My new Summilux-M 35 Asph.is blured on the far left side

[ramig]

Hi everyone,

I an new in this forum and in the Leica world. recently I got an M6-TTL, with summicron 35-Asph, and 75 1.4. Hoever I was tempted to change the cron to a grey lux (1700$). I am very happy with the lux. My impression is that the description of the difference between the two (center vs. equal sides) is accurate. But I have a worry. Under some conditions my lux gives, on the left side of the negative (about 1/12 of its size) a blured, out of focus, less light and significant curve. is that a defect in my sample? (are there such things in the Leica world?). It does not happen under all conditions. from what I so far detected it is probably on f-8, when I focus not very far, and in the outside. is it possible that the hole in the hood lets light come in under some conditions? If it is just a fact about the lux, I can leave with it. but if it is a fact about MY lux, I'd rathere...

thank's very much.

Rami.

[stephen_jones4]

Not really able to comment specifically, but I can tell you that the

2 35asph 'crons I have had seemed to perform differently (at max.

aperture and close up) - could be that I imagined it... Also, check

your lens filter (whatever they tell you I reckon multi coating is a

must on e.g. B+W filters (some are, some aren't)) and obviously check

for any smears etc on the front and back of the glass. (I once had

dust on the rear element of an R lens which I didn't notice for c.1

month of using - all the while wondering about the hazy flare (not

unattractive actually!) that I was getting.)Hope it sorts itself out

for you - my (quite limited) experience of this lens is extremely

favourable.

[jackflesher]

Rami:

 

<p>

 

I got a bit confused trying to understand your post -- your title

implies the problem is with a 35 asph 'Lux, but the body of your post

mentions you have a 35asph 'Cron and a 75 'Lux - or perhaps you have

all three... I'll assume you are speaking to problems with your

35 'Lux or 'Cron and not your 75 'Lux as you mention the hole in the

hood. If the problem is with your 75, perhaps others are more

qualified to answer as I do not own one, but I feel my answer will be

correct for that lens as well...

 

<p>

 

There should be NO blurring in any areas of the field with the

35asph 'Lux or 'Cron that are within the plane of focus in the image.

If you are having this problem there is either something wrong with a

filter if one is attached; something wrong with the lens, possibly

elements out of alignment; or something wrong with the alignment of

the film gate in the camera body. If it were the body, the problem

would likely show up at all apertures and with your 75 as well. So it

seems there is something wrong with your 35 lens OR a filter attached

to it. If you are using a filter, test the lens without the filter

attached. If that does not solve the problem, then I am sorry to be

the bearer of bad news...

[ramig]

Jack and Steve,

thank you for your answers. I am sorry if I confused any of you. The

problem is with my 35 Lux asph, and since I never use a filter for

the first week or two of testing a lense, I guess it is with the

lense itself. but, it does not always happen. it happens only in very

unique circumstances. might it be that it is just what they mean

by "the edges in the 35 lux are not as sharp as the center?" It is

definitelly on the left side only, so it doesn't make too much of a

sense. and again, could it result out of some light that gets

thrrough the hole in the hood of the 35 lux, or does it make no sense?

[kens]

The difference between center and edge sharpness is so slight you

would need a magnifying glass to tell on fine grain film. That does

not sound like the problem.

 

<p>

 

I have never seen flare caused by the hole in the shade. To satisfy

yourself, shoot a roll with the shade completely removed.

 

<p>

 

My suspicion would lie with the focusing. Have you noticed any slight

binding when you slowly focus from near out to infinity? Shoot a roll

where you record the lens distance for each shot, startng at close

focus and working your way out to infinity. Repeat this a few times

on the same roll of film. Check the resultng pictures.

 

<p>

 

If you can zero in on the problem occurring at a particular distance,

take the lens and the photo to whoever you bought it from, or to a

qualified repair person, and get it fixed. There is no reason you

should be wondering abut your lens performance while you're

concentrating on taking pictues.

[kens]

Also, try shining a small flashlight at an angle through one side of

the lens, while you look from the opposite end. Do this with the

aperature wide open (at f/1.4). You'll be amazed at the flaws you can

see this way, but not see otherwise. Slight dust particles are not a

problem, but you might see something more significant that might

cause the problem at only certain focus distances.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

Rami; I´m not an Asph owner; but I´ve been iterested in one for a

wile, and never let an oportunity down to check on pictures made with

this lenses. Cuba book by David Allan Harvey is a good source of 35

´lux Asph. images, and I invite you to take a look on pictures on

page 12 and 68 and 74 specialy 132 and why not 144.

