Leica MP not sharp?

[Cougar159]

l have recently sent my good old reliable Leica MP to Solms for a 'spa' treatment.
The following was done:
1) Adjust shutter times
2) Adjust autocollimation
3) Adjust range finder
4) Clean range finder

Post 'spa', took 2 rolls of Kodak TX400 and realised the images are not 'sharp' :bigeyes: :dunno:

Can Film Leica MP be made not sharp??!!??

Any advise?

 

[lordpain]

could you share some of the photos that you deem not sharp? were you using the same lens, same film, same developing technique and same scanner pre and post 'spa' treatment? could be any one of these variables and not the camera.

 

[Anxin]

l have recently sent my good old reliable Leica MP to Solms for a 'spa' treatment.
The following was done:
1) Adjust shutter times
2) Adjust autocollimation
3) Adjust range finder
4) Clean range finder

Post 'spa', took 2 rolls of Kodak TX400 and realised the images are not 'sharp' :bigeyes: :dunno:

Can Film Leica MP be made not sharp??!!??

Any advise?

If the horizontal alignment of RF is out, pictures taken would be out of focus, hence not sharp. That can be easily checked: aim VF/RF at a distance object (at least 1km away), turn the focusing ring of a known-good-lens to infinity marking and see if the double image are perfectly aligned. If not, RF horizontal is out of alignment. (over-shoot is front-focus, under-shoot is back-focus).

Must also qualify that it could also be possible that the infinity focusing has no problem but near range is progressively out. This is less common. To check for this, need to use a ground glass to check sharpness of actual image on film plane. A little troublesome but can be done.

This problem is common among digital M cameras, but it could happen to film Leica M's as well.

 

[lordpain]

If the horizontal alignment of RF is out, pictures taken would be out of focus, hence not sharp. That can be easily checked: aim VF/RF at a distance object (at least 1km away), turn the focusing ring of a known-good-lens to infinity marking and see if the double image are perfectly aligned. If not, RF horizontal is out of alignment. (over-shoot is front-focus, under-shoot is back-focus).

Must also qualify that it could also be possible that the infinity focusing has no problem but near range is progressively out. This is less common. To check for this, need to use a ground glass to check sharpness of actual image on film plane. A little troublesome but can be done.


This problem is common among digital M cameras, but it could happen to film Leica M's as well.

anxin, that was what i thought so too. however, wouldn't Leica Sohlms take care of that?

 

[NazgulKing]

TS mentioned "Adjust autocollimation". This is done to check focusing with a so-called reference lens. Comparing the ~20 pieces of Leica lenses that I have, my observation is that any particular RF setting would probably work reasonably accurately only for a few but not ALL lenses! If you "optimise" (or "calibrate") the RF for a 6-bit lens (say a 35mm FLE Summilux), then very likely the camera will have front-focus issue with older lenses (eg. 2nd or 3rd version 50mm summilux).

Leica would most like not admit this but don't stone me just as yet. If you have a few fast lenses (eg. 50/1.4, 50/0.95, 50/1.0, 75/1.4, 90/2), check if they all focus accurately wide-open and up close (1m or less) and then draw your own conclusion. (Warning: Truth often brings pain. Ignorance is bliss. :angel: )

I have found that some Zeiss ZM lenses don't focus correctly as well. And then there's my Leica 90mm/2.8 Elmarit that has some degree of back focusing.

The flip side is that my CV 35/1.2 and 75/2.5 focuses damn well. So go figure.

 

[NazgulKing]

On my M9-P, all 6-bit coded lenses are in focus (except the FLE, slightly back-focus) but on my MM, ALL back-focused except a v3 50 summilux which is dead on (maybe it's designed for the MM 40 years ahead of its time haha..)

It's a combination of the RF and the sensor plane alignment. I'm not sure if Leica got a handle on this yet, as the tolerances for film are not as strict as those for digital.

 

[Cougar159]

Hey guys! You are right! All my new lens are dead on when paired with my Leica MP.

But when I attached the legacy lens, all are back focused.

So does it mean the RF can only be calibrated to fit either the new OR the old lens, and not BOTH groups?

 

[raytoei]

hi,

you have 20 pieces of leica lens and you only realised this now ? hahaha.... just teasing you.

all my old lenses front focus or back focus. some of my leicas rf is front or back. i have a great time

pairing the lens to the camera. Some lens do not have a body to go with.

raytoei

 

[Cougar159]

Hi raytoei bro!

does it mean that I will never get my Leica MP to be perfect with all lens, new and old?

Cos before going back to Solms, I remember the focus is pretty much sharp.

Seems like after calibration, things do not turn out the way it is.

 

[Anxin]

Anxin,

you have 20 pieces of leica lens and you only realised this now ? hahaha.... just teasing you.

all my old lenses front focus or back focus. some of my leicas rf is front or back. i have a great time

pairing the lens to the camera. Some lens do not have a body to go with.

raytoei

Haha, I realised this long ago (since the first digital M day). Guess film is more forgiving than CCD when comes to focusing.
So pairing group of lenses to one camera is the solution bah. (Good excuse to have more than one camera )

Joke aside, I understand DAG can "calibrate" the old lenses to focus properly with the digital M but his turn-around time is horrid. No fun.

 

[raytoei]

the question is, which lens are you going to use on the MP ?

You can send the MP + chosen lens to Solms to be adjusted so that it focuses properly.

if you intend to use any lens or all lenses over time, then
you should not shoot wide-open aperture.

for example, on one of my m bodies, the elmar 50 f2.8 is
backfocused at f2.8, but it focuses perfectly with the 50 lux at f1.4.

however, if i shoot outdoors, from f4 - f16, small
differences in focusing still produces sharp images due to depth of field.

Think about it, at f1.4 the dof is pretty thin at 7cm assuming focusing at 1.5m
3.5cm variance in front, 3.5cm variance behind.

Unlike say at f4, at 1.5m, the DOF is 21m, or 10.5cm in front and 10.5cm behind,

if you want to be extreme, try this with your old lens:
capture image, focus from INF to the object and
capture 2nd image, this time focus from 0.7m to the object.

you may have an idea whether the lens is biases towards 0.7m or inf.

I keep a record of all my lens and camera pairing,

raytoei

 

[Anxin]

Or, get an M240. Live view should solve this (but very sian way of focusing).

 

[raytoei]

here's how to test.

use newspaper rather than images, as we can recognize
alphabets better than just pictures.

shoot at a 45 degrees angle. wide open. and around 1-1.5m away

The example above was shot at f1.5 on the Sonnar Opton.
I focuse at the "a" in "Shakes"

As you can see, it is quite well balanced in the focusing.
raytoei

 

[Cougar159]

Thanks raytoei bro!

Just 1 more question!

The front or back focus cannot be picked up in the VF no matter how accurately the VF patch is aligned?

 

[raytoei]

Its not the issue of ur mp but the lens.
If that is the case, then the next time
U focus on the eyes, pull back half inch,
Of your camera before u trigger, assuming
Backfocus.

Raytoei