35 APO M Lens Cap Likes to Roam

[tedwill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello.  I just purchased a slightly used 35 APO M Lens.  I absolutely love it.  However, unlike my other Leica lenses, the cap doesn't seem to stay firmly attached.  Short of getting a "leash" to attach the cap to the lens with velcro, which is never a good thing, has anyone found a third party lens cap that holds on tighter to the 35 APO?  Or any other recommendations?

Thanks!

[jankap]

The Leica lenscap 46mm costs 35 Euro. On Ebay one can find similar ones for ±5 Euro.

Quality? Well I have lost the original cap, the new one holds.

Edited June 22, 2023 by jankap

[Advertisement]

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

[tedwill]

19 minutes ago, jankap said:

The Leica lenscap 46mm costs 35 Euro. On Ebay one can find similar ones for ±5 Euro.

Quality? Well I have lost the original cap, the new one holds.

Thanks. I found it on Amazon.  I'll pick it up as a primary and use the original as backup.   In the meantime, I used gaffer tape inside the lens cap, which tightened the fit quite a bit.  I'm leaving Monday for a two week trip to Brazil.  I don't want to leave it behind as a souvenier.

[FDS]

The 35mm APO Summicron M is my favourite lens of all time!  I use a UV filter and attach the small but effective hood supplied with the lens.  No need for any cap over the hood.  Just blow off the dust and clean with a cloth once in a while. 

[tedwill]

2 minutes ago, FDS said:

The 35mm APO Summicron M is my favourite lens of all time!  I use a UV filter and attach the small but effective hood supplied with the lens.  No need for any cap over the hood.  Just blow off the dust and clean with a cloth once in a while. 

I agree.  And I know this goes back to a decades old debate between using a hood vs a lens cap.  But the 35 APO is a very special lens. I also have a UV filter and the hood.  But for times of travel, even when the camera is in a bag with me every minute, I like to keep the cap on the lens as another layer of protection during transport.  

[Jean-Michel]

I keep posting this fine youtube video to explain why Leica's lens cap engineers attempt to design self-removing lens caps, in this case the self-removing function failed. 

 

[tedwill]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

9 minutes ago, Jean-Michel said:

I keep posting this fine youtube video to explain why Leica's lens cap engineers attempt to design self-removing lens caps, in this case the self-removing function failed. 

 

A sharks fan, wearing a Rolex using a Leica and a Nikon in Detroit at a Stanley Cup display.   There's more going wrong here than just the cap issues.    As a Red Wings fan, this photo is a testament to the old adage "more money than brains"

[IMAGEPOWER]

vor 18 Stunden schrieb jankap:

The Leica lenscap 46mm costs 35 Euro. On Ebay one can find similar ones for ±5 Euro.

Quality? Well I have lost the original cap, the new one holds.

Actually, instead of a 46mm lens cap I would recommend a lens cap 39mm, which is the filter thread of the APO 35mm...;-)

As I have got the same problem with the original Leica lens cap (falling off from the original lens hood as soon as I take the camera out of the bag) I figured out a different solution.

I use the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 or the hood 12465 of the Summilux-M 35/1.4 (and Super-Elmar 21/3.4 respectively) with its original cap 14212

This is more costly, but I can still use a lens hood which I find essential on Leica M lenses (tendency to flare). And if you put the price of the APO Summicron-M 35/2 into perspective...

The attached photos show the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 on the first 2 pictures, the 12465 of the 35/1,4 in silver on the 3rd picture.

I tested both the lens hoods of the 28/2 and the 35/1,4 on the APO-Summicron 35/2, none of them show any vignetting, and they are still very effective, however the original lens hood is a tad more effective due to its different design.

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!

Edited June 23, 2023 by IMAGEPOWER

[tedwill]

6 hours ago, IMAGEPOWER said:

Actually, instead of a 46mm lens cap I would recommend a lens cap 39mm, which is the filter thread of the APO 35mm...;-)

As I have got the same problem with the original Leica lens cap (falling off from the original lens hood as soon as I take the camera out of the bag) I figured out a different solution.

I use the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 or the hood 12465 of the Summilux-M 35/1.4 (and Super-Elmar 21/3.4 respectively) with its original cap 14212

This is more costly, but I can still use a lens hood which I find essential on Leica M lenses (tendency to flare). And if you put the price of the APO Summicron-M 35/2 into perspective...