 

<p>

 

Note; I am NOT putting under discusion the work of DAH, but the image

quality given by what I suposse is a 35/1.4 asph.

 

<p>

 

Image on page 12; (A man with hat in a blue shirt out of focus in the

center of the frame in the fore ground some very rustic houses and a

man walking with a girl in red shoes, this is just to make sure we

talk about the same frame); center of the picture in the fore ground,

perfect sharpness and contrast, on the left side of the frame the

ceiling of the house is blure as well as the grass on the floor, on

the rigth side down to the corner the grass is in much near perfect

focus.

 

<p>

 

Page 68 (men playing a ball game); now we talk about the tan wall;

left side is perfect to the very corner, rigth is very fussy.

 

<p>

 

Page 74 (three women an old man and a dog) here every thing is as

usual with normal out of focus areas, but the rigth bottom corner I

see some fussyness like in a regular ´cron at 2.8.

 

<p>

 

Page 132 (two men and a horse over grass under a blue sky) Here check

the grass from center to corners; I don´t need to say any thing.

 

<p>

 

Page 144 ( some fishermen with a blue sea as foreground) Sharpness of

waves on the left side are sharp almost to the corner, on the rigth

side is not.

 

<p>

 

On the other side we have picture of page 164 (a kid in the first

plane a church and another kid on a horse in the foreground) here I

see what a 35/1.4 Leica Summilux Aspheric; is suposed to be.

 

<p>

 

What I think can be, is 1)Problems with mecanics in the focusing

sytem of DAH lens, 2)film flatness problem, 3)DAH´s hands shakes wile

exposing.

 

<p>

 

Please share coments asph owners.

[jay_.]

The occurance you are describing is very strange and illogical. If

the lens' optical axis is somehow not perpendicular to the film plane

it is possible to have only one side appear defocused, as there is

more DOF in front of the focus point than behind; however it should

be more apparent at closer distances and wider apertures where DOF is

least. You need to shoot a flat subject with crisp detail, such as a

brick wall, with the camera on a tripod and oriented as close to

parallel as humanly possible. Armed with those images it will be

impossible for a respectable, knowledgeable dealer or repairperson to

deny what's happening or pass it off as "pilot error".

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

did you see the pictures Jay?; in june/99 NG Magazine you can check

it too, just want your opinion.

[ramig]

Thanks all for your answers.

Since I submitted the message I developed some more roles, and did

some more negative scannings. As to Jay's "illogical" claim, I guess

what you mean is that it makes no sense that the problem shows up at

f-8 and not at f-1.4, right? unfortunatelly by now I have at least

one picture in f-1.4 and with the problem. again, allong with many

pictures in which the problem did not occure. and this is what I do

not understand. I don't know what is the mistake that I might be

doing, if it is me who is doing a mistake, (after all it is people,

not machines which are logical or illogical). What I get on the (far)

left side is much less focus, much less light, details... and some

rounded apparence. can it be that I do not load the film correctly?

(I am very new in the Leica world, but as I said, I did not have such

problems at all with the perfect edge to edge crom 35, or with the

amazing 75 1.4). but then, wouldn't it happen in all the pictures?

as to Ken's remark that the difference between edge and center is so

fine it requires very fine grained film and magnifying glasses, well

I use Konica 50 ASA, and scan the negatives in 4000 DPI on Nikon

Coolscan 4000, and print the pictures to 11`x8`. is that enough to

get a "normal" center/edge difference?

And a last question. if it is a problem, can such problems be fixed?

or can it be a defect in the glass? I am very sceptical about the

chances that the gray marked dealer I have been buying it from, will

be happy to help me.

thanks again for all the advice, and I will apreciate any further

comments.

[MTC Photography]

Rami, can you post your sample pictures here, it is hard to see

what problem you encounter without seeing the pictures

[jacques_balthazar1]

Rami,

 

<p>

 

And what if your neg is not perfectly flat in your scanner carrier?

 

<p>

 

Please double check your negs with high magnification loupe, or

even with a small microscope, and tell us...

[karl_georg_wolf]

Perhaps your grey market dealer supplies you with a substitute for

some hours and enables you to carry out side by side comparisons with

the lenses.

 

<p>

 

If you are new to the LEICA: a common mistake with RF shooting is to

have something in front of you which you do not really see in the

viewfinder because of the paralax between finder- and lensaxis. Of

course you could see the effect of a finger in front of the lens

easily and it would look different from the effect you described.

If your dealer is in town, show it to him. He might have an answer.

 

<p>

 

Just a thought.

 

<p>

 

Best wishes

[ramig]

Hi everyone and thanks again,

I have been trying to send some samples of the problem to the forum,

if I got the procedure of submitting a picture right, I guess they

will be posted soon. I have been in touch with the dealer, and

apparently there is a chance that I will be able to exchange the

lense to another tomorrow, which if it will take place I guess will

be the best solution. (minor worry: when I had a lense problem in

Nikon, I found out that all the line had the same defect, and I had

to wait for a new delivery. I really don't know if such things could

be the case with Leica.) I will keep you posted on that issue.

as to the scanner question- No, it is not the scanner. it is seen on

the negative. besides, the coolscan 4000 works very smoothly, and

never gives any problems, and the pictures with the problem happened

to be in the middle of the cut, not at the end. so no, that is not

the problem.

I have a question to r Watson and Ken. you say it might be a problem

with the focusing mechanism. but in the damaged pictures most of the

picture is in very good to perfect focus. non of you suspect any

problem with the glass elements themeselves. (or the aspherical

coating). doesn't it make sense?

thanks.

[kens]

Yes. What I really meant, but didn't say very well, was that I

suspected alignment of one or more elements, which might not show up

except at certain focus distances. Also, have you looked through the

lens with a flashlight? The thought there is that there might be a

fat internal grease or oil residue that comes into play at certain

focus distances or certain lighting. Last, have you looked carefully

at the aperature while closing down and opening up several times. I

wonder if a sticky blade might foul the image the way you describe.

In any case, a replacemet lens or repair seems in order.

[roberto_watson_garc_a]

Well Rami one thing is true, we all want to see your problem

pictures; and if problem is in 1/12 of the entire frame, I can think

in some flare problem, (do you use your lens shade') but flare

doesn´t blure nor out of focus or any curvature of field from that,

only parasit ligth; i belive it may be something like what i´ve seen

in DAH pictures, but again we ned to see your pictures, probably to

discover how higly critic you are my friend.

[ray_moth]

Rami,

 

<p>

 

I don't want to sound like the voice of doom but the last time I

encountered a problem like yours was with a Leica Mini Zoom and the

cause of it was fungus growing across the lens from one side. The

blurring was most noticeable in back-lit conditions. Nasty! :-(

[angus_ngtg]

Hello everybody,

 

<p>

 

I recently purchased this lens and am waiting to see a roll of

kodachrome 64. I will post the results here. My friend Roberto

mentioned the David Alan Harvey photos to me and I had a look but find

it difficult to make any comments because we don't have the luxury of

looking at the original slides. I would have to agree with what

everyone else has said. If this is truly happening it is probably not

a characteristic of the lens.

 

<p>

 

Regards,

Tom Gallagher

[ramig]

Hi everyone and thanks again, to the optimists as well as to the

pesimists ("fungus..."),

I have done some deconstructions, of nearly everything but the body

of the camera itself. My results are nearly all optimistic. I might

have had a bad coincidence and there might be no one cause of

the "left side" issue. From the total of 7 picture I have by now

with "the" problem, 3 were in fact left cut of the negative, and when

I reversed the scanning direction I got a slight difference in the

size of the blured area, so I assume it might be a scanner issue

(thank you Jacques). three others could be explained in other ways,

two of which might be depth of field issue, one might be a slight

movement on the right side's axis (that is to say I don't know what

is the problem but I guess, as r watson suggested about DAH, it is

possible), so the movement would be most noticable on the left side,

I guess. and then there is the last picture, which is the one that

nothing of that seem to explain, the one that started all my worries,

but on the other hand if it is only one there might be some

explanation, I don't think it was my finger or other blocking object,

though. (with this one picture I went, in my deconstructive mission,

as far as to go to the original location and to check, following

Woody Allen's "deconstructing Harry", whether the object itself is

out of focus. it is not). I will try to submit a link to that

picture, following the kind explanation of the procedure by members

of the discussion group. and I hope I am not being over optimistic,

but at this point I am more sure than not that the lense is OK. In

all the experiments that I did today, again, following good advice of

you, I did not get any blured areas, shooting at 1.4, as well as on

smaller appertures, objects with clear delineations, and flat

objects. as you all guess, I will spend the next few days again in

using film in the worng way, namely not for shooting good pictues,

but for trying to see what's going on on the left of the picture.

thanks for all, and I will try to submit THE picture soon. serously,

without your advice I would never have had the chance to understand

what was going on and hopefully, to feel confident about the 35lux.

After all I upgraded to Leica, since I did not want anything to block

a good picture, unless I do.

thanks,