28 Elmarit v3 - Element/Edge Separation?

[lifeandmylens]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey all,

Question for you.  Just received this copy of the 28 Elmarit V3 (1982).  Was just CLA'd.  Looks to be near mint with original caps, hood and box.  However it looks like there is some flaw.  Is it paint degrading?  Is it separation?  Or what do you think?  The seller has another mint one in stock also and he sent me a video of it and it has the exact same issues.  He says it's so common on this lens it doesn't even phase him.    Contacted DAG and he's not sure what it is, but said it's nothing to worry about.  Just curious what it might be.

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 29, 2023 by lifeandmylens

[adan]

Just saw this post.

There are no cemented (to each other) elements in the 28mm v.3, in front of the aperture blades.

This is probably some separation of the glass elements from the black barrel itself or the black coating on that. A form of so-called "Schneideritis" because it is somewhat common in lenses "of a certain age" from Schneider-Kreuznach - although also somewhat common with the M-mount 28mm Rokkor for the Minolta CLE.

The separated gaps fill with air, which produce the white/gray appearance (rather like airbells/bubbles trapped in or under winter pond ice: https://madeandcurated.com/black-pond-ice-with-air-bubbles/ ). Due to the difference in refractive index between air and glass.

Because this is in the part of the lens that is backed up with solid opaque black metal anyway, it should not affect image quality much if at all. It won't be in the functional light path(s). The white patches  might - repeat might - be reflected in the element(s) in front of them, in strong back-lit photos. Only experimentation will reveal if that actually occurs to any extent.

The barrel separation might (or might not) result in Leica rejecting the lens for other servicing - but if the recent CLA was done by Leica, probably not an issue. I know Leica will reject servicing glass-on-glass separation (so-called balsam-fraktur) in the groups behind the aperture blades. I had an identical 28mm v.3 rejected for 6-bit coding, because of that exact issue. Leica said "no more parts available" and that they could not therefore warranty the service, should the glass/glass cement finally separate completely while in their care.

Edited August 27, 2023 by adan

[lifeandmylens]

2 hours ago, adan said:

Just saw this post.

There are no cemented (to each other) elements in the 28mm v.3, in front of the aperture blades.

This is probably some separation of the glass elements from the black barrel itself or the black coating on that. A form of so-called "Schneideritis" because it is somewhat common in lenses "of a certain age" from Schneider-Kreuznach - although also somewhat common with the M-mount 28mm Rokkor for the Minolta CLE.

The separated gaps fill with air, which produce the white/gray appearance (rather like airbells/bubbles trapped in or under winter pond ice: https://madeandcurated.com/black-pond-ice-with-air-bubbles/ ). Due to the difference in refractive index between air and glass.

Because this is in the part of the lens that is backed up with solid opaque black metal anyway, it should not affect image quality much if at all. It won't be in the functional light path(s). The white patches  might - repeat might - be reflected in the element(s) in front of them, in strong back-lit photos. Only experimentation will reveal if that actually occurs to any extent.

The barrel separation might (or might not) result in Leica rejecting the lens for other servicing - but if the recent CLA was done by Leica, probably not an issue. I know Leica will reject servicing glass-on-glass separation (so-called balsam-fraktur) in the groups behind the aperture blades. I had an identical 28mm v.3 rejected for 6-bit coding, because of that exact issue. Leica said "no more parts available" and that they could not therefore warranty the service, should the glass/glass cement finally separate completely while in their care.

Thank you for the reply.  Yes, DAG has this lens for 6 bit coding and he inspected it.  He said:

"What you see in your Elmarit 28mm lens is the black paint very slightly peeling away on the sides of those lens elements, nothing optically to worry about. Of course if you're a "Leica-Person" you may not be able to sleep, food will taste different and forget about sex."

[TomB_tx]

3 hours ago, lifeandmylens said:

Thank you for the reply.  Yes, DAG has this lens for 6 bit coding and he inspected it.  He said:

"What you see in your Elmarit 28mm lens is the black paint very slightly peeling away on the sides of those lens elements, nothing optically to worry about. Of course if you're a "Leica-Person" you may not be able to sleep, food will taste different and forget about sex."

I’ve been wondering what’s caused my problems - I thought it was just age.

[RebeccaStarner]

On 8/27/2023 at 1:33 PM, adan said:

Just saw this post.

There are no cemented (to each other) elements in the 28mm v.3, in front of the aperture blades.

This is probably some separation of the glass elements from the black barrel itself or the black coating on that. A form of so-called "Schneideritis" because it is somewhat common in lenses "of a certain age" from Schneider-Kreuznach - although also somewhat common with the M-mount 28mm Rokkor for the Minolta CLE.

The separated gaps fill with air, which produce the white/gray appearance (rather like airbells/bubbles trapped in or under winter pond ice: https://madeandcurated.com/black-pond-ice-with-air-bubbles/ ). Due to the difference in refractive index between air and glass.

Because this is in the part of the lens that is backed up with solid opaque black metal anyway, it should not affect image quality much if at all. It won't be in the functional light path(s). The white patches  might - repeat might - be reflected in the element(s) in front of them, in strong back-lit photos. Only experimentation will reveal if that actually occurs to any extent.

The barrel separation might (or might not) result in Leica rejecting the lens for other servicing - but if the recent CLA was done by Leica, probably not an issue. I know Leica will reject servicing glass-on-glass separation (so-called balsam-fraktur) in the groups behind the aperture blades. I had an identical 28mm v.3 rejected for 6-bit coding, because of that exact issue. Leica said "no more parts available" and that they could not therefore warranty the service, should the glass/glass cement finally separate completely while in their care.


Thanks for the info, I was a little scared. I am looking for an expert who can write essays for me here I came across the best websites for homework help, which also completed the project swiftly and competently, while I was looking for a writer to do it for me. These websites excel in delivering exceptional essays that can elevate your academic performance.

Thanks for the info, I was a little scared.

Edited August 28, 2023 by RebeccaStarner