johannes_h_ndel

<p>@Robin, thanks for your advice. I would withdraw 'bugger' if I could edit the original post. I am extremely sorry for the wording but I have to mention that English is my second language though it is not an excuse for the wrong vocabulary.</p>

<p>Thank you @Stephen, thank you @Brian; you guys are wonderful.</p>

<p>@Stephen, Thanks. I took a snap of the blobs with my iPhone and here is the 100% crop. Sorry that I don't have a macro lens, I sold mine 9 months ago :(<br> My Voigtlander 35mm gives the perfect alignment for the shortest focus distance .7m with the marker so I am a bit worried about this 28mm Elmarit M if it does not.<br> <img src="http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj204/agrothendieck/IMG_0405_.jpg" alt="" width="1004" height="982" /></p>

<p>Hello guys,<br /> I recently got a 28mm Elmarit M type III lens from KEH but what buggers me is the two issues below:<br /> 1. There are tiny white spots along the edge of the rear element inside the immediate underneath rather than on the surface of the rear element. I don't know if these are fungi or something else. Is it possible for Leica to clean these spots if fungi? Please see the first attached picture;<br /> 2. The focus ring, the lens can go below 0.7m in terms of turning the tab to the left most point. Infinity of the right most point is aligned. Can anyone confirm 28mm Elmarit M is capable of focusing below 0.7m? Please see the second and third attached pictures.<br /> Thanks for any comments on the above two issues. If it turns out that those two issues are serious flaws, I would return the lens to KEH.<br /> JH<br /> attached photos<br /> <img src="http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj204/agrothendieck/IMG_0397.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="1024" /><br /> <img src="http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj204/agrothendieck/IMG_0394.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="1024" /><br /> <img src="http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj204/agrothendieck/IMG_0398.jpg" alt="" width="768" height="1024" /></p>

<p>When I acquired my first Leica camera, a Leica R6, I did intensive research on the web including reading the old advert of the day like the one below <br> <a href="http://www.butkus.org/chinon/leica/leica_accessories/leica_cameras_accessories.htm">http://www.butkus.org/chinon/leica/leica_accessories/leica_cameras_accessories.htm</a>.<br> It was interesting when I bought a Leicaflex SL, I revisited the file again and an SL in decent condition cost me under $200 on eBay while in 1968 it was $465 if bought new.<br> However in the same catalogue a new M4 (and M3) both cost $288 in 1968, which was 2/3 of the price of an SL then; now a decent M3/M4 would cost at least $900 on eBay which is four or fives times as much as what I paid for an SL a few days ago. Any ideas why? Isn't the fact that the pricing of an SL was higher than an M4 in 1968 saying something about the build quality of an SL vs an M4, but why now an M4 is worth more than an SL (4x more at least) in terms of build quality?</p>

<p>Martin Tai wrote,</p> <blockquote> <p>For example, Contax 55mm UV filter for Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 has the right thread, it can fit onto a Summicron 50/2, however Contax 55mm filter has a outer diameter = 59mm, it jams up the built in lens hood of Leica lens, making it inoperable<br> Only E55 filter permits the built in lens hood on Leica R lenses operable.</p> </blockquote> <p>I bought b+w 55mm filter UV MRC recently, it fits my Leitz Canada Summicron R 50mm f/2 with builtin hood. Hood operates without jam problem. </p>