Leica User Forum - View Single Post

markgay · 05/15/08, 09:25 AM

A key part of the focusing mechanism is the human eye. And that is what accuracy is about: Can your eyesight and your tolerance for staring down a tube without getting a headache result in quick, easy and accurate focus.

The split image can be painfully small in SLRs. With ground glass, what you see is what you get, but at distance they can be even harder to focus. That’s all that matters. Lines on a chart are irrelevant. Period.

So that is rangefinders versus SLRs dealth with ☺

Electronic focus can make up for bad eyesight but it has limits. Autofocus needs to know what you, the photographer, want in focus. It doesn’t. That’s why Face Detection was invented.

Autofocus is never as fast as pre-focus, it struggles in low light, and you often have to select the active focus point (unless you leave it on dynamic autofocus and let the camera decide where to focus).

So that is autofocus vs manual dealt with ☺

Yes, I know the original post was about accuracy. But in what context?

I walked through Moscow’s Botanical Gardens at the weekend, just shooting cyclists and rollerbladers, kids with their grandparents...

I was using my 90mm Summicron at f/4 with magnifier. Even with cranking the focus ring back and forth and the moving subjects I got a lot of shots. I missed no more than I would have done with my autofocus zooming in on random trees.

My tuppence. I started with rangefinders in 1972 with a Voightlaender Vito CLR.. God bless the fading gold spot that passed for a split image.

After my Nikkormat EL, I was blaming my poor eyesight for bad shots (I am top 1% of the population for myopia. Go ahead, laugh. Now where are my glasses… )
I bought an F90, which was Nikon’s big step forward with autofocus and then the F5, with selectable focus points.

My verdict? I went back to rangefinders.

A large, bright split image snaps into focus. You don’t have to STARE at it. You know when it’s in focus. Something like instinct. Judging when blur comes into focus and goes out again gives you headaches.

When I visited London last month a nice chap near the British Museum tried to sell me an R4. I mounted a 60mm and peered through the split image at my friend: small and a little dim.

Not her, the image. The R4 was gorgeous, by the way!

Regards,
Mark

05/15/08, 09:25 AM	#37 (permalink)
markgay Benutzer Join Date: 11/24/06 Location: Moscow Posts: 81	Re: Accuracy of M8's rangefinder system A key part of the focusing mechanism is the human eye. And that is what accuracy is about: Can your eyesight and your tolerance for staring down a tube without getting a headache result in quick, easy and accurate focus. The split image can be painfully small in SLRs. With ground glass, what you see is what you get, but at distance they can be even harder to focus. That’s all that matters. Lines on a chart are irrelevant. Period. So that is rangefinders versus SLRs dealth with ☺ Electronic focus can make up for bad eyesight but it has limits. Autofocus needs to know what you, the photographer, want in focus. It doesn’t. That’s why Face Detection was invented. Autofocus is never as fast as pre-focus, it struggles in low light, and you often have to select the active focus point (unless you leave it on dynamic autofocus and let the camera decide where to focus). So that is autofocus vs manual dealt with ☺ Yes, I know the original post was about accuracy. But in what context? I walked through Moscow’s Botanical Gardens at the weekend, just shooting cyclists and rollerbladers, kids with their grandparents... I was using my 90mm Summicron at f/4 with magnifier. Even with cranking the focus ring back and forth and the moving subjects I got a lot of shots. I missed no more than I would have done with my autofocus zooming in on random trees. My tuppence. I started with rangefinders in 1972 with a Voightlaender Vito CLR.. God bless the fading gold spot that passed for a split image. After my Nikkormat EL, I was blaming my poor eyesight for bad shots (I am top 1% of the population for myopia. Go ahead, laugh. Now where are my glasses… ) I bought an F90, which was Nikon’s big step forward with autofocus and then the F5, with selectable focus points. My verdict? I went back to rangefinders. A large, bright split image snaps into focus. You don’t have to STARE at it. You know when it’s in focus. Something like instinct. Judging when blur comes into focus and goes out again gives you headaches. When I visited London last month a nice chap near the British Museum tried to sell me an R4. I mounted a 60mm and peered through the split image at my friend: small and a little dim. Not her, the image. The R4 was gorgeous, by the way! Regards, Mark Last edited by markgay : 05/15/08 at 09:28 AM.