tobey bilek Posted March 6, 2015 Share #21 Posted March 6, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) No system is perfect, but you convinced me not to buy a 240. Thanks. Years back, Leica said there will never be a digital RF. Now there is this cobbled up thing that works sometimes. Zeiss gave up. I am reasonably pleased with my NIKONS. A word of advice from way back when. Pros had multiple cameras. One in for repair, one being checked after repair (they don`t use them until they pass your exam ), and one to use for work. Their service has always been iffy and slow. Either you love the camera enough to put up with it or buy something else. There is a reason why DAG and Sherry are swamped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Hi tobey bilek, Take a look here Unlucky or poor quality control. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
satureyes Posted March 6, 2015 Author Share #22 Posted March 6, 2015 Alas I also have a canon 5d3 and 1dx. So plenty of options but I was trying to integrate the M into the shoots I didn't need an SLR for. The problem is the M system I've had over the years bar the last 12/18 months has been awesome. It's an absolute joy to use and when it's working well it never fails to astound me with the quality of image. But yes. It's a lot of trading on history but perhaps one day Leica will realise and dump the optical rangefinder. Who knows :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted March 7, 2015 Share #23 Posted March 7, 2015 When did you buy the lenses? Where they bought new with the camera? Above and beyond the lenses you own, and usually affects older lenses: various manufacturers made assumption about how film sat in their cameras and set their lenses accordingly. Film has curl and depth, sensors have microlenses. Think of a Rangefinder camera more like a vintage car with a Dual-Point distributor and a Super-Charger, all manually set. No computer under-the-hood/fuel-injection/turbo for power, But more satisfying to drive when you know that you've got it tuned perfectly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 7, 2015 Share #24 Posted March 7, 2015 [...] Think of a Rangefinder camera more like a vintage car with a Dual-Point distributor and a Super-Charger, all manually set. No computer under-the-hood/fuel-injection/turbo for power, But more satisfying to drive when you know that you've got it tuned perfectly. And don't forget to level the dash-pots if you have SU carbs. (I have a home-built hot rod. I'm over it forever. Or at least until it warms up here in MinneSnowta. Maybe.) Seriously, I find it difficult to imagine three M(240) bodies were defective. Certainly it is different than my M9 which is spot-on. Was I just lucky? Statistically it is unlikely. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted March 7, 2015 Share #25 Posted March 7, 2015 I am reasonably pleased with my NIKONS. . Me too. Adjusting the RF is very easy on them. Nikon_SP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rus Posted March 7, 2015 Share #26 Posted March 7, 2015 Sorry for your frustration, Rick. I wonder if trying out some other lenses on your M body might produce some different results? I mean...is it possible that it is the lens that needs re-calibration? Just a guess. Anyway I've suffered from other focusing issues... I bought a used M9 about 5 months ago and it came with the rangefinder coupling completely off despite the fact that it had just been serviced by Leica (sensor replacement and rangefinder adjustment performed). I have a Cron 40/2 which focuses perfectly on my M8, so I used that to adjust the M9's rangefinder myself and got it working properly eventually (following Julian's brilliant tutorial on this forum). my M9 developed a shutter fault and is now with Leica Wetzlar...8 weeks waiting period I was told...but luckily the repair is free of charge. They say this will also include rangefinder adjustment.... Finger crossed that it doesn't come back with coupling issues again...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted March 7, 2015 Share #27 Posted March 7, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) Rick- I have had the same issue as you. Nearly every lens and every body needed to be calibrated. Bodies and lenses sent separate to Leica for calibration did not work (for me). Bodies and lenses need to be calibrated together, unfortunately that entails great time. Any lenses that are now added to my system are checked rigorously to see if calibration is proper, if not I return them. Perhaps Leica is at fault but I'd rather think that tolerances are so tight the digital system needs the extra fine tuning of lenses with bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 7, 2015 Share #28 Posted March 7, 2015 A sad situation, Rick, unacceptable rather. The only redeeming aspect is the involvement of Dr.Kaufmann. I do not see the chairman of the board of Sony, Nikon or any other company interceding in such a matter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted March 7, 2015 Share #29 Posted March 7, 2015 Older lenses had more spherical aberration and field curvature by design. Shapes of the aperture were designed to spread depth-of-field out over larger distances, and to help control focus shift. The Leica Xenon and Sonnar F1.5 lenses are good examples. Film had curvature and thickness, which also softened focus. 0.02mm tolerance was just fine. Modern lenses are clinically sharp, free of aberrations, and used on cameras that allow microscopic details to be brought up instantaneously on the rear LCD. Now Liveview allows instant comparison with the optical RF and the sensor image. If you setup your measuring device to post exactly how far off the focus is using the RF, the deviation is easy to compute and determine if the camera is in spec. If you want exact agreement, have the lenses and camera body "zeroed" for perfect focus. Oddly enough, my fourteen Nikkor lenses are perfect on the M Monochrom. Nikon must have assumed that film was perfectly flat in a Barnack Leica and Nicca. I've shimmed a lot of lenses- but the Nikkors were all spot-on. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted March 7, 2015 Share #30 Posted March 7, 2015 I moved the tripod to as close as the MFD of the 50 lux. I don't remember off hand- and aka don't have it to hand but it was pretty much at the limit of the focus distance. So you are using an older (pre-aspherical) chrome Lux 50, is that correct? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share #31 Posted March 7, 2015 So you are using an older (pre-aspherical) chrome Lux 50, is that correct? No. It's the latest 50 lux asph. All my lenses are current versions. I tried it with the 90 cron 35 lux FLE And it was even noticeable using a 28mm elmarit. Although obviously it was a lot more forgiving. So. It seems all these lenses are out and all the bodies I tried are out. I'm almost certain that they were not out my original M240 before it developed problems. I'm interested in the resolution which will be proposed to me on Monday by Dr K. We shall see. I am guessing he will have arranged some sort of expresses service for me to pair everything up. OR perhaps he will send me directly a camera from German and a new 50 lux that has been zeroed although that does mean my other glass will need to be sorted too. Guess I'll know soon enough. Will update you all as soon as I have more info. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
joeswe Posted March 7, 2015 Share #32 Posted March 7, 2015 No. It's the latest 50 lux asph. All my lenses are current versions. Okay, I was not sure which lens we are talking about as you said you took the shots at the minimum focus distance of 1 m, which made me think you were using the older lux (MFD pre-asph 50 = 1 m, late model pre-asph and asph = 70 cm). I hope Leica get these problems sorted out soon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted March 7, 2015 Share #33 Posted March 7, 2015 I understand that you have been burnt, but I think that you are getting too paranoid at this point. Do your testing at a reasonable real-world distance, say 2m and see if your lenses are in focus. In any actual shooting situation, focusing on a person's eyes with a lens wide open is as much accuracy as you need. I don't think that any of my lenses focus on the exact same mm line on a tape measure at minimum focal length, but the only lens I ever had to get calibrated was my 50 lux aspherical. It was visibly out of focus at around twelve feet, and I had it shimmed by Leica. It is now perfect. I have used it on an M8, an M9, a 240, and a Monochrom and there was no problem on any of the bodies. My friend bought a 50lux and an M240 and he was completely freaked out about focus issues, so I invited him to my house and we shot tight portraits at 2m with his lens and body, then with my M9 and my lens, then we changed lenses, and after we couldn't detect any focus differences between any of the pictures we had taken, he could finally relax and settle into enjoying his new setup. My suggestion is to meet up with someone in your area, so you can get a second opinion on your gear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share #34 Posted March 7, 2015 I understand that you have been burnt, but I think that you are getting too paranoid at this point. Do your testing at a reasonable real-world distance, say 2m and see if your lenses are in focus. In any actual shooting situation, focusing on a person's eyes with a lens wide open is as much accuracy as you need. I don't think that any of my lenses focus on the exact same mm line on a tape measure at minimum focal length, but the only lens I ever had to get calibrated was my 50 lux aspherical. It was visibly out of focus at around twelve feet, and I had it shimmed by Leica. It is now perfect. I have used it on an M8, an M9, a 240, and a Monochrom and there was no problem on any of the bodies. My friend bought a 50lux and an M240 and he was completely freaked out about focus issues, so I invited him to my house and we shot tight portraits at 2m with his lens and body, then with my M9 and my lens, then we changed lenses, and after we couldn't detect any focus differences between any of the pictures we had taken, he could finally relax and settle into enjoying his new setup. My suggestion is to meet up with someone in your area, so you can get a second opinion on your gear. Well.. perhaps I am now more paranoid after my initial issues - BUT I still think it's reasonable to expect a camera/lens to focus on a subject within it's range. I spent hours testing at the Leica store - used 3 cameras and they all exhibited some issues. The resolution was that perhaps sending all my lenses to Leica was a plan - but for a 3month + turnaround would mean I won't have any kit for some important work. What seems to be the feel of the thread coming out of conversations is that I can't expect perfection, and to get close I have to restrict myself to shooting within parameters which may or may not be always totally practical. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Martin Posted March 7, 2015 Share #35 Posted March 7, 2015 Get your money back and walk away Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share #36 Posted March 7, 2015 Get your money back and walk away Is that a serious reply? And the 7 M lenses I own? Sell those back to Leica? Sorry - but I'm trying to troubleshoot and perhaps understand what I can/should expect from the kit - it's not as straight forward as it is when one is a keen hobbyist rather than a working/jobbing photographer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenshacker Posted March 7, 2015 Share #37 Posted March 7, 2015 Bill Pierce gave sound and practical advice in his column, and is certainly a working photographer. Sadly, even he has stepped away from Leica digital cameras. If you post some accurate measurements for the degree of mis-focus, the difference can be calculated. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jankap Posted March 7, 2015 Share #38 Posted March 7, 2015 Here's some of the test shots with the replacement camera last night - I've had another replacement since then. So numerically - the first image is shot focussing using RF, then again with EVF and the 3rd and 4th are RF then EVF. All mounted on a tripod and using self-timer. I used the larger 0 as the focus point. Can you see the difference in the files? The first 2 shots are taken at pretty much minimal focus distance. They are on WeTransfer... http://we.tl/2m4A5MUV65 I found - with help of FastRawViewer - the following picture number / focus combinations: 4157 at 5 4158 at 1 4159 at 18 4160 at 4 Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
satureyes Posted March 7, 2015 Author Share #39 Posted March 7, 2015 I found - with help of FastRawViewer - the following picture number / focus combinations:4157 at 5 4158 at 1 4159 at 18 4160 at 4 Jan I assume those measurements are in feet? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted March 7, 2015 Share #40 Posted March 7, 2015 I don't know what to say about this, other than Leica needs to stop fixating on the global celebritwat and billionaire market; meet the needs of real photographers, whether they are full time professionals, part time pros or amateur enthusiasts. I hope someone in Wetzlar is listening/reading. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.