1.4/35 ASPH - mini apertures

I just received a new Summilux 35 ASPH lens from Adorama that has a quirk I haven't seen

before and wondered if anyone else had or had advice on the matter (and advice is NOT

"leicas are overpriced" or "it's another example of quality leica engineering").

 

The aperture ring can be turned just a little past both the 1.4 stop and the 22 stop. It's as

if the stops for the ring are set a little wide; it's noticable in both feel and by observing the

aperture blads while looking through the lens. I'm going to put a couple of rolls of film

through the camera this weekend and see how the results turn out.

 

Has anyone seen (or felt) this before or know what the cause is? I'm perfectly willing to

send the lens in for repair right away if waranted but thought I'd check here first.

 

Thanks.

Bryan, as long as it clicks on all of the click stops (including 1.4 and 22) there is nothing wrong. That's just the way they are made. BTW, I thought the 35/1.4 ASPH only went to F/16, if you have F/22, it must be a special lens. :-)

Every recent Leica lens I've owned does exactly the same thing. If you want a really precise aperture ring, try Konica's Hexanon RF lenses.

I bought my 50 Summilux (early 80s serial #) for $600 because the store clerk showed me that the aperture markings didn't line up with the index dot and told me he'd asked Leica in Northvale how much it would cost to fix it was was quoted $200. When I got home I loosened three tiny screws around the aperture ring, lined it up, re-tightened the screws and put a drop of clear nail polish in each screw recess with the end of a toothpick. Less than one minute's work.

My 35/1.4 ASPH (c. 1997?) does the same. Don't worry about it.

and the aperture ring is loose right? they don't make them like

they use to but it works.

Thanks for the answers everybody, and yes it really only goes to 16. Well, 16+, I guess.

yes, unfortunately that is standard QC from Leica of today.

 

"They dont make them like..." Leitz used to make them.

 

How sad..

The aperture rings on lots of leica lenses have a little play in order to

compensate for temperature extremes. Seb

Seb is right. Leica certainly has QC issues, but this isn't one of them. That's how they are made. For those that don't like it, the aperture control ring can easily be tightened. In my lens (which is the previous "aspherical" rather than ASPH version), the aperture blades protrude a little so that you can see them, even at F/1.4 (wide open). This is not a QC issue either. It was calibrated that way at the factory.

 

It is correct however to say that in terms of mechanical solidity, ergonomics, and craftsmanship, they don't make lenses the way Leitz did in the early days of the M-system (1950s and 1960s). On the other hand, no one else does either. You will not see that level of workmanship again.

Both of my 35/2 asph crons did this (sold), but my Konica Hex 50/2 is better built and does not have any "play."

Sad to see how many users here denigrate Leica...but still own them!

 

Worse of it is that many don't understand the differences between "intentional

engineering" and "quality control."

 

If they're so terrible... I'd suggest switching to Nikon (where a high-end lens [17-35 AF-S]

squeals but is considered "within normal tolerances"), or some other more

"dependable" brand.

 

This isn't a put-down to those situations where the QC is definitely not where it should be

but to those situations where folks simply don't know the differences between intentional

engineering and QC and, yet, make disparaging remarks based on ill-informed knowledge.

 

And, yes, folks are welcome to their own opinions but I've always thought if things are SO

bad...then the wise person would make a change to something "better."

 

Just an observation...

 

Cheers

What does loose aperture ring have to do with temperature

extremes HC? Please educate me.

Leslie,

 

Firstly, READ MY POST AGAIN.

 

Secondly, when you do READ IT AGAIN you'll understand that the posting is NOT

about accepting QC issues. In other words, Leslie, if the aperture ring is loose...that is

a QC issue.

 

You're quite right in that a loose aperture ring has nothing to do with temperature

extremes. However, if you READ the posting, my comments are not intimating this.

 

Please do NOT take my comments personally! It's NOT meant to be taken that way.

 

Comprende?

 

Cheers

<i>"If they're so terrible... I'd suggest switching to Nikon (where a high-end lens [17-35 AF-S] squeals but is considered "within normal tolerances"), or some other more "dependable" brand."</i>

<p>My 17-35/2.8 AFS doesn't "squeal," but this is exactly what I did, and exactly what I got - a more dependable brand.

El,

 

I respect you for making the change... and I'm glad your 17-35 doesn't squeal. Mine

did... and it was returned to Nikon Canada in Toronto for repair. They looked at it and

returned it (after 3 weeks) saying that it was all "within tolerance." As soon as it was

fitted onto the camera and focused for the first time after being repaired... it

squealed again. Mind you... it does go away after a few minutes of use.

 

Perhaps, you got a good lens but I can certainly tell you that it was frustrating trying

to have it dealt with.

 

At the end of the day... I did the opposite of what you did. I sold off my Nikon system

in favor of an M-system and a H1.

 

What can you say? Win a few, lose a few!

 

They're only cameras! :>) Bottom line?.... the picture.

 

BTW...do you use any Leica cameras at all? Or are you strictly a Nikon man now?

 

Cheers

"On the other hand, no one else does either."

 

Eliot, try out Konica's line of RF lenses. If they made any f1.4's I'd still own them.

My 35mm Summilux ASPH does the same thing.

 

Kevin wrote, "Every recent Leica lens I've owned does exactly the same thing. If you want a really precise aperture ring, try Konica's Hexanon RF lenses."

 

I agree that *almost* every Leica lens does the same thing. My 90mm Tele-Elmarit has next to no free play at all at the ends. Just the tiniest bit!

 

Here's where I disagree: I don't think there is anything imprecise about this! I think Leica, and Leitz before them, just makes the glass the tiniest bit larger than it needs to be, at the maximum stated aperture. Then they set the click-stop *exactly* where it belongs for the true aperture calibration; f/1.4 in this case.

 

I think this probably improves the accuracy of calibration. The slightly oversize lens elements might be an optical benefit, as well. Perhaps it help to reduce flare, by keeping the the inner walls of the mount farther away from the light path. The 90mm Tele-Elmar is thought to be a bit more susceptible to flare than average. Maybe the near-lack of free play at the wide end has something to do with that!

HC, I was a Leica man but now strictly Nikon. However, I am a rangefinder guy and I'm getting moldy waiting for the day Leica wakes up and gets a complete, reliable, digital RF system onto the market.

El,

 

"I'm getting moldy waiting for the day Leica wakes up and gets a complete, reliable, digital

RF system onto the market."

 

LOL... I think a lot of folks are! Me included... it'll be interesting to see what happens at

this year's Photokina in respects to the digital back for the R-system. I've considered going

back to the Rs but have decided against it simply because they're all manual focus. With

my eyesight...the D100 was (and is) a great camera! In that respect, I do miss the Nikons.

That said, I must also admit the penchant to buying another D100 before they stop

making them. The D70 (to me) just doesn't "feel" right... I'm not sure what it is about it but

I'd go the D100 route instead.

 

Would you ever consider the RD-1? I've heard some very interesting things about it but it

is going to be different than using an M-camera. Personally speaking, I find the shutter to

be quite loud in the line (overall.) But, it's a fine camera nonetheless.

 

But, you're right... a reliable, well-built digital M camera (at an affordable price) would be

the cat's meow!

 

Cheers