jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
As much as I have enjoyed my time with the M9, which has been short so far, one major area of frustration is focussing. Not one of my 5 lenses is truly right on. They either focus too close or too far. I sent my 35 ASPH to DAG as it was way off and it is ok now but not truly on. My 135, 90 Summicron focus in back of the subject and the 50 Summicron a bit in front. The 90 Elmarit-M is about right.
So I called DAG and Don said that so man Leica lenses really aren't dialed in that well (paraphrase) and he has had to adjust many for the 8 and 9. So it may not be a problem of the 9 but it wasn't a problem with my M2 or M3. The exacting nature of the sensor seems to pose a bit more trouble. I guess I will have to send everything in but I never had to do this with any other camera though I know those who have had to with some of the Canons.
So I called DAG and Don said that so man Leica lenses really aren't dialed in that well (paraphrase) and he has had to adjust many for the 8 and 9. So it may not be a problem of the 9 but it wasn't a problem with my M2 or M3. The exacting nature of the sensor seems to pose a bit more trouble. I guess I will have to send everything in but I never had to do this with any other camera though I know those who have had to with some of the Canons.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
How do the prints look from these cameras versus pixel peeping at 100 percent? When comparing results from an M2 and an M9, did you really look at photos from your M2 at sizes as large as 20 inches wide with your nose at the photo? I suspect you would have been unhappy with the results as well.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
I guess it's not the camera so much as that people look at pictures differently. The difference with the digital camera is that people start pixel-peeping and looking at 100% crops. Then they are disappointed if they find imprecisions. Had they looked at their M2/M3 negatives with a microscope, they would have found the same imprecisions, except that they didn't do it. It wasn't necessary anyway, because people normally don't make billboard-sized prints, which would be the equivalent of a 100% crop.
That's the reason why you didn't have to do it with any other camera.
I don't know how you determine that your lenses are "on" or "off", but if it's by looking at 100% crops, you'll never have peace of mind; pixel-peeping drives up the total cost of ownership by a fair margin. If you give your camera a little bump and the rangefinder goes out of alignment even a little bit, those 100% crops of open-aperture shots will scream "Service! Service!", a long time before you would have even noticed the same misalignment with normal enlargements from film negatives.
That's the reason why you didn't have to do it with any other camera.
I don't know how you determine that your lenses are "on" or "off", but if it's by looking at 100% crops, you'll never have peace of mind; pixel-peeping drives up the total cost of ownership by a fair margin. If you give your camera a little bump and the rangefinder goes out of alignment even a little bit, those 100% crops of open-aperture shots will scream "Service! Service!", a long time before you would have even noticed the same misalignment with normal enlargements from film negatives.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
rxmd, GMTA 
I was always frustrated by my negatives in the old day looking at them on the enlarger baseboard with a grain focuser. But the prints looked fine.
I was always frustrated by my negatives in the old day looking at them on the enlarger baseboard with a grain focuser. But the prints looked fine.
popeye
Established
The fact that this can and does happen with any camera of this type as well as autofocus SLRs should come as no surprise, right?
gdi
Veteran
Of course you want to get the most out of your M9 and lenses. Focus errors will most certainly be evident in prints, obviously more so with fast, wide open lenses.
That said, I think you will find that the exact point of focus will vary somewhat between your various lenses. You need to decide if they all fall within the acceptable DOF. I had to have one lens adjusted by Don for my M8 - a Hexanon. However I also had to tweak the RF myself on the camera to get good results from all lenses. With everything adjusted the exact focus of my Summicron 90 is at a different point within the DOF than my Hex, or my Elmar, etc.
That said, I think you will find that the exact point of focus will vary somewhat between your various lenses. You need to decide if they all fall within the acceptable DOF. I had to have one lens adjusted by Don for my M8 - a Hexanon. However I also had to tweak the RF myself on the camera to get good results from all lenses. With everything adjusted the exact focus of my Summicron 90 is at a different point within the DOF than my Hex, or my Elmar, etc.
Most of the lenses that I shimmed myself for my film cameras were fine with the M8. I use a 15x magnifier with them. A couple were off, including the 90/2 Summicron and 10.5cm F2.5 Nikkor. One J-3 was off, but more due to focus-shift.
SO: Bottom line, I do not find a difference in a properly adjusted film camera and the M8. The ability to "pixel-peep" goes way beyond normal DOF tolerances with lenses.
This unccoated Sonnar was shimmed for my Canon P, used wide-open on the M8 without change.
