Lens CLA with/without digital body

[samgrover]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

I had an issue with my 35mm Summicron lens where the aperture ring had come loose. I mailed it to Steve's Camera in LA based on the recommendation from this forum. I'm in Portland, Oregon.

 

After they examined the lens, I got this email:

 

So Steve fixed that loose front barrel no problem, but your main issue is the focus which is around $285 for a complete CLA. He also wanted to know which camera body you use this lens?

 

Since I bought this lens used and have used it a bunch, I decided a CLA sounds good. I also told them that I use it with a Leica M (Typ 240). Then I got this email:

 

That's what I was afraid of. At anytime we have to adjust any lens to a digital body we would have to have the camera to do it due to the zero tolerance with the focus. If it's a film camera it would have been O.K otherwise. If you can please send us the body so we can get this service started as soon as possible. Also Steve wanted to know if you use any other lens for that body?

 

I don't doubt that they are trying to provide the best service, but I am confused as to how to proceed, which is why I'm here for advice.

 

I only have one body, and I would rather not mail it anywhere. Taking it there in person is not feasible. Although I haven't used this lens with my film body (Bessa), I'm hoping to do so. I'm also hoping to use my other 50mm Summicron with both digital and film interchangeably. It had never occurred to me that a lens adjustment would be tied up so much with a specific body.

 

I've never had repair done on any of my Leica gear, since I'm relatively new to it (two years). If a CLA and focus issue needs a specific body, then how is this expected to work long term, with other digital and film bodies, etc? What do you suggest?

 

Thanks,

Sam

[Advertisement]

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

[edwardkaraa]

Camera bodies and lenses are independently calibrated according to some specific measurements. It's never a good idea to calibrate a lens to work on one specific body. What if your camera is off?

[TomB_tx]

I've had the focus adjusted on a few lenses by DAG with excellent results when used on my M9, and he never asked for the body. I wouldn't expect a 35 f2 to be as critical as a faster, longer lens. I suppose there is some risk that it might not be "perfect" - but if you didn't notice a problem before, I would expect less of an issue once adjusted to a normal stanard.

I'm sure some users are perfectionists who pixel-peep at test charts, and perhaps this is why they are being cautious.

[samgrover]

Yea, that was my expectation of calibration and why I'm confused about the situation.

 

Camera bodies and lenses are independently calibrated according to some specific measurements. It's never a good idea to calibrate a lens to work on one specific body. What if your camera is off?

[dante]

This might go back to the M8, which did not have the same flange-to-sensor distance, causing some lenses that focused properly at Leica spec distance to have problems. Been there, done that. The problem went away on later models.

 

Dante

[thighslapper]

Flange to sensor/film distance is 27.8mm and all leica bayonet mount lenses should be adjusted to focus at this figure.

 

Leica go to great lengths to align the sensor with the flange to ensure this is exactly right for all digital bodies. 

 

Anyone offering lens CLA should be able to do it to this specification without the body.

 

If they are offering to check whether your body is correctly calibrated ..... well that's another thing and is very generous of them ....

 

If you have several lenses and focus peaking and manual focussing coincide then your camera is fine ...... so there is no need to send it anyway .... whatever baloney they come up with as an excuse...

[cpclee]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With digital the adjustment can always be more precise if the camera and lens(es) are calibrated together especially with faster lenses.  Leica asked for my camera too when a lens was sent in for adjustment.

 

Having said that, I think $285 is not cheap (but it has been a while since I had a CLA done), and for that price I'd ask for quite from Leica NJ first.  And ask them about whether they would recommend sending in the camera too.

[Jeff S]

Leica Service NJ often makes the same request to send camera and lens, despite the independent calibration, to eliminate all possible sources of error (and frankly to reduce back and forth customer communications and shipping).  If, however, you're confident that the camera is calibrated well, there is technically no need to send it.  With LV, and several other lenses, it's relatively easy to eliminate the camera as a problem…unless no camera/lens combinations perfectly match between VF and LV.

 

Jeff

[Peter Branch]

Many years ago it was a well known practice amongst news photographers to send something like an M3 body and a lens such as a Noctilux to Leica for "Calibration".

 

Leica, of course, maintained that they never matched items and that each was adjusted to conform with the "Standard".

 

The fact was, as everyone knew, the tolerances were such that there was little chance of getting an optimum result using a lens and body selected at random.

 

"Matched" pairs of lenses and bodies were carefully preserved - a camera body being treated as almost a consumable. Each lens had its own body. 

 

Today, particularly with the M240, I understand that the tolerances are very much reduced and that this practice should not be necessary - also M240 bodies are hardly a consumable item even for pros. 

 

As an historical note it was generally accepted that Canon LTM bodies were manufactured to significantly tighter tolerances than the then contemporary Leica bodies. 

[fiftyonepointsix]

It used to be that the tolerance for shimming a lens was ~0.02mm, and this has always been fine for film cameras. Film has depth to it, and does not lie perfectly flat in the camera. Nor does it have microlenses and offset microlenses. No one worried about focus shift with changing aperture and using deep orange and red filters. Then along came digital. I have found slight differences between the M9, M Monochrom, and M8. I've adjusted a lot of lenses for people, and use my M9 when the person has an M9 and the Monochrom when the lens will be used on a Monochrom. So far, that works well- closer than that, I need them to send their camera. If a Sonnar is spot-on wide-open at F1.5 on the Monochrom, I know it will be best on the M9 at F2. That seems to be about the difference, all within 0.02mm. But with pixel-peeping, not good enough.

 

If the 35/2 was fine on the film camera and on the digital, you'll probably be fine. 

 

All of my vintage (15 or so) Nikkor LTM lenses have been perfect on the M Monochrom. "In the Day" manufacturers made assumptions about film flatness to optimize a lens. Nikon must have assumed that it sits perfectly flat. 

[gwgchase]

I bought a very lightly used monochrome and, separately, a 50 mm Rigid Summicron last year. They seemed well enough aligned so assumed both were aligned to spec.  Then I added a 90 Elmarit, which seemed to be off quite a bit. After some discussion with Steve's, I reluctantly ended up sending everything in.  His conclusion was that the 50 and camera were off, the 90 was fine. He did not charge anything for checking the 90, easily could have. Turnaround was quite fast and everything was packed professionally for the return trip.

 

I have since added more lenses, and nearly all focus perfectly with the body including one that has been to Leica NJ and Germany, so it seems Steve was correct about the camera needing adjustment. Certainly not cheap, but I had the camera back in my hands 10 days after I sent it.

 

gwgchase 

 

 

[gwgchase]

Wasn't completely clear in my points (I stopped drinking coffee recently…)

 

Anyway, I believe that Steve calibrates each item to the standard values, then verifies that the lens is working well with the camera. He doesn't want to send a lens back to a customer after calibration and have it seem "off".  I note that he did not feel the need to tweak my 90, nor did he ask me to send the camera in when I sent him an additional lens for calibration a few months later. 

I think he is just being thorough.

[spydrxx]

The only time I had to send in a body was when I was having a lens modified, and the expert doing the work wanted it to perfectly match the body I would be mostly using it on....I did, and he did. I subsequently used the lens on other bodies and it worked fine on them as well. I think Steve just wants to have a thoroughly satisfied customer.

[samgrover]

Thanks you all for the comments and feedback. I've asked Steve to calibrate to standard for this time. It's great to have this knowledge, and access to repair specialists as thorough as Steve so I know where to turn to for future needs.

[jaapv]

Another point is that Leica has narrowed the adjustment tolerances for digital bodies as opposed to film. As far as I am aware no independent has access to the required gear to match these tolerances. However, normally a "standard" adjustment will be just fine

[Peter Branch]

Another point is that Leica has narrowed the adjustment tolerances for digital bodies as opposed to film. As far as I am aware no independent has access to the required gear to match these tolerances. However, normally a "standard" adjustment will be just fine

 

This is a complex subject.  It often seems to be assumed that the only important parameter is the Flange to Focal Plane distance.  This is actually only one parameter which itself needs careful definition.  Of equal importance is the alignment of both the Flange and the Focal Plane with respect to the Optical Axis.  It is not sufficient for them to be parallel planes, they also have to be orthogonal to the Optical Axis.

 

Measurements capable of determining such parameters to the required resolution certainly requires specialist equipment but nothing out of the ordinary in the field of precision engineering metrology.

 

More than 40 years ago several specialist workshops in London, such as the one operated by Wallace Heaton, were perfectly capable of measuring these parameters to a very high degree of precision.  They tended to be somewhat guarded about the results however because they were not always favourable to companies with whom they had commercial relationships.

 

As I posted earlier in this thread Leica at that time were clearly one of the better companies but others, particularly Canon as represented by equipment they exported from Japan, were at least as good and often significantly better.  Canon's weakness at the time was getting lens elements centred, something at which Leica excelled.

 

Perhaps Leica's reputation for world class lenses combined with so-so bodies had, at least at that time, some basis in fact.              

[jaapv]

As far as I am aware Leica will check and adjust the sensor/ flange alignment on every incoming camera to 1/1000th of a mm using advanced equipment. It is unlikely that any camera workshop would invest to be able to do so.

[friedeye]

I think what Peter says is wise and true.

 

But I will say - and I hate to say this -  but I have a hard time with Steve's.  It seems that almost everything they do requires an expensive CLA. And I have had trouble on a couple of occasions with lens calibration, where they have shimmed and adjusted when not needed. This has happened to friends, as well. The weird thing is that Steve and his people seem to be very nice and trying their best - and I have had success with them on a couple of occasions.  But my 2 cents?  You'll have less trouble by sending it to Leica, or Youxin, or Sherry, or Dave.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[friedeye]

In re-reading your original post, I'd like to amend my statement. It's outrageous that Steve's came back to you telling you needed a complete CLA. If your main issue was focus, wouldn't you have noticed that before you sent it in?  Your post just reinforces my feeling that Steve's is inflating problems and overcharging.

 

I will give you a specific:  I had an old Barnak that had, a couple of years earlier, had a complete Leica CLA courtesy of my wife.  Barnaks are tough to load ( always trim the leader) and I managed to jam some pieces of film that broke off and were impeding the shutter.  Took it to Steve's and they told me I needed a complete CLA - which I thought was very weird - but I was a relative newbie, like you and paid for it.  A year later I had an identical jam and found that by removing the lens, working the shutter, and using tweezers I was easily able to fix it myself. 

 

As I said, I have heard similar stories from photo-friends here in L.A.  

 

I believe you're being worked, and I'm putting it out there.

[cpclee]

Youxin charges very fairly and does from what I can tell a very good job.  He is upfront about what he can and cannot do, for example if he doesn't have the necessary instruments for that particular task. He will even tell you who to send your equipment to in that event.