Help on m9p issue.

[raytoei@gmail.com]

Hi,

i finally broke down and bought a m9p brand new from a friend.

the rf was almost aligned but not quite 100%, ie. it would be sharpest at the point where the RF patch was ALMOST aligned.

I tested this on a version 2 summilux, a pre-pre 35 Cron and of coss my CZJ Sonnar.

I sent it in and Leica asked me for a lens as well. I thought this was a simple RF mis-alignment problem.

Yesterday I received an email asking for about $500 to align the 50 lux lens to the m9. According to Leica, the m9p is within factory specs.

So, is it my lens or my m9p that needs alignment ? I never had problems with the 3 lens on the film m4-p before.

thanks

raytoei
ps. sorry for the newbie digital m question.

 

[ChrisN]

I came across this, this morning, and it rang a bell:

"The real cause of all the troubles in the era of digital capture is the sensor with zero depth. The agX emulsions had a layer of 10 to 30 microns thickness and this layer could accommodate most of the focus difference and some other mechanical and optical defects. The digital sensor on the other hand has zero thickness and on top of this there is that layer of micro-lenses which should not be interpreted as lenses in the classical sense, only smaller, but as a large blanket of bubbles overlaying the photodiodes. The shape of these micro-lenses is not exactly identical, element for element. In the case of the Leica M camera, the shape of the micro-lenses is such that some color fringing is exaggerated and even caused by that shape. If we note color fringing in a Leica M picture, there are several causes: the property of the lens, the shape of the micro-lens and the interpretation algorithm of the in-camera processing system."

from Erwin Puts M9 - The final verdict.

I suspect the precision in the digital camera sensor positioning requires a higher degree of precision in lens calibration, compared with what was good enough in a film camera.

 

[Ken Shipman]

When I sent my lenses in for 6-bit coding Leica also calibrated each lens for digital performance. My 50 Elmar could not be calibrated to tolerance, and they wanted $500 to correct the problem. I skipped it at the time since I have other lenses, but sure enough it does have focusing problems on digital that I never noticed on film. You might have a similar problem.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

*sigh*...thanks for all your replies....

 

[splitimageview]

Yes, this is common and the nature of the digital beast. It occurs on digital SLRs too which is why some models have micro adjustments. I have had good results sending gear to DAG for this; much cheaper and if you ask for expedite he usually accommodates. He is one of the few (or only) independents with the proper equipment.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

one question that bothers me is whether post-adjustments, will my lens work differently with the film camera, m4-p.

thanks again

 

[Jeff S]

one question that bothers me is whether post-adjustments, will my lens work differently with the film camera, m4-p.

thanks again

It will still work fine. Film thickness will accommodate very small adjustments; this is why you didn't notice any issue with the film camera in the first place.

I'm surprised with your M9-P purchase that you are being charged even a small fee. Leica NJ adjusted my lenses for free when I bought an M8.2 a few years back. Is your lens still under warranty? Perhaps you could just ask nicely.🙂

Jeff

 

[jaapv]

The price of 500$ per lens is what drove me to an independent; for the USA read DAG, Sherry Krauter etc... Now I pay 75 Euro for an adjustment.🙄

 

[jsrockit]

Leica is out of its mind...

 

[séamuis]

I wonder why leica doesn’t implement a micro adjustment system like some of the big names in the SLR world do? you would think, at such a price… I know the micro adjustment is a godsend on my Pentax K-7’s because my 77mm limited works great on film, but on digital, without adjustment it would never give the same type of performance. or is this just something Pentax has because of the sensor mounted shake reduction system? it seems rather backwards to adjust lenses individually, when it could be the body thats adjusted at the users discretion with presets for individual lenses. but then at 500 bucks a pop one can certainly see the profits to be had here.

 

[Jeff S]

The price of 500$ per lens is what drove me to an independent; for the USA read DAG, Sherry Krauter etc... Now I pay 75 Euro for an adjustment.🙄

Sherry doesn't work with digital; she says the equipment for calibration is cost prohibitive.

