Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/03/18

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: RE: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?
From: "Austin Franklin" <darkroom@ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 00:15:13 -0500

Hi Tim,

> > > It sounds like they described it accurately to me. If the aperture
> > > moves freely I would not worry about it. Oil on the aperture blades is
> > > more of an issue with SLR auto diaphragm lenses.
> >
> > I believe it is a reflection issue...which wouldn't matter if
> > it's an SLR or
> > not...
> >
>
> As with LF lenses in shutters, as well as SLR auto diaphragm
> lenses, it's an
> issue of the oil actually slowing the shutter/aperture diaphragm blades
> down - they should be dry. But on a rangefinder it's not an issue as the
> aperture blades don't move in a leica M lens during exposure.

you mean "on a range finder THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE is not an issue", because
oil on the blades can very well be an issue.  Over time, it can get on the
elements, and it can also possibly cause a haze on the optics.  Oil inside
the lense like that is just not a good idea, rangefinder or not.

> Reflections? Bah humbug. Some of my shutter blades are so old and
> shiny you
> could shave in em!

Then why do they matte them to make them not shiny?  Any internal
reflections can reduce contrast, and/or cause flare.  The potential is
certainly there.

Regards,

Austin

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

Replies: Reply from Jerry Lehrer <jerryleh@pacbell.net> (Re: [Leica] 35 Summilux from KEH, should I complain?)