Seeingeye Posted April 30, 2009 Share #1 Posted April 30, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Some good news, my dealer rang me today to say that he had received my order this morning, the lens having been delivered some four weeks ago. All being well, I should be picking it up on Saturday. Incidentally, I can only agree with Erwin Puts, this is a stunning lens. SEM18, part 2 Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Hi Seeingeye, Take a look here Super Elmar 18 UV/IR Filter. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sclamb Posted April 30, 2009 Share #2 Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) Picked up mine today :-) When you get yours could you do me a favour. Blow on the filter from the underside (the recessed side that attaches to the lens) and see if you hear a vibration. Mine makes a vibration sound (but not when I blow from the outside of the filter) and I assume either it is normal and the filter glass itself is supposed to be slightly loose or mine is faulty and should not be loose at all. Thanks. Simon PS. I agree about the 18/3.8 - an extremely good lens. Edited April 30, 2009 by sclamb Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seeingeye Posted April 30, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted April 30, 2009 Simon I'll check the filter out as you suggest and let you know. I cannot think of any reason why the filter glass should be loose, so thanks for the warning. I hope that it is OK, as it is very easy to leave detection on when changing lenses and I now have a sequence of shots that are very magenta in the corners! Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted April 30, 2009 Share #4 Posted April 30, 2009 The filter works as it should and it is neat the way it firmly attaches to the lens and then the hood to the filter. It does increase the length of the lens by around 5mm though. I don't think the filter glass is loose but something on the inside vibrates when you blow on it. Guess I should just leave it on and stop blowing on it :-) Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted May 1, 2009 Share #5 Posted May 1, 2009 The regular Leica IR filters are made by Hoya and the glass is held in by a "C" ring - and definitely some of those have loose glass that rattles. I don't know if the version for the 18, with its special ring, is also Hoya-made. (Not a knock on Hoya - they supply some of the raw glass for Leica lenses and partnered with Leica in developing the pressed-ASPH manufacturing process) I fixed my rattling filters by popping out the "C" ring and the glass, and putting 4 tiny drops of Elmer's Glue (woodworker's glue, for those not familiar with US brand names) on the rim of the glass - letting it dry BEFORE remounting the glass. I.E. the glue bumps did not "glue" the glass in place - but just became little soft plasticky bumpers to make the fit tighter. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #6 Posted May 1, 2009 I was told by Leica UK that the 18mm filters are made by B&W. To be honest, it does not rattle when you shake the filter, just this vibrating sound when you blow on the back of it. I shall just stop blowing :-) I can't see me taking it off the lens now anyway, so not really a problem. Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
paisatge Posted May 1, 2009 Share #7 Posted May 1, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've been considering this lens as well but knowing that with a few hundred more euros I can get the Tri-Elmar WATE, I'm having doubts now. Why would one choose the Super Elmar 18 over a Tri-Elmar WATE besides the price difference? Pros cons? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #8 Posted May 1, 2009 Well, I decided to go for the 18mm as I am used to the 24mm FOV and that is of course what I get with the lens on the M8. I also decided in my own mind that there would be fewer compromises in image quality with a prime versus a three-in-one lens, although I did not have any firm evidence to support my theory! The 18mm is definitely easier to use than the set-up requirement for using the WATE. I also figured that to get to 16mm I would take three steps back :-) Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted May 1, 2009 Share #9 Posted May 1, 2009 That is good news indeed, let's see if my dealer remembers to call... Let me just join the chorus of praise for this lens, it is simply flawless. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #10 Posted May 1, 2009 Just spoke to my dealer. The other 18mm filters he has had are all fine. If I shake mine from side to side it rattles as the filter glass is loose. Yet again (as I had a bad M8.2 out of the box and a bad 18mm f/3.8 out of the box) I now have a bad 18mm filter out of the box. Leica QC is as bad as it gets right now. Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted May 1, 2009 Share #11 Posted May 1, 2009 I've been considering this lens as well but knowing that with a few hundred more euros I can get the Tri-Elmar WATE, I'm having doubts now. Why would one choose the Super Elmar 18 over a Tri-Elmar WATE besides the price difference? Pros cons? Even if I'm actually selling my 18 super elmar, I'd say that size/weight/filter issues/newer design were the reasons behind my preference for the Super Elmar. Matter of fact I had used a WATE for more than a while too. I simply prefer the 18 when it's up to wide angle lenses. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 1, 2009 Share #12 Posted May 1, 2009 Just spoke to my dealer. The other 18mm filters he has had are all fine. If I shake mine from side to side it rattles as the filter glass is loose. Yet again (as I had a bad M8.2 out of the box and a bad 18mm f/3.8 out of the box) I now have a bad 18mm filter out of the box. Leica QC is as bad as it gets right now. Simon Leica literature ca 1950: A filter glass should be slightly loose in the mount, to prevent stress by heat expansion..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #13 Posted May 1, 2009 Aha! However, no other filter that I own rattles when shaken, and the other 18mm filters that the dealer had do not rattle either. I prefer the non-rattling kind :-) Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted May 1, 2009 Share #14 Posted May 1, 2009 Tolerances I suppose. I gues the tolerance range on filter glass is quite wide, as function is not impaired. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #15 Posted May 1, 2009 I guess that is true. However, if I was taking pictures by the side of a road and a large articulated lorry drove past, how could I be sure that the vibrations caused by the lorry would not cause the filter glass to vibrate (similar to windows vibrating if near traffic) and that then having an adverse effect on the image quality? Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sclamb Posted May 1, 2009 Share #16 Posted May 1, 2009 OK, might have to eat a bit of humble pie here! The glass itself in the filter is not what is rattling. There is a black ring of stiff card or plastic inside the filter housing (about 5mm wide) which reduces the effective diameter of the filter by blocking off the outermost 5mm all the way round. Not sure what it is for but it is not a tight fit in the filter housing and it can be rotated quite freely. The actual glass itself does move a bit if you press on the outside and push gently, but I am OK with that as some give is necessary I would imagine. So I guess the rattling sound when you shake the filter is normal as the baffle is quite loose fitting. Simon Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted May 1, 2009 Share #17 Posted May 1, 2009 On a personal note: I love a good blow, and oh boy would I be scared if it rattled:eek: Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicoleica Posted May 1, 2009 Share #18 Posted May 1, 2009 On a personal note: I love a good blow, and oh boy would I be scared if it rattled:eek: You obviously haven't met the right woman yet then! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauribix Posted May 1, 2009 Share #19 Posted May 1, 2009 You obviously haven't met the right woman yet then! ahahahaha! This is getting hot. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockyIII Posted May 1, 2009 Share #20 Posted May 1, 2009 Well, I decided to go for the 18mm as I am used to the 24mm FOV and that is of course what I get with the lens on the M8. I also decided in my own mind that there would be fewer compromises in image quality with a prime versus a three-in-one lens, although I did not have any firm evidence to support my theory! If you look at the MTF and distortion graphs for both lenses at 18mm, you'll have your evidence. Rocky Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.