Summicron V4 on M9 found to have issues after incorrect initial assessment

stevencrichton said:
He has confirmed that the lens is out. It's also an early type mount so it could pose issues with a full rebuild as the plastic used in that type for the front optical cell is actually a bakealite nazi era derivative. :D
Click to expand...

Oh well.. At least your suspicions were confirmed about the focus issues. That nazi stuff is pretty awful from what I hear. A friends 1.2 Noctilux had the same issue. Hope it isn't too costly.
 
goamules said:
I don't keep up with Summicrons, but are you saying this was one made in WWII? Or just the mount uses a similar plastic? If that's when it was made, I can't imagine putting this much worry into analysis. It was built before most people working in the lens industry were even born. I shoot a lot of old lenses, very, very old lenses, and simply embrace their features. You are trying to cobble a 70 year old lens, of unknown (but we now know) maintenance over the decades and generations, to a modern Digital camera. Two entirely different things. But your standards are the same as for either shooting a top film lens on film, or a modern digital lens on digital.

Field curvature is a fact of life for some lenses. Getting things in different planes in equal focus is the realm of large format cameras with movements, not hand held cameras with almost century old lenses.
Click to expand...

I think he makes reference to the fact that the glass element holding unit in early V4s is basically some sort of pressure formed plastic with roots in WW2. Without wanting to debate whether using plastic is actually the cause of the issue, I believe that the barrel was changed back to metal in the latter canadian batches and all German ones.

As far as I know all V4s still have plastic aperture blade cages & aperture rings (the clicky bit - for lack of a better term).
 
Brusby: I can stand by it as until that phone call after all the testing etc. The copy I had produced those results I saw with my eyes and also shared within the thread that proved centre focus was on, but exhibited massive field curvature.

It confirmed the disappointment that I saw in a supposedly "great" example I had purchased. What could I compare it to other than what was at hand, if I was financially fluid enough and could purchase 2 this wouldn't have been the case. The telephone call came today in the late afternoon until such time and the previous discussions about the curvature existing all points added up on screen (paper). Before all the discussion was started, I will add I had already had it checked by a repairer in Scotland who had said it was fine. I will not be using their services any longer I may add.

Goamules: The lens wasn't that old, 1980's. The plastic formulation is. Malcolm pointed this out that some have a front brass optical unit construction and some examples have the mentioned construction and are also due to this they are harder to fix. I imagine this is part of the cause of the CLA paperwork not being worth the paper it's printed on!

Rod: Don't say that! I'm already sore enough about an empty garage where a beautiful classic honda used to be and the fact my new toy is already on holiday to the hospital!


All in all I've managed to see great examples from people at f2. Brusby, thanks to you most. Yours was the first conclusive proof that at f2 at an off centre subjective viewpoint, this lens is sharp in terms of the point of focus. Not in terms of resolution, halos or coma etc.

I was also worried when starting the thread about negativity due to the protectiveness that leica users hold of the brand. Yes it's a well made camera, yes their optics are very good etc .. although they too are designed ultimately by humans and assembled by humans.. therefore fallacy can exist. In my case I have been affected by this and now hopefully it can be rectified going onwards and I will be able to join this group in confirming all that other do about the v4.
 
Best wishes for the timely repair of your lens.

Since this thread will now come up in searches by others researching this lens model, it may be worthwhile for you to edit the original post to add a note that your example proved to be out of spec.
 
Steven, I'm really not trying to be harsh. Maybe, in the interests of accuracy, the thread should be called "Broken Summicron V4 on M9 really doesn't live up to the hype?". :)

Good luck with your journey.
 
Be sure to post some images for us when you get the lens back :)

What other digital cameras have the incredible choices at 35mm like the Leica Ms?