The attached photos show the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 on the first 2 pictures, the 12465 of the 35/1,4 in silver on the 3rd picture.

I tested both the lens hoods of the 28/2 and the 35/1,4 on the APO-Summicron 35/2, none of them show any vignetting, and they are still very effective, however the original lens hood is a tad more effective due to its different design.

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!

That’s a great idea.  Thanks!

[tedwill]

6 hours ago, IMAGEPOWER said:

Actually, instead of a 46mm lens cap I would recommend a lens cap 39mm, which is the filter thread of the APO 35mm...;-)

As I have got the same problem with the original Leica lens cap (falling off from the original lens hood as soon as I take the camera out of the bag) I figured out a different solution.

I use the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 or the hood 12465 of the Summilux-M 35/1.4 (and Super-Elmar 21/3.4 respectively) with its original cap 14212

This is more costly, but I can still use a lens hood which I find essential on Leica M lenses (tendency to flare). And if you put the price of the APO Summicron-M 35/2 into perspective...

The attached photos show the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 on the first 2 pictures, the 12465 of the 35/1,4 in silver on the 3rd picture.

I tested both the lens hoods of the 28/2 and the 35/1,4 on the APO-Summicron 35/2, none of them show any vignetting, and they are still very effective, however the original lens hood is a tad more effective due to its different design.

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!

That’s a great idea.  Thanks!

[tedwill]

On 6/23/2023 at 3:41 AM, IMAGEPOWER said:

Actually, instead of a 46mm lens cap I would recommend a lens cap 39mm, which is the filter thread of the APO 35mm...;-)

As I have got the same problem with the original Leica lens cap (falling off from the original lens hood as soon as I take the camera out of the bag) I figured out a different solution.

I use the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 or the hood 12465 of the Summilux-M 35/1.4 (and Super-Elmar 21/3.4 respectively) with its original cap 14212

This is more costly, but I can still use a lens hood which I find essential on Leica M lenses (tendency to flare). And if you put the price of the APO Summicron-M 35/2 into perspective...

The attached photos show the lens hood 12471 of the Summicron-M 28/2 on the first 2 pictures, the 12465 of the 35/1,4 in silver on the 3rd picture.

I tested both the lens hoods of the 28/2 and the 35/1,4 on the APO-Summicron 35/2, none of them show any vignetting, and they are still very effective, however the original lens hood is a tad more effective due to its different design.

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!

By the way, I want to thank you again. I decided to go with this option and I ordered the lens hood for the 35 summilux and the lens cap. I don't understand why they put so much work in designing a perfect lens but the lens cap, and the lens hood for the 35 APO don't really work together.  In fact, the factory lens cap for the 35 APO started taking the paint off the lens hood.  I will put them aside in case one day I sell the 35 APO.  Another solution I found for the 35 APO, in the event of rainy weather is a temporary rubber cover - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MVK33ZT?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details. 

Edited July 16, 2023 by tedwill

[Ko.Fe.]

2 minutes ago, tedwill said:

By the way, I want to thank you again. I decided to go with this option and I ordered the lens hood for the 35 summilux and the lens cap. I don't understand why they put so much work in designing a perfect lens but the lens cap, and the lens hood for the 35 APO don't really work together.  In fact, the factory lens cap for the 35 APO started taking the paint off the lens hood.  I will put them aside in case one day I sell the 35 APO.  Another solution I found for the 35 APO, in the event of rainy weather in a temporary rubber cover - https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07MVK33ZT?psc=1&ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_product_details. 

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!

Use protective filter and lens hood. No cap needed, because front element is protected in best form this way. 

[tedwill]

1 minute ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Use protective filter and lens hood. No cap needed, because front element is protected in best form this way. 

I was in Brazil for three weeks.  Lots of wind and sand.  Most of the time I had a bag for protection, but other times, to avoid standing out with a camera bag doing street shooting in some sketchy areas, I just had my M11 and 35 APO.  It just felt "wrong" not having a cap.  I totally agree with you. I have a very nice UV filter and the hood, but felt weak in the knees walking about without more protection.  It's just my own superstitions and fears.  

[Ko.Fe.]

