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!
As long as your lenses are calibrated good and fit your body I feel to focus more precisly and faster with the M9 vs focusing on a display or evf with focus peaking.
Focusing with viewinfder magnification I find only usefull for still images.
I believe many people have lenses which are not 100% calibrated and therefore believe its a fault of the rangefinder system.
Focus shift is a different story (I didnt manage it on the old Nocti and the 35/1.4asph, but found it not to be such a big problem with the 50/1.5 Sonnar)
Focusing with viewinfder magnification I find only usefull for still images.
I believe many people have lenses which are not 100% calibrated and therefore believe its a fault of the rangefinder system.
Focus shift is a different story (I didnt manage it on the old Nocti and the 35/1.4asph, but found it not to be such a big problem with the 50/1.5 Sonnar)
I have a lot of Sonnars, all of the 50mm Sonnars that I have exhibit focus shift similar to the C-Sonnar. I have a 1938 Sonnar "T" 5cm F1.5 on the Leica M9 now. The focus shift from F1.5 to F4 is near identical to the C-Sonnar. The Canon 50/1.5, Nikkor 5cm F1.4, Zeiss-Opton 50/1.5, post-war CZJ 5cm f1.5 Sonnar, Jupiter-3, all about the same. The F2 lenses exhibit less shift, mostly because they are a full stop slower. Collimate them for wide-open work, just stop the RF slightly closer for stopped-down work.
With liveview: using the EP2 with the EVF, stopping down makes the image noisier and increases DOF making it more difficult to find the best focus. Liveview has drawbacks as well. Try stopping a manual focus lens to F8 or F11 and finding the best focus. Not so easy.
With liveview: using the EP2 with the EVF, stopping down makes the image noisier and increases DOF making it more difficult to find the best focus. Liveview has drawbacks as well. Try stopping a manual focus lens to F8 or F11 and finding the best focus. Not so easy.
V
Vivek
Guest
Brian, Interesting to hear about your experience with the classic 50mm Sonnars made for RF.
It is possible to get good focus even stopped down. Recently I shot a few at 1:1 magnification at f/22 which makes the effective aperture f/44. It was not just a question of dim view but also the effects of diffraction!
Live view allows for magnification and if there is enough light to allow for viewing at 16X and f/44, it is possible to see clearly. Even in not so bright light, live view becomes grainy but still usable.
One problem area is with the fast lenses, especially if they are not contrasty wide open and the if the light is not contrasty.
In such cases, it is also possible to increase the contrast settings in the camera to make it manageable.
It is possible to get good focus even stopped down. Recently I shot a few at 1:1 magnification at f/22 which makes the effective aperture f/44. It was not just a question of dim view but also the effects of diffraction!
Live view allows for magnification and if there is enough light to allow for viewing at 16X and f/44, it is possible to see clearly. Even in not so bright light, live view becomes grainy but still usable.
One problem area is with the fast lenses, especially if they are not contrasty wide open and the if the light is not contrasty.
In such cases, it is also possible to increase the contrast settings in the camera to make it manageable.
It takes me longer to accurately focus a lens stopped-down with live-view than it does to focus with the rangefinder and "build-in" the compensation. Basically, the same technique used for the DOF marks on the Leica M3 and M2- but you need to just remember the offset rather than it being marked.
Focusing a stopped-down lens using live-view for me is about the same as focusing a lens on an SLR stopped-down. Faster for me to focus wide-open, then stop-down.
I am sure Live-view will improve, my "latest" is the EP2 with the VF-2. It's great for IR work, I had the IR absorbing glass removed on one of my EP2's. But once things are stopped down to F8 or so, the finder gets noisy. You can still focus, but I find it distracting.
What i would really like to see for live-view: A "magnified zoom-box" for the image. Rather than the 7x or 10x magnified image covering the whole finder, just pan a zoom-box over the portion of the image that you select to focus. That way you could focus and frame simultaneously. Like being able to move the RF spot anywhere in the finder, focus and frame at the same time. On the EP2, or any other Liveview camera, it would be easy to implement in firmware, but i do not know of any camera that shows a magnified sub-image overlaid on the full-view frame.
Focusing a stopped-down lens using live-view for me is about the same as focusing a lens on an SLR stopped-down. Faster for me to focus wide-open, then stop-down.
I am sure Live-view will improve, my "latest" is the EP2 with the VF-2. It's great for IR work, I had the IR absorbing glass removed on one of my EP2's. But once things are stopped down to F8 or so, the finder gets noisy. You can still focus, but I find it distracting.
What i would really like to see for live-view: A "magnified zoom-box" for the image. Rather than the 7x or 10x magnified image covering the whole finder, just pan a zoom-box over the portion of the image that you select to focus. That way you could focus and frame simultaneously. Like being able to move the RF spot anywhere in the finder, focus and frame at the same time. On the EP2, or any other Liveview camera, it would be easy to implement in firmware, but i do not know of any camera that shows a magnified sub-image overlaid on the full-view frame.
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Brian
the Sony NEX shows a magnified sub-image overlaid over the full frame view. I think the Leica X1 does the same . . . but IMHO this, just like the Olympus system, is really difficult to use in moving situations (fine on a tripod).
