Brand New APO 75mm with Visible Cracks

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Happy New Year, Pete!

Thank you kindly for your answer  

Always a pleasure reading your posts.

Stay well!

Best regards,

Simon

[Dr No]

On 1/1/2021 at 8:05 PM, MrFriendly said:

I don't know if anyone is looking for perfection, but Leica is a premium brand, and we are paying for "quality" I suppose.

The Palpas issue in the Summicron 75 could be worse because of potential collateral damage to the camera, don't you think?  From my experience in the last couple days, when that stuff crumbles, it can either be sticky because it's greasy, or it can also be dry, almost like powder.  I had the greasy kind land all over the rear element of the lens when I touched it the first time, and cleaning it wasn't easy because you can't just blow it off; it sticks and becomes difficult to clean it.

The powder kind is what worries me, because I have no idea if any of it got in the camera.  I spent the entire day shooting it with my brand new M10M that I had just received couple days ago, before I noticed the cracks.  How do I know that stuff isn't in there?  How do I know it won't cause shutter failure, or some other mechanical failure a few months or couple years down the line?

I got a used M246M about four months ago (my first Leica).  Couple weeks ago the range-finder roller disc (orwhatever it's called) started failing; it would get stuck and it sounded like metal was rubbing against metal everytime it did move (not enough lubrication?).  Maybe the previous owner used a Summicron 75 that had the same problem; the disc and the roller are millimetres away from each other.  Could enough Palpas particles get dislodged overtime to cause mechanical issues like that?  I don't know.  That's the thing, I don't know.

And finally, toxicity.  Is Palpas toxic?  I can't seem to find anything about it online.  With the lens only inches away from my face, and the way this large lens breaths, I worry :-).

Oh, then there was the freezing issues I was having couple months ago, which I finally gave up and accepted it as part of the deal.

Just too many issues in only four months.

Certainly a concern. It will end up inside the camera for sure. I can't imagine toxicity would be an issue.

Edited January 8, 2021 by Dr No

[MrFriendly]

@farnz and those who care about the outcome:

I sent an email to technicalinfo at leicacamerausa on the 4th, and two days ago I finally got a response back from them.

As far the used/damaged condition of the lens that I received, they said that Leica does not present any used, demo, etc. product as if it is new so it's hard to say what unfortunate mix-up led to me receiving a used or compromised lens.  So those who were claiming that Leica refurbishes or repackages used lens and gives them new serial number to sell as new, well, you're were wrong.  Such a thing does not happen.

The rep also told me that he imagines there is going to be an internal investigate to determine how a lens in such condition was sold as a new product.

And finally, as far as toxicity, the rep told me that the black material is not known to be toxic and to use an air bulb blower to blow out any material that made its way in.  For any other inspection or cleaning he recommended Leica Customer Care.

I still have not received my refund, even though the Return Request was authorized on the 4th, and according to UPS tracking they received the lens back on the 5th.

[BrianS]

As you have proof that the lens was returned and received, and the follow-up Email: I would be calling the credit card company or Paypal to start a charge-back to get your money back. That is a lot of money. 10 days is a long time to float it.

Thankyou for sharing the story with us. I still cannot believe that Leica used a material that is so prone to rotting after such a short period. Someone in their engineering department needs to read this thread.

Edited January 14, 2021 by BrianS

[Ouroboros]

What a disappointing thread!

I've been tempted by the 75mm f2 off and on since it was released.  When Cosina Voigtlander released their new 75mm Nokton f1.5 a few months ago my interest in the Leica lens was piqued again and I have been searching for a mint used example.  There have been a few advertised as such recently but my idea of 'mint' is somewhat different to any of the examples I've seen on any of the dealer's sites I've looked through. 

This thread has put me off buying a 75mm apo summicron-m asph until it's clear just how widespread or inevitable this problem is.    

[didier]

I bought a new silver anodised APO 75 2 months ago.

Aboslutely no Problem : I am more than happy with it !

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello Didier.

This lens, Apo-Summicron-M 75mm in silver ?

Can you post a pic of your lens please, if you don't mind.

[didier]

Here it is Arnaud

 

[a.noctilux]

Thanks Didier,

I didn't know this nice lens exist in silver.

Special edition ?

[didier]

Yes Arnaud, 300 copies as far as I know.

the Hood is also different from the Standard Edition (the same kind as the APO 50)

[adan]

14 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

I didn't know this nice lens exist in silver.

Yep, see this page - click silver focus scale icon beside lens image top-right to see the silver version:

https://us.leica-camera.com/Photography/Leica-M/M-Lenses/APO-Summicron-M-75mm-f-2-ASPH

[wattsy]

21 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

This thread has put me off buying a 75mm apo summicron-m asph until it's clear just how widespread or inevitable this problem is.    

I've owned this lens a couple of times and don't remember a problem with any disintegrating anti-reflective material. My main problem with the 75mm APO was that I couldn't get on with the 75mm framelines and I sold it (twice) for that reason. However, it is worth noting that the 75 APO is a noticeably flarey lens under certain conditions. It's a similar flare to the one that affected early versions of the 50 APO – a lower contrast veiling type flare in the centre of the frame. I dare say that it is that flare problem that explains the anti-reflective material that is being discussed in this thread. It was probably not part of the original design and added as a bit of bodge to mitigate a problem that may not have been immediately apparent.

[Ouroboros]

@wattsy, it does seem odd that this issue has only just come to light after around 15 years since launch.  If, as you say, is is an attempt by Leica to reduce veiling flare, it seems a different solution is needed.
 

 

Edited March 8, 2021 by Ouroboros

[a.noctilux]

As side note, user notes.

Yesterday, I've used this lens for copying some pictures.

With my Monochrom +Apo-Summicron 75mm I wanted to know if colored filters shift somewhat the focus plane.

Another thought was is it really "apo", in close range.

Focussing with liveview, of course and changing filters.

Half satisfied as this is not scientific "test", only as practical user "test".

I wanted to "mute" some gray rendering from colors in my repros.

At wide open or f/2.8 a bit of "shift" with yellow/orange filter and "medium shift" with deep red filter.

Anyway when close down to f/5.6, nothing to complain, dof took care of discrepency with red filter.

That is why in my past use with red filter (close down as usual), I've never seen "focus shift" to talk about.

 

😄For me this lens behaves "apo", as nice as my practices allow.

[pgk]

1 hour ago, wattsy said:

It was probably not part of the original design and added as a bit of bodge to mitigate a problem that may not have been immediately apparent.

I just wonder if it was a 'test' piece put in by someoneto see if it helped minimise flare and then the lens somehow made its way back into the sales warehousing or whatever without it being removed. Such inserted parts don't 'just happen'.