keenr Posted August 23, 2015 Share #101 Posted August 23, 2015 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) So why are we hearing ONLY about flare prone 50APOs...ALL with earlier SN's? Why are we not hearing of problems with newer sn's >4299xxxx...? So what do we believe: 1)personnel who failed to triple check a batch of older sn's (4189xxxx-42xxxxxx); 2)all 50 APO's are flare prone; or, 3)limited number of older 50APOs dating back to the blackout period are not properly retrofitted and entering the market in 2015? Agree with Mark....don't buy 50APOs with older SN's (4189xxxx)...as there is a higher risk of flare... Also agree, if you get one that behaves as it should, it is magical. Edited August 23, 2015 by keenr Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 23, 2015 Posted August 23, 2015 Hi keenr, Take a look here APO 50mm Summicron Flare Issue. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
lct Posted August 24, 2015 Share #102 Posted August 24, 2015 [...] when you get the chance, could you try the sun in the morning [...] Just did it and i got the same blue ghost flare as yours with my 50/2.5 copy. Disappears with my 12517 rubber hood though fortunately. The latter is always stuck on the lens, reason why i had not noticed that horror... Bottom line to colleagues using this (otherwise) excellent lens: a good hood is mandatory. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quadraticadder Posted August 24, 2015 Share #103 Posted August 24, 2015 Just did it and i got the same blue ghost flare as yours with my 50/2.5 copy. Disappears with my 12517 rubber hood though fortunately. The latter is always stuck on the lens, reason why i had not noticed that horror... Bottom line to colleagues using this (otherwise) excellent lens: a good hood is mandatory. Thanks for taking the time to check this out. I've never seen the blue ghosting in over a year of practical use, just this one time when the sun was shining directly on the lens. It's a great little lens, so using a hood to avoid this circumstance is definitely worth it. I'm guessing the new, F2.4 version does this as well. Best, Steve Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 24, 2015 Share #104 Posted August 24, 2015 [...] I'm guessing the new, F2.4 version does this as well. I would not hold my breath given the small size of the hood but perhaps the new lens is afraid of no ghost... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keenr Posted August 24, 2015 Share #105 Posted August 24, 2015 The subject of this thread is specifically about the '50APO Summicron Flare issue', not the much lower priced '50 Elmarit'. Me thinks when evidence is too strong, naysayers will change the channel. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 24, 2015 Share #106 Posted August 24, 2015 Sorry for the (short) OP but evidence of what? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quadraticadder Posted August 24, 2015 Share #107 Posted August 24, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The short discussion about the 50 mm Summarit resulted from a direct comparison to the APO. Your speculation about naysayers changing the channel is wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivohula Posted August 27, 2015 Author Share #108 Posted August 27, 2015 As the one who started this thread, may I take the liberty of pointing out the main point of its existence and, perhaps, to end it. As one who wanted a 50APO since its introduction, I was surprised by the flare issue that afflicted the first lenses produced. These were the "early serial number lenses" produced and there was a general consensus on this site that these early serial numbers were flare-prone, so buyer beware. Then, the lens was taken off the market for a "fix" and reintroduced several months later. Leica has never officially advised anyone about the exact technicalities of this "fix". These later lenses had a later serial number, were produced after March 2014 and started with serial number 4235xx, and I will call them "post redesign serial number lenses". These post redesign lenses were now generally thought of as flare free and I thought the whole flare issue had run its course. I spent my money on a new 50 APO in June of 2015 and got an early serial number lens that flared. It was returned to Leica and as their explanation for the early serial number was lacking, I requested a late serial number (458xxx), which I got - and - no flare. My issue then was that early serial number lenses may still show flare and, buyer beware, if you purchase a low serial number 50APO, you may be getting a dud. If you purchase a higher serial number, then this does not seem to be the case. Is there anyone out there who has a post redesign serial number (higher than 4235xx) lens that flared? The date on the sticker seems to be irrelevant to me in resolving this problem. And, there again seems to be no official Leica line as to what the date stands for. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fchan1211 Posted August 27, 2015 Share #109 Posted August 27, 2015 I purchased the 50mm f2.0 APO last week from BH, and the serial number is 4189xxx. I requested a replacement with the latter serial number but they told me that they don't know the serial number so they are not sure they can honor my request. However, I can return the lens for a refund within 30 days. I wonder how Neuer request the replacement and what channel he has to go through. With dealer or Leica directly. I am in Toronto, Canada. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 27, 2015 Share #110 Posted August 27, 2015 Test the lens, if it is OK then don't worry as we certainly don't know whether every lens in this sn range is flare-prone. If it's no good then return it for a refund. Either re-buy buy from B&H or ring around the smaller Leica dealers specifically asking for a ≥0458xxxx sn lens. You may have to wait a short time but f the dealer wants the sale they will request such a lens form Leica Canada or USA if they aren't crying an APO-50 with that sn range. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keenr Posted August 27, 2015 Share #111 Posted August 27, 2015 I'm on my second copy and both in the 4189xxxx range. My first was a flare-magnet, which i promptly reported to my dealer and Leica NJ, sharing photos and such. It was replaced without question. My second one was only a few numbers off the first SN; it is is much better but still not near my 50 lux. Mine were bought new in NYC, and I've since notified Leica/Germany per advice of my dealer. It is without doubt a beautiful rendering lens. I am hopeful they'll replace mine, despite having owned the 2nd one for greater than 30 days. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 28, 2015 Share #112 Posted August 28, 2015 Because real men don't shoot at f/16 i suspect. No, they shoot at f/64 because only ''real men would lug around such cameras. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 28, 2015 Share #113 Posted August 28, 2015 Ha ha! an M at f/16 has much more more DoF than a 8x10 at f/64. Not for real men i said. Soccer moms photogs perhaps? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted August 30, 2015 Share #114 Posted August 30, 2015 So I've used my 2nd replacement 50-APO for most of the weekend. sn 0458xxxx Very flare resistant lens. Very happy owner. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
keenr Posted August 31, 2015 Share #115 Posted August 31, 2015 (edited) No surprise MarkP given newer SN. Congrats! Edited August 31, 2015 by keenr 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
apertur Posted August 31, 2015 Share #116 Posted August 31, 2015 42349xxx and it flares.... Not in all circumstances but once the sun is just right or very much outside of the frame. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lct Posted August 31, 2015 Share #117 Posted August 31, 2015 What is not normal with the 50/2 apo is CVF i.e. central veiling flare which appears at f/16 when shooting against the light. Looks like a pale stain in the middle of the frame. Apart from that, normal flare may appear like with any lens when there are strong light sources outside of the frame. Lens hoods are made for that and in the worst cases your hand (or your hat) will solve the issue. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigeyes Posted October 22, 2015 Share #118 Posted October 22, 2015 Dear All,I am not sure too. Mine is #458.....but it flares even with hood and only gets better if I use my hand to block. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted October 22, 2015 Share #119 Posted October 22, 2015 Hi and welcome to the forum. If it flares as in my post #84 above then there may be a problem and you may want to get it checked/exchanged. My initial lenses were almost unusable with this problem . For years, if I've been shooting in a very flare-prone angle into the sun I'll always shade the lens with my free hand. Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBabyEarl Posted October 24, 2015 Share #120 Posted October 24, 2015 As the one who started this thread, may I take the liberty of pointing out the main point of its existence and, perhaps, to end it. As one who wanted a 50APO since its introduction, I was surprised by the flare issue that afflicted the first lenses produced. These were the "early serial number lenses" produced and there was a general consensus on this site that these early serial numbers were flare-prone, so buyer beware. Then, the lens was taken off the market for a "fix" and reintroduced several months later. Leica has never officially advised anyone about the exact technicalities of this "fix". These later lenses had a later serial number, were produced after March 2014 and started with serial number 4235xx, and I will call them "post redesign serial number lenses". These post redesign lenses were now generally thought of as flare free and I thought the whole flare issue had run its course. I spent my money on a new 50 APO in June of 2015 and got an early serial number lens that flared. It was returned to Leica and as their explanation for the early serial number was lacking, I requested a late serial number (458xxx), which I got - and - no flare. My issue then was that early serial number lenses may still show flare and, buyer beware, if you purchase a low serial number 50APO, you may be getting a dud. If you purchase a higher serial number, then this does not seem to be the case. Is there anyone out there who has a post redesign serial number (higher than 4235xx) lens that flared? The date on the sticker seems to be irrelevant to me in resolving this problem. And, there again seems to be no official Leica line as to what the date stands for. Sorry, but are you saying made after March 2014AND with a serial number higher than 4235xx and above? I have one I just bought and the serial is 4290xx and made in July 2014. I haven't mounted the lens yet, but is that in the problem zone?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.