e.g. for test over normal distribution, a sample size less than 30 is deemed as non significant, but to take just 30 is still not very good)

Now with the above imagine Mc Donalds, who claims one of their "meat" slices has 125 g: What a QA test does, is weighting all slices of a sample and apply a statistical test which basically says that all slices are in average 125g plus or minus 2.5% confidence (which is not necessarily 2.5% of 125g, but less). Imagine one slice has 130g and all other 124g. Then it is still possible that above test is positive and one customer will be very happy, while others are having a thinner slice (I didn't calculate it though).

And then to make it more complicated, there is also the probability that your test is positive even though it should be negative (this is usually increasing by tightening your level of confidence)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think comparing Ford or general QC principles to expensive Leica product is like comparing apples to not oranges.

 

I agree, Leica claims to have no "online" production, which allows much different QA processes. A Ford however, despite the image, is mostly more expensive than a Leica, especially when bought new.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I agree, Leica claims to have no "online" production, which allows much different QA processes. A Ford however, despite the image, is mostly more expensive than a Leica, especially when bought new.

 

Leica is expensive when compared to a Sony and Ford is inexpensive when compared to a Mercedes. Again apples and oranges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The attached image is the worst instance of flare that I've had in the several months since I got this lens. For what it's worth the aperture was F11.

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

I came very close to placing an order for the lens on Friday and stopped myself and then went into the shop again this morning to do so and did not. I am scared of paying $8320 nz dollars only to be stuck with all the garbage and bureaucracy of dealing with couriers, camera dealers, customs agents, solms if the lens turns out to be a piece of shit that has flaring or other issues. I just don't think that at that price point this should even occur. I can just imagine my future conversation with the dealer who coincidentally already began arguing about my informing him that there were flaring issues identified with the lens. He said it was impossible as they are the best lenses in the world. I need someone to tell me that any new orders will not have any issues and I want a guarantee that Leica will refund all costs associated with sending and receiving the repair lens in the event that I have to. That includes customs cost because that crowd are a notorious bunch of thieving legalised swine and I want nothing to do with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I thought about it right now , wow it's so hard to just buy a lens and not have problems if you live outside Germany. Perhaps too hard. I think I might just order a lens directly from solms and have a friend pick it up and bring it over. This should not be so hard for a luxury good.

Link to post
Share on other sites

When I thought about it right now , wow it's so hard to just buy a lens and not have problems if you live outside Germany. Perhaps too hard. I think I might just order a lens directly from solms and have a friend pick it up and bring it over. This should not be so hard for a luxury good.

It sounds like you might need another dealer to work with if your dealer is denying there is a problem when it is well documented. Sorry you are having trouble with deciding. It is a wonderful lens. Mine has never had the reported issue. Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

APO Summicron 50/2 ASPH: Central veiling flare / fogging

 

My brand new APO Summicron 50/2 ASPH produces flare / fogging under circumstances that should not cause problems, eg overcast sky, without any direct sunlight present.

Shading the lens with the hand from above removes the fogging.

 

Diglloyd.com has observed the same phenomenon, and suggests that inadequate blackening of the lens interior may be the culprit. Looking into the lens one can see two silvery rings that could reflect light.

 

Below is a photo of the rings taken with my iPhone.

 

 

 

Just received the 50/2 AA from Solms an hour ago.

The silvery rings inside the lens are gone, so it seems internal blackening has been performed.

Will be shooting with the lens as soon as the current bad weather recedes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think comparing Ford or general QC principles to expensive Leica product is like comparing apples to not oranges.

 

I have a personnal testimony from many years ago.

While almost all the gear i bought from Leica was close to perfection i had once a real surprise.

I bought new a summicron 35mm version IV and opened the box in front of the dealer.

The diaphragm blades where bent like a tulip flower, as if someone pushed a finger through.

So this summicron went all the way the building process, the lenses where mounted on the two sides (the problem had to occur before, after was impossible) and so on until the quality control guy (?) signed the card included in the box.

Sorry Leica.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received the 50/2 AA from Solms an hour ago.

The silvery rings inside the lens are gone, so it seems internal blackening has been performed.

Will be shooting with the lens as soon as the current bad weather recedes.

 

We definitely look forward to hearing and/or seeing your results before and after of the same image, if possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

We definitely look forward to hearing and/or seeing your results before and after of the same image, if possible.

 

Unfortunately, the loss of foliage and the diminished sunlight has has essentially changed the circumstances here in comparison to July, when I shot the pictures demonstrating the central fogging.

 

So the for the "before and after" -series, the "after" will have to wait till July next.

 

But I will try the lens out in similarly challenging lighting situations as soon as possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I came very close to placing an order for the lens on Friday and stopped myself and then went into the shop again this morning to do so and did not. I am scared of paying $8320 nz dollars

 

You would have plenty of time to change your mind ;-) Only one 50AA has landed in NZ AFAIK, I am still waiting well over a year after ordering...

 

john

Link to post
Share on other sites

Had time to take a few snapshots with the repaired 50/2 AA today.

 

So far I have not seen central fogging in any of the shots taken in circumstances that induced it last summer.

Extremely sharp pictures.

 

There is no report from Solms on what was done on the lens exactly, but the silvery rings depicted in my first post are no longer visible, so most likely internal blackening has been increased.

 

Lloyd Chambers' diagnosis was probably correct.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...