I'd like to try the v1 cron :)
 
I had a chance to speak with Sherry Krauter a few days ago. She really prefers the V4 over the ASPH in lens construction. She mentioned Leica skimming on the materials used on newer lenses (the ASPH I have has play on parts of the lens barrel). The ASPH version is only good for color otherwise gives a very flat BW image. The v4 on the other hand can excel on both bw and color once you get to know its characteristics.
 
sge998 said:
I had a chance to speak with Sherry Krauter a few days ago. She really prefers the V4 over the ASPH in lens construction. She mentioned Leica skimming on the materials used on newer lenses (the ASPH I have has play on parts of the lens barrel). The ASPH version is only good for color otherwise gives a very flat BW image. The v4 on the other hand can excel on both bw and color once you get to know its characteristics.
Click to expand...

The V4 is also a bit of a cheap lens, construction wise. With the front tending to spin off... And dont get me started on the Leica MP!

The ASPH has a slightly less relative DOF than the v4 on account of its slightly longer focal length. I use mine almost exclusively for B&W and it is capable of producing nice deep 3D images. Would not call them flat at all.

p.s. Welcome to the forum.
 
stevencrichton said:
The plastic formulation is. Malcolm pointed this out that some have a front brass optical unit construction and some examples have the mentioned construction and are also due to this they are harder to fix.
Click to expand...
Malcolm has my damaged copy of this lens. Fortunately the dodgy section is actually undamaged and I imagine that providing it is undamaged then fixing isn't going to be the problem. In my case the rear element separation is more of a problem.....

I'd suggest not' to worry about the construction material unless it proves to be a problem.
 
Lot's of hating on the pre-asph here!

I have to say that some of my most pleasing (to non photographers) pictures have been taken using the 35mm pre-asph summilux.
 
When my children were small mine lived on an M6. It was hard to focus or frame my daughter in a 50mm lens, so lively was she. My daughter even framed a marvellous shot of me when she was four with that combination. Years later I took a photo of her in the late afternoon, f4 backlit, laughing as usual, and the creamy tones of that shot are always noticed by visitors. People like the shots of them with this lens - not necessarily a good thing. I love it.
 
The construction of the earlier versions was fabulous, but I've really not heard of particular problems with the V4.

I like my 8 element and 6 element versions. I've always thought the 8 element was the best corrected until the aspheric (maybe not surprisingly), and have sold a number of the 6 element version after comparison testing. Lately I finally had the sense to just take pictures with my current 6 element. The poorer edge performance has yet to show up in the actual picture taking I do with it, and it has become a favorite lens.

The Version 4 seven element design seems to be nearly as well corrected as the original 8 element, and has the advantage of youth and better coatings.

pgk said:
Malcolm has my damaged copy of this lens. Fortunately the dodgy section is actually undamaged and I imagine that providing it is undamaged then fixing isn't going to be the problem. In my case the rear element separation is more of a problem.....

I'd suggest not' to worry about the construction material unless it proves to be a problem.
Click to expand...
 
Thanks!:)
The asph I own also have the problem of spinning front. I have yet to use the asph for BW so I will wait till I test it out to get a fair judgement.
I have the MP so I am curious to see what you have to say about it.

Ansel said:
The V4 is also a bit of a cheap lens, construction wise. With the front tending to spin off... And dont get me started on the Leica MP!

The ASPH has a slightly less relative DOF than the v4 on account of its slightly longer focal length. I use mine almost exclusively for B&W and it is capable of producing nice deep 3D images. Would not call them flat at all.

p.s. Welcome to the forum.
Click to expand...
 
sge998 said:
The ASPH version is only good for color otherwise gives a very flat BW image.
Click to expand...

sge998 said:
Thanks!:)
I have yet to use the asph for BW so I will wait till I test it out to get a fair judgement.
Click to expand...

So you're saying the ASPH version gives a very flat BW image, but you've never actually used it for BW. Am I reading that correctly...??? :confused:
 
I was quoting Sherry Krauter. She told me the asph gives a very flat image for BW. I've only used it on color film so far so I cannot attest that until I try it myself.

jonmanjiro said:
So you're saying the ASPH version gives a very flat BW image, but you've never actually used it for BW. Am I reading that correctly...??? :confused:
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom