Summilux 35mm FLE v1 - problematic flare?

[KenRothman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I purchased this lens around June from a very reputable seller of used gear.

I have used it a fair amount, but am still getting to know it.

However, a few outings now in bright sun have resulted in some photos with flare that seems to be problematic to me, not really what I'd expect from a modern controlled lens.

It's happened at least two outings now, both in midday bright sunlight

First on an M10 monochrome with a Leica yellow filter, then yesterday on an M10-R with a Heliopan UV0 filter.  Both with the hood on.

I'm leaning towards NOT blaming the filters, considering that it's two different ones.

And that the flare starting point it not always in the same place.

Doesn't that point to one of the rotating rings perhaps.

These are not wide open, prob 5.6 or smaller, I'd guess. (I didn't record the settings)

 

Any thoughts / advice?

CLA?

 

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[KenRothman]

there *is* a possibility both sessions used the hellopan uv filter, fwiw.  I didn't keep records.

[KenRothman]

the one with the girl in white may be most interesting, as you can see an edge to the flare.  maybe a smoking gun?

[KenRothman]

so I took it out for a walk and was able to get it to flare with or without the uv filter and with or without the hood, across apertures, 1.4 to 16

https://photos.app.goo.gl/sQSJk1XHiyBnem9k6

I included all the photos I took on the walk for comparison with and without the crazy flare. some of it seems like "regular" flare, imo

[aficionados]

I had this lens a while ago, and never had this kind of crazy flare.

I think your copy is problematic, not the lens itself.

[KenRothman]

Yes of course, I was referring to my copy.  

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I had a similar flare issue with a 90/2 APO-Summicron-M asph on my M240 some years ago that would flare at odd times.  Eventually I discovered that it was light leaking between the lens and the lens mount, probably because the 90 AA is quite a heavy lens that put load on the mount causing it to bend slightly (the mount only needed to bend less than a millimetre for the light to get in).

I would be surprised if the 35/1.4 Summilux asph FLE v1 caused similar lens mount bending but it seems worth checking.  The way I tested with the 90AA was to put a black velvet scrunchy around the lens mount to prevent any light getting to it, and the difference was immediate.  Without the scrunchy, even in flat, bright light there would be an 'X' shaped flare (similar to the flare in yours) across most of the pictures but with the scrunchy in place - no flare.  Black tape would probably work for a test as long as it doesn't leave any adhesive on the camera body when removed.

I've since moved both that camera and lens on but I hope this might be of help to you.

One thing I also noted was the 'edge to the flare' in your 'girl in white' picture, which suggests a mechanical cause and would point me at the mount bending.

Pete.

[KenRothman]

Thanks Pete,

That's a very interesting theory. 

I'll look more at that.

[LocalHero1953]

The examples in the first post show the flare coming from the same angle, but opposite sides, which is odd. The mount leak has previously been related to the 6-bit coding sensor area, but the opposite angles would discount that. And the angles would imply a leak towards the bottom of the mount, which would be less likely if the weight of the lens was an issue. It would still be worth doing Pete's checks, and inspecting the mount for play. I had the lens for a number of years without seeing flare like this. 

[KenRothman]

True true.

And these images were not flipped or manipulated in a way that would move the flare.

[jaeger]

It needs a lens hood,

[KenRothman]

3 minutes ago, jaeger said:

It needs a lens hood,

These were all taken with the standard hood except for the test shots where I tried to rule out the hood as part of the problem.

[lct]

No such a flare on my 35/1.4 FLE but i would use no filter to test flare personally.

Edited November 18, 2024 by lct

[KenRothman]

21 minutes ago, lct said:

No such a flare on my 35/1.4 FLE but i would use no filter to test flare personally.

yes, did so.  it flares like this with no filter and no hood at all apertures

[lct]

8 minutes ago, KenRothman said:

yes, did so.  it flares like this with no filter and no hood at all apertures

It is not normal then but i would like to see your flares sans filter if you have some.

[KenRothman]

13 minutes ago, lct said:

It is not normal then but i would like to see your flares sans filter if you have some.

I posted a bunch of photos here including "good" and "bad" flares...

https://photos.app.goo.gl/sQSJk1XHiyBnem9k6

[lct]

Do you remember the ones sans filter?

[KenRothman]

23 minutes ago, lct said:

Do you remember the ones sans filter?

unfortunately I did not keep good track.

I'm going to do another set tomorrow

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[TheGodParticle/Hari]

I see this flare with my copy of the 35/1.4 FLE v1, with or without filters and hoods. Sometimes I take another picture from a different angle, but sometimes you need that exact angle and the flare ruins the shot 

[KenRothman]

1 hour ago, TheGodParticle/Hari said:

I see this flare with my copy of the 35/1.4 FLE v1, with or without filters and hoods. Sometimes I take another picture from a different angle, but sometimes you need that exact angle and the flare ruins the shot 

wow, interesting... 

do you have any samples?

and you believe this to be "normal" and not "broken"?