mikemc_photo
Established
Lack of use or the curtains are going dry. If you start releasing it at the slowest speed that the curtain clears you may get that escapement to start moving fully. I suspect lack of slow speed use if your exposures are good side to side
dubya
Established
Those types of "defects" are more likely to be contributed to improper care than any kind of "failure rate" on the manufacturer's part. All lenses by all manufacturers are more susceptible to haze, fungus, lubricant evaporation and migration and/or coating problems due to poor handling and storage techniques rather than to any defect in the lens. To see any sort of "failure rate" on a manufacturer's part, one need look no further than the over-engineered and extremely complex Zeiss bodies, IMO.
I know I've seen well cared for Summarits that were as beautiful as the day they were born. I've also seen Summarits that weren't as lucky to be so well cared for and they can certainly get ugly quick. Leitz's use of soft glass and/or coatings on some of their lenses may not have been the wisest idea in terms of longevity (considering the fact that some of us aren't very careful with our equipment) but I'm pretty sure image quality was their number one concern at the time and they used the best technology available to reach that goal.
Find one of those well cared for lenses and continue to take care of it well, it will reward you (and the next guy) for many years to come.
W
Robert Lai
Well-known
Every vintage camera that I've bought, and every vintage lens has needed service. It just goes with the territory. People neglect their possessions for decades, then we come along and want it to be within factory specifications. There is only one way to do it, and that's to get the service done.
Since you've already gone 9/10'ths of the way by having the lens sent to Krauter, I would have gone the final step and replaced the element. Sure, objectively it may image fine, but emotionally you'll always have that nagging thought in the back of your mind. Replace it and be done with it. If somebody else comes along and takes that last element, you'll curse yourself until your dying days.
Since you've already gone 9/10'ths of the way by having the lens sent to Krauter, I would have gone the final step and replaced the element. Sure, objectively it may image fine, but emotionally you'll always have that nagging thought in the back of your mind. Replace it and be done with it. If somebody else comes along and takes that last element, you'll curse yourself until your dying days.
dubya
Established
Having never been in the situation to have work like this done, I'd be curious what the chances are of actually improving the image quality by replacing the front element... given that these lenses were designed and assembled by "hand" without the aid of to-the-micron computer technology to grind the elements.
What are the chances of being able to replace your slightly damaged front element with the last known good one on earth and having it actually perform better?
I wouldn't have spent the money either, personally. If the front element is only damaged at the periphery, the offending fungus has been killed and the rest is in order, chances are you'll never see it effect an image and it most likely performs better now than it ever would by putting a "mismatched" element in the mix (nothing against Sherry's or anyone else's abilities). Let her save the last good one for a lens that really needs it, IMO.
The 80mm Planar on my Hassy had a good sized nick just off center in the front element that I never was able to make degrade an image. Shoot it, enjoy it, don't let the fungus come back and don't drop it on a rock like somebody did my Planar!
W
What are the chances of being able to replace your slightly damaged front element with the last known good one on earth and having it actually perform better?
I wouldn't have spent the money either, personally. If the front element is only damaged at the periphery, the offending fungus has been killed and the rest is in order, chances are you'll never see it effect an image and it most likely performs better now than it ever would by putting a "mismatched" element in the mix (nothing against Sherry's or anyone else's abilities). Let her save the last good one for a lens that really needs it, IMO.
The 80mm Planar on my Hassy had a good sized nick just off center in the front element that I never was able to make degrade an image. Shoot it, enjoy it, don't let the fungus come back and don't drop it on a rock like somebody did my Planar!
W
mgermana
Established
Update: I called Sherry in time, and she's replacing the element now.
Just like with the drum and cymbal equipment I obtain, I seldom purchase anything I can't sell down the road in case my tastes change. Having Sherry make the lens perfect will enable me to recover the cost of the replacement in just a few years' time. In the meantime, I can enjoy the lens a bit more without worrying about the fungus coming back. (Read: I did it for financial reasons, not aesthetic ones).
Just like with the drum and cymbal equipment I obtain, I seldom purchase anything I can't sell down the road in case my tastes change. Having Sherry make the lens perfect will enable me to recover the cost of the replacement in just a few years' time. In the meantime, I can enjoy the lens a bit more without worrying about the fungus coming back. (Read: I did it for financial reasons, not aesthetic ones).
raid
Dad Photographer
You did the logical thing here. Enjoy the perfect lens.
MISH
Well-known
I find this question to be very interesting.................I would agree with others here that have suggested that you may not have got the biggest bargain in the world when you purchased it (but is my opinion relevant since you were happy with the purchase and felt that the price reflected the condition.) It sounds to me like you could have many happy years using the lens the way it is and never give it a second thought. That being said with the high cost of everything Leica I was kind of surprised you could buy a new front element for that price (and since all my lenses are at least forty years old, that you could even buy a new front element) for me the equation would not be lens cost + CLA + new element but is the price of the new element justified for what I would be getting. Personally I would think it is.