I think Leica should provide this service gratis for anyone spending $8000 on a digital camera that is designed to use Leica lenses. Just my opinion. (And, as I posted earlier, they did for me, even for an M8.2 and 3 lenses)

Jeff

 

[eleskin]

Another expensive M Digital problem! Aggahh!!

Another expensive M Digital problem! Aggahh!!

I am depressed. I keep hearing these stories of problems after plunking 7K plus down. Don't get me wrong, I own 2 M8 cameras, one I bought new, one used with little problems, however I will bet when the Nex 7 comes out, there will be less problems per thousand cameras they produce than the M9.

Looks like my next camera will be the Nex 7, the 21st century successor to the rangefinder camera.

 

[Jeff S]

I am depressed. I keep hearing these stories of problems after plunking 7K plus down. Don't get me wrong, I own 2 M8 cameras, one I bought new, one used with little problems, however I will bet when the Nex 7 comes out, there will be less problems per thousand cameras they produce than the M9.

Looks like my next camera will be the Nex 7, the 21st century successor to the rangefinder camera.

Well, the digital tolerance versus film issue discussed here is common to many digital cameras. But, as far as reliability in general, I avoid buying first generation products that introduce new technologies, not just cameras but cars, appliances and more. Too many things can and will go wrong initially, and the bugs need to be worked out.

The M8 and M9 both qualify; the M8 of course being the first digital M, and the M9 introducing additional new issues with a new full frame sensor. That's why I waited for the M8.2. It's a much better sorted camera than the M8, with no significant technological changes. I now have two of them, bought over the last 3 years, and have had zero problems with either.

Jeff

 

[leicashot]

I believe its is IMPOSSIBLE to have 'everything' perfectly aligned. I gave up on that a long time ago, and its not worth the $$$ unless you have major problems, and even then it won't 'all' come back perfect.

 

[raytoei@gmail.com]

guys,

thanks again for all the information. Looks like DAG is the way to go for all my other lenses.

raytoei

 

[Out to Lunch]

Perhaps the 'perfect' is not for rangefinder cameras. Also, today
500.00 USD = 357.560 EUR

 

[Jeff S]

guys,

thanks again for all the information. Looks like DAG is the way to go for all my other lenses.

raytoei

Make sure you can see any problems in the print; otherwise you'll waste $ addressing issues that don't matter practically.

Jeff

 

[dcsang]

Make sure you can see any problems in the print; otherwise you'll waste $ addressing issues that don't matter practically.

Jeff

Might I add "Make sure you can see any problems in the print" . . . at regular viewing distances

Digital imaging has created umpteen numbers of critics that love to zoom in to 200% on a 30 inch LCD but never ever ever make a single print to hang on their walls..

Cheers,
Dave

 

[Ben Z]

Hi,



the rf was almost aligned but not quite 100%, ie. it would be sharpest at the point where the RF patch was ALMOST aligned.

I tested this on a version 2 summilux, a pre-pre 35 Cron and of coss my CZJ Sonnar.

I sent it in and Leica asked me for a lens as well. I thought this was a simple RF mis-alignment problem.

Yesterday I received an email asking for about $500 to align the 50 lux lens to the m9. According to Leica, the m9p is within factory specs.

So, is it my lens or my m9p that needs alignment ?

If the discrepancy was exactly the same with 3 lenses, it seems like it would be an awfully big coincidence if it wasn't a rangefinder misalignment issue.

So if I were you I'd be sure to tell DAG your camera is off the same amount with all your lenses if that's the case. He may find it's a rangefinder alignment problem regardless of what Allendale said.

 

[Freakscene]

All my lenses needed re-collimation to higher specs for use on digital Ms. The 50/1, 35/1.4 asph and 75/1.4 required the largest changes. The 75/1.4 took three goes to get right and I was without it for quite some time. The new lens specifications are tighter than the old ones and Leica has changed their method for adjusting the lenses to achieve this. It's impressive really, but it also shows the lack of accuracy and flawed nature of the RF focusing system in a digital age. There are ways to achieve better focus without losing the viewing system and I hope that these will be part of some future system.

Marty