2 hours ago, tedwill said:

I was in Brazil for three weeks.  Lots of wind and sand.  Most of the time I had a bag for protection, but other times, to avoid standing out with a camera bag doing street shooting in some sketchy areas, I just had my M11 and 35 APO.  It just felt "wrong" not having a cap.  I totally agree with you. I have a very nice UV filter and the hood, but felt weak in the knees walking about without more protection.  It's just my own superstitions and fears.  

Not sure what cap has to do with sketchy areas.   Cap is good for film Ms while they are not in use at all on f1.4 and wider to prevent accidental burning of shutter clothes.

For extra protection of camera and lens (if needed),  I use hand towel over the entire camera. And rocket blower, plus brush to clean the elements after. Because sand, dust, mist, rain, snow and birds poop is getting everywhere, not just at the lens.  

[IMAGEPOWER]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.:

Use protective filter and lens hood. No cap needed, because front element is protected in best form this way. 

But each filter, no matter how good, degrades quality. Why pay 7.000+ Euro for a fantastic APO lens and then degrade its quality? Especially in backlit / contre-jour situations I can see the difference. The filter just adds one element to the optical system. However, I do use protective Leica filters, e.g. by the sea, because the salt can damage the lens coating. Also on the M10 Monochrome I use Leica color filters, which verifiably degrade optical quality. It also depends on what you do. I mainly photograph landscape, architecture and travel for photo agencies. They need maximum quality, resolution and contrast. For street photography I doubt you will detect a difference of with or without protective filter...

But I just realize we're going off topic...;-)

Edited July 17, 2023 by IMAGEPOWER

[pedaes]

2 hours ago, IMAGEPOWER said:

But each filter, no matter how good, degrades quality

Is the difference you see in backlit situations related to flare?

Edited July 17, 2023 by pedaes

[IMAGEPOWER]

vor 50 Minuten schrieb pedaes:

Is the difference you see in backlit situations related to flare?

yes, flare is stronger with filters. I use multicoated Leica filters as well as slim B+W filters.

[Ko.Fe.]

4 hours ago, IMAGEPOWER said:

But each filter, no matter how good, degrades quality. Why pay 7.000+ Euro for a fantastic APO lens and then degrade its quality? Especially in backlit / contre-jour situations I can see the difference. The filter just adds one element to the optical system. However, I do use protective Leica filters, e.g. by the sea, because the salt can damage the lens coating. Also on the M10 Monochrome I use Leica color filters, which verifiably degrade optical quality. It also depends on what you do. I mainly photograph landscape, architecture and travel for photo agencies. They need maximum quality, resolution and contrast. For street photography I doubt you will detect a difference of with or without protective filter...

But I just realize we're going off topic...;-)

Removing off the cap by adding of protective filter and hood is on top of the topic.

 

I have no problems with protective filters at all. Problems you have described are well familiar to me for filters circa 2010. The only remaining problem is to find clear and digital filter. UV is useless on digital sensors and introduce light entering sensor change.

I'm not using my cameras as tourist.  I deal with all weather, in fact I prefer interesting weather, which typical coffee shop dwellers calls as bad weather. Not only water, snow on the street, but our dog is swimmer and water goes on the lens front periodically. Yet my lenses front elements  are not scratched because I'm not a gambler at all. Protective filter goes on the lens before first use.

Oh, $7K talk. Say, your lens is getting front impact. What is less devastating to deal with. protective filter or ruined front element? 

So, hood and filter all the way, cap does really nothing, except blocking the light.  

Edited July 17, 2023 by Ko.Fe.

[IMAGEPOWER]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Ko.Fe.:

Removing off the cap by adding of protective filter and hood is on top of the topic.

 

I have no problems with protective filters at all. Problems you have described are well familiar to me for filters circa 2010. The only remaining problem is to find clear and digital filter. UV is useless on digital sensors and introduce light entering sensor change.

I'm not using my cameras as tourist.  I deal with all weather, in fact I prefer interesting weather, which typical coffee shop dwellers calls as bad weather. Not only water, snow on the street, but our dog is swimmer and water goes on the lens front periodically. Yet my lenses front elements  are not scratched because I'm not a gambler at all. Protective filter goes on the lens before first use.

Oh, $7K talk. Say, your lens is getting front impact. What is less devastating to deal with. protective filter or ruined front element? 

So, hood and filter all the way, cap does really nothing, except blocking the light.  

I do hope you are not referring to me as a "tourist" or "coffee shop dweller" which sounds pretty insulting to me ( however, I am not a native English speaker). I have been earning my life as a sports photographer for 25+ years, shooting Bundesliga, Premier League and Champions League. We sit at the sidelines in ANY weather, be it snow and rain storm or heat wave. Of course I totally rely on my Nikons and Nikkors during the matches (no front filter can be applied to my 600/4, 400/2.8 or 180-400/4 by the way ...;-). I am pretty sure no Leica M would really survive these conditions, heavy rainfall for hours...the lenses have no rubber sealing at the bayonet. Especially the remote cameras behind the goal suffer a lot, we are not allowed to approach them during the match.

And if you had read my above post closely enough you would have seen that I DO use filters on my Leica lenses, but only if the weather turns really bad (esp. salt water).

I am not trying to convince you to stop using filters, by no means. Do as you please. As do I apply them only if I think it is necessary...both for our reasons.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ko.Fe.]

1 hour ago, IMAGEPOWER said:

I do hope you are not referring to me as a "tourist" or "coffee shop dweller" which sounds pretty insulting to me ( however, I am not a native English speaker). I have been earning my life as a sports photographer for 25+ years, shooting Bundesliga, Premier League and Champions League. We sit at the sidelines in ANY weather, be it snow and rain storm or heat wave. Of course I totally rely on my Nikons and Nikkors during the matches (no front filter can be applied to my 600/4, 400/2.8 or 180-400/4 by the way ...;-). I am pretty sure no Leica M would really survive these conditions, heavy rainfall for hours...the lenses have no rubber sealing at the bayonet. Especially the remote cameras behind the goal suffer a lot, we are not allowed to approach them during the match.

And if you had read my above post closely enough you would have seen that I DO use filters on my Leica lenses, but only if the weather turns really bad (esp. salt water).

I am not trying to convince you to stop using filters, by no means. Do as you please. As do I apply them only if I think it is necessary...both for our reasons.

I'm ESL as well.

Here is nothing insulting to be tourist and stay in coffeeshop  if weather is not good enough. It is common sense. 

But I'm not this type and go out under rain and snow. Always been this way. And if I'm not on the tour but on route as essential service worker I don't really have choice just get to work under stretch of open air where I still like to take pictures. My work from home allowance is very limited.

If you only need filter for something, but not constant protection of expensive lens front element , based on your background - I understand, except modern filters doesn't do anything bad as in the past, so I see no reason to screw-unscrew all the time. It just brings dust and else on the lens front and filter inner side. Based on my experience.  Maybe I'm too picky. Even one speckle on the lens front is risky annoyance to me. 

I was not photographing the sport, but been semi-pro, open air, all weather training for endurance.  Including tens of kilometers skiing under -25C. (once you are back to warm place, private parts are getting defrosted and it is very painful).  Even now  my chances to have impact, oil+sand spill are high, this is why I choose to have filter and hood all the time. Often enough I'm very glad I don't have to clean the mess from the front element, but on filter. Did I mentioned we have a dog and it is also source of all kind of spills on regular (by occurrence) hike?

I mean, not regular dog owners on-leash stroll or jogging together, but wading  in moving waters to get both of us entertained in slightly different ways.

 

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!

M-E 220, CV CS 21/4 LTM.

As for weather sealed gear, If I knew it is heavy rain, snowstorm I walk out with light and compact Pentax K-3, matching weather sealed and light weight lens. It is relatively light kit and not expensive at all.

If I'm getting into unpredicted rain, snow , hood and filter is not something I'm going to attach on the spot. Too late. I point camera down, covering by hand from the top. This shortens optics exposure to the elements between shots.  If it is getting worse I'm adding towel to cover my M or X2.  It modifies direct spill to indirect leak. Both cameras have lenses with hood and filter attached all the time. It was less worrying with M4-2. Only got film frozen and broke on advance once on third hour of -28C (which was not a big deal for locals, kids included) skating at  Rideau Canal.

Picture with M4-2 as I was skating. 

 

Keeping filter all the time in winter is most appropriate way. Condensation, if happened, only occurs on filter and residual after it dryers as well.  

PS: I put all of those details and effort not to particular arguing, but for broader audience to show several real life reasons why filter and hood all the time is a must.