Have you had a go with focus peaking?
It's a gamechanger in my opinion.
However . . . . . . . . I still find rangefinder focusing (with an M9) to be
more accurate
more satisfying
faster
but then I've practiced that technique more.
the Sony NEX shows a magnified sub-image overlaid over the full frame view. I think the Leica X1 does the same . . . but IMHO this, just like the Olympus system, is really difficult to use in moving situations (fine on a tripod).
Have you had a go with focus peaking?
It's a gamechanger in my opinion.
However . . . . . . . . I still find rangefinder focusing (with an M9) to be
more accurate
more satisfying
faster
but then I've practiced that technique more.
I have not tried the NEX, I am glad they did this. I'll have to try it out. The all-or-none of the Olympus is hard for me to use. I have to shift it back and forth.
1935 Sonnar 5cm F1.5, wide-open on the EP2, focus via the VF-2.
And wide-open on the Leica M9, focus via the RF. Focus and then frame.
Converted to Leica mount using a Jupiter-3 focus mount.
I've been using rangefinders for over 40 years, since I was 11. It's automatic for me.
1935 Sonnar 5cm F1.5, wide-open on the EP2, focus via the VF-2.
And wide-open on the Leica M9, focus via the RF. Focus and then frame.
Converted to Leica mount using a Jupiter-3 focus mount.
I've been using rangefinders for over 40 years, since I was 11. It's automatic for me.
V
Vivek
Guest
Good point, Brian! If that "picture in picture" possibility arrives to main stream live view, especially if the box can be moved around as you describe, That would be far better than the fixed RF patch.
EDIT: Jono posted (correctly) that this already exists in SONY NEX-7!
On the invisible spectral captures- that was the main reason why I bought an Epson R-D1s a while ago. There were many complications still. The thickness of the filter (IR or UV pass) determines the focus shift and it isn't possible to calibrate each lens for every filter. That plus my acceptance of my limited skills when it comes to modifying lenses for RF use, unlike you, made me give up that path (FWIW, the Biotar 40/1.4 was bought for that!). With live view, both those major issues are taken care of!
i will be modifying the Biotar 4cm F1.4 for the Ep2- and I see what you mean about flare. I did a quick-and-dirty test on the EP2 already, and got "rainbow flare" with strong backlighting. I suspect the image circle is not big enough to cover the M9, and edge distortions would be big on the M8.
However- given that this F1.4 Biotar lens is from the 1920s, it is very impressive. I disassembled it to clean all of the surfaces, looked like wax-paper when I got it. Looks like Waterford crystal now.
However- given that this F1.4 Biotar lens is from the 1920s, it is very impressive. I disassembled it to clean all of the surfaces, looked like wax-paper when I got it. Looks like Waterford crystal now.
Jono,
I agree with you besides I believe (now) that it is not a matter of training. A Rangefinder is just more accurate IMO.
Fokus peaking depends a lot on contrast which can be very different in different light situations. The extrem would be very dim light and low contrast where you would not see any contrast-corners for peaking.
The other extrem (more often) would be scenes where you get a certain range with those white (or yellow or red) corners glowing, and the range would be bigger than the range that actually will be sharp in the image.
Focus peaking for is fine but not perfect. The advantage compared to rangefinder is that tolerances of rangefinder and lenses, focus shift and things like that are not a problem when using peaking.
The other thing why I prefer the rangefinder is that I see the real thing, and I see it without (in some cases) distracting white borders.
It would be great to have a camera which does both (and I assume the M10 might offer both rangefinder and lifeview), but if I had to decide between the two it would be a rangefinder for my taste- at least for a certain range of focal length.
k-hawinkler
Well-known member
Excellent points. And then there are situations the rangefinder wasn't designed for.
I have one camera setup in which I can use for focusing either the optical Visoflex viewfinder, or the magnification or focus peaking of the electronic viewfinder or LCD panel of the NEX-5N.
My limited experience of a few weeks with the NEX-5N has already demonstrated to me that depending on subject matter and lighting conditions any of the mentioned focusing methods can be best for a specific situation and frankly I would like to have all of them available in a future camera so that I can choose. Even the optical rangefinder in my mind could benefit from some kind of focus confirmation.
Best, K-H.
I have one camera setup in which I can use for focusing either the optical Visoflex viewfinder, or the magnification or focus peaking of the electronic viewfinder or LCD panel of the NEX-5N.
My limited experience of a few weeks with the NEX-5N has already demonstrated to me that depending on subject matter and lighting conditions any of the mentioned focusing methods can be best for a specific situation and frankly I would like to have all of them available in a future camera so that I can choose. Even the optical rangefinder in my mind could benefit from some kind of focus confirmation.
Best, K-H.
jonoslack
Active member
Hi Tom
whilst I actually rather like focus peaking in very low light . . . there's hardly a sparkle, but the ones you do get are usually in the eyes.
On the other hand, I completely agree with you - a camera which does both is fab . . . . otherwise I'll choose a rangefinder every time.
jonoslack
Active member
. . . if you've been trying with the "zoom in" focus on the Pen I quite agree . . with focus peaking it would be no problem - really, although whether it's as good an experience as taking advantage of 40 years experience (or 6 in my case) is a moot point!