Focusing problem with M3

[ToddB]

Hey guys,

I need some advice.. I think I might an issue with my M3. I posted some symptom on another thread. To summarize. It almost acts as if it focuses backward. The further away the subject get the worse off the focus. Is there any experts on that focusing cam just inside camera body. The lens I have with it is the 50mm DR f2.0. Everything works on the camera perfectly except for this focusing issue. I want make make sure I exhaust all my options on the help forum before I consider sending off for a CLA. Anyone here from Albuquerque or Rio Rancho to give a look over.

Todd

 

[summicron1]

when you set the lens at infinity -- turn the ring all the way to the infinity lock --and have the lens mounted correctly, what does the viewfinder's rangefinder patch say about that telephone pole at the other end of the block?

 

[ToddB]

when you set the lens at infinity -- turn the ring all the way to the infinity lock --and have the lens mounted correctly, what does the viewfinder's rangefinder patch say about that telephone pole at the other end of the block?


On the money... Thats why I'm not understanding why my pics are blurry. Got any educated guesses?

Todd

 

[summicron1]

when you set the lens at infinity -- turn the ring all the way to the infinity lock --and have the lens mounted correctly, what does the viewfinder's rangefinder patch say about that telephone pole at the other end of the block?


On the money... Thats why I'm not understanding why my pics are blurry. Got any educated guesses?

Todd

hmmm. Not really. Did the lens come with the camera? I'm not really familiar with the DR summicron -- the cam in the camera is actuated by a ring in the lens, which is in turn actuated by the lens elements which are set in their own spiral of threads -- it's a complex arrangement that moves the lens elements in and out to focus in rythem with the rangefinder. The ring in the lens that moves the rangefinder has to move the same distance no matter which lens you use, while the lens elements obviously move a different distance. Those all have to match up.

One wonders if someone "serviced" the lens at some point and put it back together wrong. It sounds as if the lens elements in your lens are too far out from the camera body to start with, is why I wonder this. If the lens element unit is not matched with the focusing unit, this can happen. If that is the case, focusing them on something closer moves the lens elements further out, and makes it all even fuzzier.

I saw the post on the other thread that this lens unit unscrews. I assume you are screwing it back in all the way...something is wonky somewhere.

bummer. may need to have it looked at or have words with the person who sold it to you. If no other lens is handy, it is small consolation that the DR Summicron is one of the all-time greats. I have an even earlier collapsible (same lens elements, different mount) that I use constantly and it is top drawer. I joke with a friend that we should substitute it for one of the newest models in a test and dare anyone to tell the difference.

Just drive to ogden, why don't you? I'm retired, we could take all the time we needed to test it out.

 

[ToddB]

Inclosed is a picture of our piano. I focused on the small box with looks like tree illustration on it. As you can see, this image is completely out of focus. Shot 125 F2.8. It act as if it focuses backwards.

Todd

 

[Lamar]

I had to adjust every one of my rangefinders after purchase. Even if it appears infinity is on it may not be. I don't own a Leica but I would assume they have vertical and horizontal adjustments. I use a tripod to make sure there is no movement when I check. Infinity should be checked at a very far distance, not a block. I'm using tree tops about 1/3rd of a mile away to be sure. I'm sure there is some mathematical formula to derive the minimum infinity distance from base length but it was just easier to look as far away as possible than to try to calculate. It made a difference from using a point that was 60 or 70 meters away, at least on my Canon 7. Not sure about the base length on the Leicas. Then check some closer distances 10 meters, 3 meters 1 meter and adjust as necessary. Make sure you are measuring from the film plane.

To QC your infinity; set up your camera with lens mounted and the back off so that you can lock the shutter open and see through the lens and camera out the back. Place scotch tape or a piece of film at the film plane so that it is exactly where the exposed film would be during a shot. Place a mark on the tape or film at the center of the frame with a marker, an x will do. Make sure your Leica lens aperture is wide open and is set to infinity. Now with another large aperture long lens on an SLR set it at infinity with aperture wide open. Using the SLR viewfinder look through the front of the Leica lens to see the x you marked at the film plane. With everything set up correctly, the x should be sharp. If it is not either your setup is wrong or there is a problem with the lens / mount. If there is a problem you would have to identify why and correct it. I can adjust lenses on my Argus's to correct infinity offset issues. Not sure about m-mounts. I do have an Argus lens that was re-assembled wrong at some point in it's life and will not check out at infinity. Trying to figure out what was wrong was how I learned to do all this....

 

[Xmas]

The moon is the best focus target. Failing that a white cottage a mile away.

But the test at infinity is not complete for a M or Canon 7. They both are good for /0.95 5cm.

The lens, the registration plate and the rangefinder each need to be inside production tolerances to be sharp from 0.7 to infinity.

 

[benjiboy]

I suggest you have it checked out and recalibrated by a professional.

 

[frank]

Do you have another lens? Can you borrow one for just a few shots? That way you can discern if the problem is with the lens or the camera.

 

[ToddB]

There is a camera shop here locally that has a bunch of new and used gear. I know they have a section of Leica stuff. Maybe I'll run by and ask the shop owner if I could put on a used lens and take a few shots out the store for testing.

 

[benjiboy]

There is a camera shop here locally that has a bunch of new and used gear. I know they have a section of Leica stuff. Maybe I'll run by and ask the shop owner if I could put on a used lens and take a few shots out the store for testing.

That's a good idea to isolate the probable cause of the problem, but ultimately it still needs to be repaired .

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

Todd, where are you?

 

[Jerevan]

I've run into this issue with a Summilux 35/1.4 and an M4-P.

Camera was just overhauled, but the lens didn't match up at infinity, very slightly off ... I thought I was going nuts; tried it on another M3. Turned out that the lens that had had two owners, was in "excellent" condition and costed an arm and a leg - in reality, was tampered with. Something I realised when I took a loupe to some of the screws. Some dude with more screwdrivers than sense had put it together slightly wrong. It cost me a lot of grief and €250 to fix by sending it off to a known repairman.

 

[Richard S. (rich815)]

I've run into this issue with a Summilux 35/1.4 and an M4-P.

Camera was just overhauled, but the lens didn't match up at infinity, very slightly off ... I thought I was going nuts; tried it on another M3. Turned out that the lens that had had two owners, was in "excellent" condition and costed an arm and a leg - in reality, was tampered with. Something I realised when I took a loupe to some of the screws. Some dude with more screwdrivers than sense had put it together slightly wrong. It cost me a lot of grief and €250 to fix by sending it off to a known repairman.

Similar with me on a Rollei 35T. Bought it from a known dealer in Marin County here in Northern California for a price that while not that expensive was not a great bargain either. After all it was a dealer of good repute who sold it as good condition and recently CLA'd, or so I thought. My results were soft as heck. I just thought the Tessar was not that sharp! Then I had it looked at by someone else. Turns out some buffoon had disassembled the lens and put in one of the elements backwards or crooked or something. Reassembled properly NOW it's sharp as all get out!

 

[frank]

What is the history of this camera and lens? Is it recently new to you? Bought together? Has it every focused properly for you?

 

[ToddB]

Hi Frank,

I'm new to the Leica Rangefinder line of cameras. I got it from really great guy here on APUG. The body is mechanically sound, all shutter speed properly, self timer perfect, film transport is right on the money. There is just something not connecting with the focus. Focused on infinity on the mountain here in Albuquerque, I put on infinity and the two images matched. So it's not off there. Looked inside body, there really isn't much there as far focusing parts. It's really a mystery why the images are blurry. The only in there is the shutter curtain and the cam assembly piece on the top. The lens is near mint condition, very smooth and gunk free. P.S. it's deffently a DR 50mm lens, it has the flat top on it.

Todd

 

[ToddB]

disassembled the lens and put in one of the elements backwards or crooked or something. Reassembled properly NOW it's sharp as all get out!

I'm thinking that what going on with this. Again the body works perfectly. I wish there was someplace I send just the lens to have checked out. As I mentioned, I'll be stopping by camera shop to see if I can take a few shots with another lens, If it's clear and crisp then I'll know the problem.

 

[summicron1]

disassembled the lens and put in one of the elements backwards or crooked or something. Reassembled properly NOW it's sharp as all get out!

I'm thinking that what going on with this. Again the body works perfectly. I wish there was someplace I send just the lens to have checked out. As I mentioned, I'll be stopping by camera shop to see if I can take a few shots with another lens, If it's clear and crisp then I'll know the problem.

there are NO user serviceable parts on an M3. Don't mess with anything in there, please. Camera repair people get rich off of folks who try.

From what you have said I'm almost certain it is the lens, not some minor miscalibration of the rangefinder. Testing the camera with another lens, and the lens on another camera, will make certain. If you have a local shop with someone who is experience with an M3 he/she may also be able to show you if you are mounting the lens wrong, or if it is put together wrong.

Youxin Ye or DAG camera repair can both test/fix this lens AND this camera, either separately or together. Google both. DAG is really good but takes a long time (because he's that good.) Ye has a shorter wait time because he is more limited in what he fixes, but send him a note.

Leica itself also services these lenses, I believe.

 

[Philippe Grunchec]

+1!
Are you sure the lens is complete? Not missing the front part that can be unscrewed?

BTW, I have this lens and it is splendid.

 

[ToddB]

Update: I went over to camera store and shop owner allowed me to shoot a 90mm. I shot 6 images across the street. This images came out nice and clear. So here is the strange part. Earlier that day , I was shooting stuff around my work building, just to have comparison shots. Those came out out clear too. That with 50mm lens that I thought was giving trouble. I should mention that I shot 50mm all at 125 f16. So it it possible to have clarity issues on lower f stop. Like f4.0 or lower? I'm grasping straws at this point.

 

[darkosaric]

Update: I went over to camera store and shop owner allowed me to shoot a 90mm. I shot 6 images across the street. This images came out nice and clear. So here is the strange part. Earlier that day , I was shooting stuff around my work building, just to have comparison shots. Those came out out clear too. That with 50mm lens that I thought was giving trouble. I should mention that I shot 50mm all at 125 f16. So it it possible to have clarity issues on lower f stop. Like f4.0 or lower? I'm grasping straws at this point.

f16 probably masked the error in focus. If focus if little of - you will not see it on f16, only wide open and on close focus subject, where shallow depth of field if more visible.
Good thing is that body looks to be ok, when it is focusing good with 90mm lens.

 

[Jerevan]

Here's how I figured it out: my M4-P, (the botched-up) Summilux and my friends' M3 with Summicron, then we both tested the various combinations with the outcome being that the Summilux was not working correctly. We did the test by going out in the street, matching up the rangefinder on a far-off church tower. If you want to be even better you set up a tripod and burn a few shots with each body/lens combination, both wide and stopped down a bit.

My lens was fine at close range (rangefinder and on film) and since I was making photographs at the near limit mostly, it took me a bit of time to figure something was up.

As Darko says, f/16 will probably obscure the problem, unless you are on a tripod and really know what you focused on.

 

[georg16nik]

A Leica M is easier to check for accurate focus than Barnack. You need to position some tracing paper or small piece of ground glass on the rails with the back door open. This way you can check various lenses for focus accuracy at any distance and if there is some mismatch between what you see on the ground glass and the RF patch, without wasting any film. Leave the lens wide open while doing it and use magnifying glass if needed.