The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

An Open Letter to Leica – what should the Leica M10 be like?

Paratom

Well-known member
I am convinced that a lot of focusing problems with rangefinders are caused by bodies and lenses which are slightly off regarding calibration or by using lenses with focus shift.
I have sent several lenses to Leica and also my body once and after that focusing with the rangefinder I am at least as fast and precise as focusing manually with a SLR.
I even recommend to send the body with your fast lens to Leica and let them check it together.

Some of my lenses focused fine at shorter distances but not at infinity (my 135mm) my 50/1.4asph backfocused slightly when I bought it (new).
The Summarit 35 and 75 were spot on from the first minute.
The Noctilux, 35lux I gave up since even after calibration they suffered slightly from focus shift.

But once you are sure all lenses you use are spot on than focus is not as difficult any more. I believe many people think of user fault or general rangefinder shortcomings what are just calibration issues.

Of course a very good AF is even faster.
 

tom in mpls

Active member
Marc, even with my 35 I find that I can often turn the focus ring a small bit back and forth yet cannot see a difference in the merged images. And then there is the problem of finding a good part of the image to use, hopefully a straight vertical line. And if I need to focus/recompose, I must hope that it remains in focus as I move. This second problem could be encountered in a DSLR as well, but I had only one lens wider than 2.8. I do understand the issue of proper calibration. I must shoot with my glasses on, so diopter is not the problem. Also I do not like the idea of using magnification and losing part of the view through the viewfinder. I should not need add-ons to properly focus a camera; it's time for Leica to introduce a better technology to assist focusing while maintaining the "M aesthic". I think it unarguable that many find focusing the M accurately to be a difficult challenge. I hope that in 2010 it is technologically possible to update the focusing mechanism.
 

jonoslack

Active member
Marc, even with my 35 I find that I can often turn the focus ring a small bit back and forth yet cannot see a difference in the merged images. And then there is the problem of finding a good part of the image to use, hopefully a straight vertical line. And if I need to focus/recompose, I must hope that it remains in focus as I move. This second problem could be encountered in a DSLR as well, but I had only one lens wider than 2.8. I do understand the issue of proper calibration. I must shoot with my glasses on, so diopter is not the problem. Also I do not like the idea of using magnification and losing part of the view through the viewfinder. I should not need add-ons to properly focus a camera; it's time for Leica to introduce a better technology to assist focusing while maintaining the "M aesthic". I think it unarguable that many find focusing the M accurately to be a difficult challenge. I hope that in 2010 it is technologically possible to update the focusing mechanism.
Hi Tom
A couple of observations. I wear vari-focals, I still resent it after years of perfect vision, but I guess I should be thankful for those!

. . . . . at least, if I wear glasses I wear vari-focals. Generally speaking I wear disposable contact lenses, and always when I'm shooting with the M. Close up in the left eye - distance in the right. This means that I don't need glasses and I don't need a dioptre, which also means I can see right out to the edge of the frame.

The result of this (and practice) means that with a properly calibrated lens I don't have a problem focusing - even in poor light with wide open lenses, I certainly get as good a 'hit rate' as I do with the A900 and the D3 before it (at least, when I have time to focus).

I really can't imagine trying to use an M (film or digital) with glasses on (I know it's possible, but it'd drive me crazy).

As for updating the focusing mechanism - Andy Piper on LFU put an interesting description of why you couldn't make a zooming rangefinder (basically there is no room for a moving element). I don't know if that's true or not, but it seems likely (otherwise why wouldn't some have done it). The Contax G2 of course DID have a zooming rangefinder, but it was very dim in comparison, and had no focus confirmation at all.

I'm not against any of these new technologies (in fact I've always embraced them). But it seems to me that the spirit of an M camera is what it is (by all means make it better, but it doesn't need changing).

I think Leica should bring out something else - a kind of full frame GF1 which would take M or R lenses and which could embrace all the new technology options sounds to me a wonderful idea (live view / video etc.) . I'd certainly be interested.
But can't they leave the Leica M as it is? It isn't perfect, but it does a particular job really really well. Even better with the advent of digital (IMHO of course).

all the best
 

tom in mpls

Active member
I don't propose EVF or zooming finder. All I really want is focus confirmation. Unfortunately for me, my eyes are too dry to wear contacts; believe me, I've tried. I would very much prefer not to use glasses when shooting any camera but it's not going to be possible for me. And it just does not work to remove to shoot because I can't see a darned thing if I look up. Maybe there are technically insurmountable obstacles; I hope not. Just give me a little red dot for focus confirmation while leaving the rest alone and I die a happy man. BTW I remain a big fan now of the M.

I am firmly in the camp of "don't ruin a good thing", but that does not rule out the possibility of carefully conceived improvements.
 
Last edited:

jonoslack

Active member
I don't propose EVF or zooming finder. All I really want is focus confirmation. Unfortunately for me, my eyes are too dry to wear contacts; believe me, I've tried. I would very much prefer not to use glasses when shooting any camera but it's not going to be possible for me. And it just does not work to remove to shoot because I can't see a darned thing if I look up. Maybe there are technically insurmountable obstacles; I hope not. Just give me a little red dot for focus confirmation while leaving the rest alone and I die a happy man. BTW I remain a big fan now of the M.

I am firmly in the camp of "don't ruin a good thing", but that does not rule out the possibility of carefully conceived improvements.
Hi Tom
I do agree - I think focus confirmation would be fine, but suspect that it would require a CMOS sensor and live view to do it.

As for the contacts - have you tried the new moist lenses? They're so much better than they used to be.

all the best
 

jonoslack

Active member
What? No! Have to look into that.
The crack is to get the left eye to get you close enough to read (I have mine perfect for a computer screen) and the left eye at your distance setting. It makes you feel like someone whacked you with a frying pan for about two minutes, after which it's so much better than glasses . . . except for driving at night. At least, that's what I find.

all the best
 
Top