35mm summilux pre-asph calibration problem

[sinjun]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I sent my 35mm summilux pre asph titanium to Wetzlar for calibration last year. It back focussed at all distances to the extent that at f8 I had to dial back the focus to 10 metres as marked on the scale to get infinity sharply in focus.

It came back and focus calibration looked improved - fine at short distances and more generally at open apertures. However, there remained this strange behaviour whereby at smaller apertures it back focusses, e.g. at f8  focus in the centre is achieved with the scale set to 10 metres and moving to the hard stop the sharpness noticeably worsens. However, at the edges, focus is achieved at the infinity hard stop. The same sort of behaviour is there at f5.6 and f4 but in a progressively less well-marked form.

So I sent it off again explaining the problem, but it was returned as being within spec, saying 'improvement in performance cannot be achieved'.

Has anyone else had this problem?

[Advertisement]

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

[LocalHero1953]

If you're willing to try again, and get a second opinion, consider Skyllaney for lens servicing. They know their lenses, and gave me a very credible explanation as to why my Summilux-M 75 (notorious for focus shift) could not be improved - and did not charge me for recalibration.

[rtai]

This is strange because normally the dof at f8 would hide some back focusing. Agree with the above advice.

[sinjun]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

consider Skyllaney for lens servicing

Yes, I could try them - I've heard good things about them.

 

2 hours ago, rtai said:

This is strange because normally the dof at f8 would hide some back focusing

Yes, that is what I would have thought. There is clearly something wrong beyond standard rangefinder calibration.

Anyway, I'm disappointed in Leica service. I can only think they do a limited set of tests such as rangefinder calibration at different distances wide open and assume that stopped down will be OK. I gave quite a lot of detail about my specific problem which should have been easy for them to replicate.

[grahamc]

Sorry to hear it .  I recently had a similar lens serviced / focus adjusted at Wetzlar , it came back with poor focusing performance.  I sent to DAG, his assessment was that the lens had been "tampered with" (LOL!) .  After reassembling the lens 'correctly' (his words not mine) and adjusting, it now performs as expected.

Disappointing but on the basis of that experience Wetzlar may no longer be the best at this kind of work, or even profecient .  Send to a service tech with a good rep in your country and I am sure you will see progress, the Titan pre-asph is an amazing performer and I'm sure this can be rectified. 

Edited January 4, 2024 by grahamc

[sinjun]

2 minutes ago, grahamc said:

Sorry to hear it .  I recently had a similar lens serviced / focus adjusted at Wetzlar , it came back with poor focusing performance.  I sent to DAG, his assessment was that the lens had been "tampered with" (LOL!) .  After reassembling the lens 'correctly' (his words not mine) and adjusting, it now performs as expected.

That's interesting. I suspect there is something incorrectly assembled in my lens. Not saying that Wetzlar put it back together wrongly, but that they haven't checked it properly. It's frustrating because it's now had two trips away from home, plus the not inconsiderable service cost for their first service / adjustment.

[grahamc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, sinjun said:

That's interesting. I suspect there is something incorrectly assembled in my lens. Not saying that Wetzlar put it back together wrongly, but that they haven't checked it properly. It's frustrating because it's now had two trips away from home, plus the not inconsiderable service cost for their first service / adjustment.

I'm hearing you.  I decided to save myself the stress and go independent , I was glad I did 

[weatherproof]

1 hour ago, grahamc said:

Sorry to hear it .  I recently had a similar lens serviced / focus adjusted at Wetzlar , it came back with poor focusing performance.

Did you originally send your Summilux in for a calibration because it was front or back focusing?

[grahamc]

9 hours ago, weatherproof said:

Did you originally send your Summilux in for a calibration because it was front or back focusing?

It was forward focussing.  Sent to Wetzlar to be looked at.  Returned in same or similar condition after long wait.

Sent to DAG . Fixed. Report on invoice: "parts were not correctly assembled. Re-assembled correctly"  

 

Edited January 5, 2024 by grahamc

[weatherproof]

Oof.. I've heard enough horror stories of delays from Wetzlar that I'm glad DAG is domestic shipping for me.

[grahamc]

7 hours ago, weatherproof said:

Oof.. I've heard enough horror stories of delays from Wetzlar that I'm glad DAG is domestic shipping for me.

Yeah hard to believe but just glad I took independent advice / service on that one. 

[astro8]

I had the same experience with an early transition version 2167xxx that I acquired 10 years ago. The seller sent it to be cleaned and serviced by YY, but it arrived front focusing, blurry and binding up. I put it down to early summiluxes being “a dog of a lens” that I’d read about so often.

 Not feeling very hopeful,  I sent it to Don at DAG and his words were “…this 35 Summilux has been all messed up! I will need to reassemble it correctly and I’ll also collimate it for use with a digital sensor.”

I received it from Don and quickly took a couple of shots. I was amazed at the smooth focusing and sharpness. It had been transformed.

It makes one wonder if the bad rap that these early summiluxes sometimes receive are just from bad servicing.

Even though mine is well worn and has some spots of separation, a dealer offered a straight swap for the new steel rim version.

I politely declined.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 7, 2024 by astro8