Nikkor-P 8.5cm F2, straight off of Ebay from reliable dealer, wide-open on the M8.
SO: Bottom line, I do not find a difference in a properly adjusted film camera and the M8. The ability to "pixel-peep" goes way beyond normal DOF tolerances with lenses.
This unccoated Sonnar was shimmed for my Canon P, used wide-open on the M8 without change.
Nikkor-P 8.5cm F2, straight off of Ebay from reliable dealer, wide-open on the M8.
Last edited:
newsgrunt
Well-known
I honestly believe if it was sensor related then most of the shots I've taken with dslrs would suffer similar fate using older mf as well as manually focussed af lenses. But don't. I've had no problems with the M9 I have now and all are older non coded glass. Even the Nokton 1.1 is fine.
Could this be sensor assembly related ?
Could this be sensor assembly related ?
If the sensor was not properly placed, all lenses would either front focus or back-focus. As the error is "plus and minus", it's the lenses and not the camera.
The Nikkor 10.5cm F2.5 was slightly off, one layer of copper tape of the RF cam took care of it. The perfect focus is between wide-open and F4, chosen for the focus-shift.
Ben Z
Veteran
I feel very lucky in that none of my lenses, which are mostly prior-generation Leica, and Voitlander, has a focus problem with my M8. Is the M9 more critical in that respect?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I would stop agonizing if I were you. Although all posters above are right, film was much les critical than a sensor. For one thing, as it has a thickness, there is a good chance that either the bottom or the top would provide the sharpness. And due to the random character of grain, film is less precise than a sensor too. So it is not abnormal that you will have to have your older lenses adjusted to the new situation. Lenses delivered nowadays are built to much more narrow tolerances than before, so those will be fine unless something went wrong with the calibration. That does not happen frequently, but is does happen.
If you feel you need more exact focussing, just sent the lenses to Don Goldberg and have them adjusted.
As for the Summilux 35, that one has focus shift and will only be correct at one aperture.
If you feel you need more exact focussing, just sent the lenses to Don Goldberg and have them adjusted.
As for the Summilux 35, that one has focus shift and will only be correct at one aperture.
jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
Yes, I already spoke with Don. He has noted many problems with lenses being off. I shot a guy the other day and the Summicron 90 I just got focussed 3 feet behind him. Sure it isn't the camera but the lenses and that was what I was trying to say. The sensors bring this out all the more.
I should add that I started shooting professionaly back in the early 1970's using everything from 8X10 down. I do know how to focus and what to look for. All but one lens either back for front focus of the 5 I have used and as mentioned, Don fixed the 35 ASPH and it was very off. I took three shots of the guy near a wall refocussing each time and each time the wall was in focus but not the subject.
I should add that I started shooting professionaly back in the early 1970's using everything from 8X10 down. I do know how to focus and what to look for. All but one lens either back for front focus of the 5 I have used and as mentioned, Don fixed the 35 ASPH and it was very off. I took three shots of the guy near a wall refocussing each time and each time the wall was in focus but not the subject.
Last edited:
Ron (Netherlands)
Well-known
Never had any problems with my M8.2 nor with the R-D1s (2x summicron 35 version 1 and V, summicron 50 latest, summicron 90/2 version 2, Biogon 25, Orion 28, Canon 135 ltm). Have one Industar LD 61 that is off on all my cameras, but another one is dead on. These Leitz lenses were sharp on all my M camera's apart from the Hexar RF, alsmost all lenses on that camera were off; I sold the camarra, since I didn't want to mingle with the lenses. If one uses lenses on different camera's, it is always the camera that has to be adjusted, not the lenses!
ampguy
Veteran
Assuming you want it to focus accurately at a given distance, and given aperture (e.g. wide open), here is a 1 hour test to indicate if the focus errors may be camera, VR/RF, or user focusing error:
1. Set the aperture to the aperture you want to focus most accurately on.
2. Set the camera at measured distances you want to focus accurately at on a tripod.
3. Put out some markers at your target, with a few behind by a couple cm and a couple in front by a couple of cm.
this is the most important part:
4. Don't trust your RF/VF, but do your best to focus and take an exposure, notating it with a mark on the lens.
5. Rotate the focus CCW in 1 degree increments 5 times and take 5 images.
6. Go back to the spot in #4's index focus mark.
7. Rotate the lens in 1 degree increments CW and take 5 shots.
8. Pixel peep the images at 100% at target.
9. If your indexed mark is not your sharpest image, then you need to consider that user focusing error, or your VF/RF, or eye rx, etc. may need to be looked at first. Then get back to your lens.
1. Set the aperture to the aperture you want to focus most accurately on.
2. Set the camera at measured distances you want to focus accurately at on a tripod.
3. Put out some markers at your target, with a few behind by a couple cm and a couple in front by a couple of cm.
this is the most important part:
4. Don't trust your RF/VF, but do your best to focus and take an exposure, notating it with a mark on the lens.
5. Rotate the focus CCW in 1 degree increments 5 times and take 5 images.
6. Go back to the spot in #4's index focus mark.
7. Rotate the lens in 1 degree increments CW and take 5 shots.
8. Pixel peep the images at 100% at target.
9. If your indexed mark is not your sharpest image, then you need to consider that user focusing error, or your VF/RF, or eye rx, etc. may need to be looked at first. Then get back to your lens.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Three feet behind him is clearly a problem with the lens. Can't blame the M9 for that!
newsgrunt
Well-known
Just did some qwik tests with the M9 and my 21, 35, 50 and 90, wide open and ALL were sharp. No front or back focus. All worked fine on my M6 and MP so my experience tells me it's a camera tolerance issue. Can't understand how lenses that in all likelihood worked perfectly with film cameras can now be at fault. I wonder what the serial numbers of the problem cameras are and if perhaps there might be a group that slipped through qc.
mervynyan
Mervyn Yan
If I were you, I wouldn't want to spend 7k without almost a perfect camera. If it is still under warranty, I'd send to Leica NJ for adjustment, I am sure there is a solution for it.
DAG has adjusted a few of my lenses for use on the M8 as well; some needed it while others didn't.
To clarify, your 35 ASPH was very off AFTER Don "fixed" it? Since the lens does have some focus shift, what lens opening did he adjust to be ON, and is it indeed on at that f/stop?
My 35 Lux ASPH arrived at his shop yesterday for a general look-see as it's not as sharp as expected at any aperture, oddly though maybe a bit sharper on the right than on the left. Certainly different individual lenses may exhibit more or less sharpness or focus shift... I asked Don to put less priority on accurate focus wide open than at f/2-f/8, as wide open is "special use" for me and I can compensate manually for errors there.
I earlier asked the same for the 50 C-Sonnar, and he did a great job on that. I hope for the same quality work on the 35 ASPH so your comment is alarming!
jamato8
Corroding tank M9 35 ASPH
Sorry, I did not mean to convey that he didn't fix it. I meant that it was way off and I sent it too him and he stated that yes, the 35 was off and he fixed it. It is still off a little so I imagine I am going to have the send the camera and lens or lenses.
On another note, I got my Leica bellows today for my Visoflex I. I put on my 135 Elmar hoping everything would match up.
Wide open with the viso and bellows the 135 is exactly on. To the hair wide open. So the viso, with it ground glass that mimics the distance to the film/sensor is right and the camera records an exact sharp image.
Don mentioned that a number of Leica lenses come from the factory out of a true tolerance because they got used to film that allowed for this. Now with the sensor Leica is experiencing problems that require the lenses to be calibrated and brought into "true" specifications.
I may just have had a bad draw of luck but most of all mine are off. The 90 Summicron does not focus correctly at infinity as s few other don't. It doesn't go past infinity but not to it.
I just did some more comparison and focusing with the bellows. The 135 Elmar f4, even wide open, is as good or better than my 180L, 100L and would be a contender with my 60mm Macro (Canon), which I find (the 60) as one of the sharpest lenses I have used. The focus is also totally exact.
On another note, I got my Leica bellows today for my Visoflex I. I put on my 135 Elmar hoping everything would match up.
Wide open with the viso and bellows the 135 is exactly on. To the hair wide open. So the viso, with it ground glass that mimics the distance to the film/sensor is right and the camera records an exact sharp image.
Don mentioned that a number of Leica lenses come from the factory out of a true tolerance because they got used to film that allowed for this. Now with the sensor Leica is experiencing problems that require the lenses to be calibrated and brought into "true" specifications.
I may just have had a bad draw of luck but most of all mine are off. The 90 Summicron does not focus correctly at infinity as s few other don't. It doesn't go past infinity but not to it.
I just did some more comparison and focusing with the bellows. The 135 Elmar f4, even wide open, is as good or better than my 180L, 100L and would be a contender with my 60mm Macro (Canon), which I find (the 60) as one of the sharpest lenses I have used. The focus is also totally exact.
Last edited: