Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/19

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Zzzzz... OT: Hexar RF focusing
From: Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu>
Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2000 07:17:16 -0500 (EST)

The first one (Amateur Photo) I read - and the article itself talked about
low finder magnification being a factor. I think the real issue is that
the travel for 1m to infinity is 1/4 turn, vs 1/2.  It gives you the
opportunity to overshoot the subject.  But that's more of a design
tradeoff to allow faster focusing.  One thing that I didn't like about the
90/2.8 Elmarit-M was that the travel was too long (ditto for the 90/2).

The vignetting (in the article, "falloff") was not listed as much of a
problem in PopPhoto.  And as a potential design issue, it is not a quality
control one.  It's something the bedevils all wideangles.

- ------------
Dante Stella

On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, John Collier wrote:

> Amateur Photographer had focusing problems with a 90/2.8 while PopPhoto had
> none. PopPhoto had vignetting with the 28/2.8 which persisted through out
> the whole aperture range while others have claimed that the lens is the
> equal of the Leica. That is two which come to mind without digging.
> 
> John Collier
> 
> > From: Dante Stella <dante@umich.edu>
> > 
> > What was the problem with the lenses?  That's the first I've ever
> > heard about that.  Of course, it's getting hard to separate statistics
> > from innuendo with this thing...  All test reports I have seen put the
> > lenses at top of the pile, giving deference to Leica.  Aside from the
> > RF-infinity rumblings and the "too easy" lens release, I have seen nothing
> > in the way of complaints.  Some infinity problems may be attributable to
> > other things. 
> > 
> > I think Mikiro is right - if there are problems that can be
> > adjusted, it's not a big deal.  If I had to pick a QC problem, it would be
> > an RF out of adjustment and not bad meters, light leaks, and
> > self-disassembling rewind cranks (all seen on this list with M6s).
> > 
> > Personally, I wouldn't buy any rangefinder without an opportunity
> > to test it in person.  The Hexar RF, although similar in design to the M
> > finder, does not have the easily accessible screws for adjustment.  Hence,
> > it is safest to pick it up in person and not to ship it around.
> > 
> > On Sat, 18 Nov 2000, John Collier wrote:
> > 
> >> The focusing problems that I have read about, are not limited to Leica
> >> lenses, they also affect the Konica lenses as well. There seems to be a bit
> >> of a quality control problem with the Hexar RF and its lenses. I have read
> >> both praise and damnation from unbiased sources and little rhyme nor reason
> >> to explain the differences in opinion.
> >> 
> >> John Collier
> >> 
> >>> From: Ernest Nitka <enitka@twcny.rr.com>
> >>> 
> >>> Dante - Many thanks for taking the time to put your thoughts down on "paper"
> >>> - I very much appreciate this effort.  After posting the question I came up
> >>> with some hypothetical responses myself
> >>> -ernie ur getting old ( true 'nuff) and so are your eyes
> >>> -50/1 is tough even with M6 classic
> >>> -how do your work horse lenses compare and does the DOF even wide open at
> >>> f/2 cover up the problem? The answer is that with 35/2, 35/1.4 and 50/2
> >>> seemed to be close enough for the DOF to handle when open all the way open.
> >>> Also brought out the M4 to check and all three ( M4, M6 and hexar) were all
> >>> reasonably close.
> >>> 
> >>> Perhaps a tempest in a teapot so long as I don't shoot 50/1 or 90/2.8 wide
> >>> open.  On the other hand when I presented the problem to my wife (standard
> >>> issue leica spouse -"what the hell do you need another camera for") her
> >>> response is that If I need a Hexar lens to test I should just go out and buy
> >>> it - so there may me a silver lining to this cloud.
> >>> 
> >>> Now for the inverse ? Anyone have problems taking Hexar lenses and using
> >>> them on M bodies?
> >>> 
> >> 
> > 
>