Happy Shooting
"These lenses are expensive but it only hurts for a couple of years after you pay for them and then it doesn't make any difference" Ken Ford at RFF get together in Chicago
Happy Shooting
"These lenses are expensive but it only hurts for a couple of years after you pay for them and then it doesn't make any difference" Ken Ford at RFF get together in Chicago
MISH
Well-known
I wonder how many people on the forum were thinking that if you did not take this last one that they might want to jump on it?
mgermana
Established
Another twist in the tale:
Sherry calls me last night to tell me she's not going to replace the front element because the second cemented pair also had minor fungal damage, and that I'd just be spending more money not to see any improvement in the images.
While I appreciate her candor and desire to save me some money, I'm having some significant buyer's remorse now. Yes, the lens images nicely, and no, I don't think the damage is significant enough to have any impact. But I was counting on being able to sell the lens down the road to fund other glass.
Sherry calls me last night to tell me she's not going to replace the front element because the second cemented pair also had minor fungal damage, and that I'd just be spending more money not to see any improvement in the images.
While I appreciate her candor and desire to save me some money, I'm having some significant buyer's remorse now. Yes, the lens images nicely, and no, I don't think the damage is significant enough to have any impact. But I was counting on being able to sell the lens down the road to fund other glass.
zuiko85
Veteran
Quite a convoluted history so far.
But you could still sell the lens later and recover some money. Sometimes I resold some item's and just took the loss and looked ahead.
This is why for all my regular bodies and lenses I like 'user grade.' Then I don't worry about it very much. Sometimes hard to even tell when it accumulates another nick or mark.
But you could still sell the lens later and recover some money. Sometimes I resold some item's and just took the loss and looked ahead.
This is why for all my regular bodies and lenses I like 'user grade.' Then I don't worry about it very much. Sometimes hard to even tell when it accumulates another nick or mark.
mgermana
Established
You're right about the benefits of user-grade gear. I don't have any qualms about keeping my M4 in my bookbag so I have it with me most of the day.
This being said, I would like to be able to recover costs when purchasing what to me is quite expensive equipment. The responses in this thread aren't filling me with confidence.
ferider
Veteran
I wouldn't worry about some comments in this thread on you having paid too much. They are typical on RFF and often come from people either wanting to buy the lens from you, or old memories of Leica lens prices a couple of years ago.
Yes, I also bought that lens for US 500 once. As I bought a clean DR Summicron for US 300, 2 years ago.
Those times are gone. When you check ebay prices, your lens is worth 900-1400 US (see http://www.antiquecameras.net/50summicronmlenses.html), where your copy with a pristine front element, CLA and collimation from Sherry (the best in the business) will be rather in the high end of this range. Just keep the receipt that Sherry will send you.
Also, not all lenses are equal. When you get it back and like how it performs, it might be worth more to you than what you could sell it for on ebay. I know it would be for me.
The way I think about it, we are not buying these lenses for price and/or performance. If we would, everybody would shoot, say, a Nikon with Nikkor 50/1.8 (for less than 100 bucks). We use these lenses because we like them, handling, "rendering", whatever, and that "liking" is hard to assign an exact dollar value to.
Enjoy the lens. The v3 is great.
Roland.
mgermana
Established
Thanks for the vote of confidence, Roland. Do note, however, that Sherry will not be replacing the element since, as she said, "It's not worth the money."
ferider
Veteran
Oh, I missed that post. She is fun one the phone, I remember
In any case: most important is that you like the lens in use ... and the cleaning and collimation might just make it the perfect performer.
The v3 is optimized for micro contrast and flare resistance. A great lens on slide film, among others ....
Roland.
In any case: most important is that you like the lens in use ... and the cleaning and collimation might just make it the perfect performer.
The v3 is optimized for micro contrast and flare resistance. A great lens on slide film, among others ....
Roland.
mgermana
Established
Thanks for these assurances, fellows. I'm looking forward to getting the lens back and taking pictures with it again.
raid
Dad Photographer
I hope that you will enjoy using your lens once it is returned. Don't worry about the lack of perfection.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
I don't know why older Leitz lenses (pre 80's) are so prone to fungus, fogging and scratches compared to even older Nikkors, Zeiss and others. Now I just buy relatively "cheap" shooters and look at the pictures instead of the lens. Whenever I buy such a lens used it is expected and factoring in a CLA is normal. Prior to entering the Leica world I have never had to do that with other makes.
Shade
Well-known
The summicron V3 is supposed to be cheapest amongst all the 50 crons available (save for the very first version).
And 900 is quite on the high margin. I wouldn't call it exorbitant. Besides, the seller IS being a sport remember?
Moreover, I don't know why it's priced lower than the others, it's less sharp TECHNICALLY than the rest, but I doubt it's THAT discernible in the results. If you were planning you use the lens for a long time, I would exchange the front element altogether. I hate fungus and with it being left there, it "MAY" spread into other areas of the lens.
And 900 is quite on the high margin. I wouldn't call it exorbitant. Besides, the seller IS being a sport remember?
Moreover, I don't know why it's priced lower than the others, it's less sharp TECHNICALLY than the rest, but I doubt it's THAT discernible in the results. If you were planning you use the lens for a long time, I would exchange the front element altogether. I hate fungus and with it being left there, it "MAY" spread into other areas of the lens.