Jump to content

21mm Elmarit lens cap in contact with lens element


guy

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My 21mm Elmarit came with two lens covers in the box: a full lens hood with slip-off rubbery cover, and a simple lens cap of the type you squeeze at the sides to release. Generally I've wanted to keep things simple and have ignored the full hood in favour of the smaller cap.

 

Over the four weeks or so I've been using the lens, I've repeatedly noticed little scuff marks on the front element. I don't have a filter in place because I'm away from home and was still awaiting my freebie IRs when I left. I've been carefully removing these scuffs with lens tissues but have been puzzled as to where they've come from (although I get my fingers on the rangefinder window a lot of the time, I'm pretty good about not splodging up the lens).

 

Today I worked it out. The squeezable release catches of the lens cap are actually in contact with the front element of the lens :eek: . Every time you remove or replace the cap, they're scuffing it. The 21mm has a strongly convex front element, but even so, this is a pretty obvious and rudimentary design flaw.

 

I've switched to the lens hood (which I don't like, but which is nowhere near in contact with anything) but have been left a bit shocked by how dumb this is. This is the Leica cap that came in the box with the lens. Nowhere in the product documentation does it say "you have to fit an optional filter to this lens or our lens cap will scrape it raw". I'm hoping and assuming that once I have an IR filter fitted, I can go back to using the cap because the flat surface of the filter won't touch it, but still... sheesh. The lens seems fine, but presumably if I'd have given it a few more months...

 

My one niggling doubt is that maybe this isn't the cap for this lens. In which case, how did it get into the box? (In other words, was I sold ex-demo or s/h stock as new? :confused: ) Can anyone else using this lens tell me what it came with, and if one of the caps was this one (guilty parties marked clearly):

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

x

It's the correct cap for the lens - 14289 - and I agree it makes contact with the front lens element. "They all do that, Sir". Another example of a Leica lens cap/lens hood SNAFU.

 

I keep the hood on all the time, so always use the lens hood cover instead.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's the correct cap for the lens - 14289 - and I agree it makes contact with the front lens element. "They all do that, Sir". Another example of a Leica lens cap/lens hood SNAFU.

 

I keep the hood on all the time, so always use the lens hood cover instead.

 

Yikes!

 

Okay, in a weird way I'm relieved. At least it's not some underhand lens scam. Though still nonplussed about why they'd ever let this combo out the door. They might as well give me some fine-grade wire-wool for cleaning off fingerprints while they're at it...

 

You say "another example"... so clearly there's a history here. Dare I ask?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the obvious one is the WATE (16-18-21 Tri-Elmar) which when used with the M8 requires a filter adapter to carry the IR filter. If you use their filter adapter, the supplied lens hood and lens cap are useless and constantly removing and replacing the filter adapter causes the rubber o-ring at the base of the thread to stretch and eventually get mashed in the thread.

 

You can then look at the variety of hoods they offer with their lenses. Another year, another hood design, including ones with metal claws which chip the anodised aluminium (your 21mm is an example, others are the 24mm, the 90/4 and the pre-ASPH 50/1.4, the version before it had a built-in hood).

 

I don't understand why Leica could not adopt a convention of bayonet lens hoods. As it is, the 21/2.8 is different from the 28/2 which is different from the 35/1.4 which is different from the 35/2...

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a Leica-M8-style bug fix available :rolleyes:

(btw. no such problems with the 24asph./14289 combo so far)

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

Then the question should be: Did they change anything? I cannot imagine that this problem was unknown till now. This lens is not new on the market. I must admit that i use these wide-angles with the hood, best protection anyway.

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...