Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/08/25
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Daniel, I just noticed you addressed another Phil. Apologies for this. Philippe > From: Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:36:25 +0200 > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] New Jupiter arrives > > Thanks, Daniel. > I've contacted Oleg Khalyavin and will send him my package shortly, just to > be sure everything is everything CLA'd and the lenses are adapted to the > body. > Meanwhile, I did a black lacquering experiment on the frontplate of the > Kiev > 4AM myself and although being a bit stressed before seeing the final > result, > I'm pretty pleased with it. That's the fun with these camera's: they're so > cheap that mistakes are easily forgotten. > > >> From: Daniel Ridings <dlridings@gmail.com> >> Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >> Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2005 13:30:50 +0200 >> To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> >> Subject: Re: [Leica] New Jupiter arrives >> >> On 8/24/05, pswango@att.net <pswango@att.net> wrote: >>> Hoping for the best, though I have been warned about uneven QC on this >>> model. >>> We'll see. Anyway, it only cost $20 plus shipping. >> >> I hope it works out, Phil. >> >> Quality control can be many things. My limited exerience (half-a-dozen >> lenses) has been that the glass is just fine. But there are shims in >> the lens body to gauge how far the lens is from the film plane >> (Contax/Kiev's are not as solidly built as IIIc, IIIf, and later >> Leicas, where the body is one piece). So the body thickness could vary >> a bit. To counter this, the shims in the lenses could be thinner or >> thicker accordiningly. >> >> And ... as Dante Stella has demonstrated, the dimensions were never >> the same as Leica, not even in the Zorkis and other screw-mounts, to >> start with. >> >> It appears that the factory just threw in a shim. Sometimes it will be >> too thick, sometimes too thin. This will cause focus to fall a little >> in front or a little in back of what you think you are focusing on. >> >> The Jupiter-8's seem to be consistently wrong, if they are wrong, so >> once you've figured it out, you just adjust the rangefinder image >> slightly to push the lens further away or closer to the film plane. >> It's usually just a tad. >> >> But if it is off, it can result in slightly out of focus, soft images. >> But, as I said, this doesn't necessarily mean anything is wrong with >> the glass. Just the dimensions. >> >> So take some close-up shots at wide-aperture to see where the focus is >> falling. Mine is just ever so slightly off (slightly behind). So I >> focus and then move the focus ring a slight tad closer. Actually, it's >> so close that beyond 1 meter, I don't usually bother with it. At two >> meters the little depth of field as f2.0 is enough to compensate. >> >> Now Jupiters-12's .. that's another story. They can be pretty far off. >> Don't ask me why. >> >> Enjoy! I hope it works out for you. >> >> Daniel >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >