50 lens focusing

[leica1215]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have shot with 50/1.4 the latest version for some time, experience it is not easy to get perfect focusing, in other words I do need few sec more to get perfect in focus. My question is for all you guys using the 50s do you find 50s can be use zone focus and get perfect sharp pictures? Or you do plan and take few more sec to get nice pictures?

 

Will 50/2 summicron prduce sharper pics than 50/1.4?

Thanks

[james.liam]

Will 50/2 summicron prduce sharper pics than 50/1.4?

Thanks

 

No.

 

Check out this comparison of rangefinder 50s by Roger Cicala of Lens Rentals. The Summilux is sharper at ƒ/1.4 than the Summicron 50 at ƒ/2.

 

What you get with the Cron is flat field, lower contrast and a touch of the glow WO -desirable at times-, but focus shift to ƒ/5.6. From here to diffraction (between ƒ/8 and 11) it is brilliantly sharp and the distinction between it and its loftily priced sister 50s becomes less apparent.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[250swb]

With zone focusing you will only get sharp focus in one narrow plain where the actual focus point occurs, the rest of the depth of focus will be at an acceptable level of focus made possible by using the smaller aperture.

 

But it's common sense that if you are using an f/1.4 lens wide open it may take longer to get the image in focus, and even then I always make a few more images if possible just to be sure I got it right. If using the lens stopped down you begin to know when the increased DOF can help you get the image in one exposure or if you need to try again.

 

But it isn't a competition, plenty of people will say they get the focus spot on first time, but we tend never to know what they are photographing or how long 'first time' takes. Others will try three or four exposures experimenting with focus and may also be trying slightly different compositions at the same time, and the final exposure brings all the elements together. The first example is the more formal approach, the second example is the notebook approach. Ultimately it depends on what you are photographing which works best.

 

Steve

[epand56]

I'm quite puzzled about all this "surgical photography" frenzy

I have both, the Summilux Asph. 50 and the Summicron 50/2 and they are so sharp, when I get the focus, that I can't really tell which one is the sharpest.

And they are so sharp, always when I get the focus, that I'm not even guessing what I could pretend more from a lens.

I can't really portray people over 40 years of age because they get scared when looking at their wrinkles, skin hair and pore and all the other "sharp" signs of their growing age.

This is why i often wonder what the heck some people have to photograph when looking for a better sharpness than these lenses can provide.

[luigi bertolotti]

having not the lux asph, I give my opinion on the first topic :

if you are working at 1,4 with a 50 (and morover with, say, a 90 at f2) and are worried abut focusing, the tecnique to learn and use is focus bracketing : take 2 to 4 pictures staying firm and making SMALL movements of the focus barrel : you need a smooth mechanism (which can be a problem with some old lenses like the old Summarit 1,5) and, above all you can learn the right "smidge movement" just for 2 max 3 lenses, imho... is a delicate task to get accustomed into.

[lct]

[...] do you find 50s can be use zone focus and get perfect sharp pictures? Or you do plan and take few more sec to get nice pictures? [...] Will 50/2 summicron prduce sharper pics than 50/1.4?

Zone focus will give you sharp results in the area of acceptable sharpness the extent of which will depend on your tastes essentially. I prefer focussing on the main subject matter personally but YMMV. Of course focussing at f/1.4 is a bit more difficult than at f/2 with the rangefinder but there is a learning curve and the EVF will solve the problem if you use an M240. The Summilux 50/1.4 asph is not significantly sharper than the Summicron 50/2 above f/2, according to my samples at least. At f/1.4 it is infinitely superior of course and at f/2 it is sharper in borders and corners but not in the center of the frame.

Edited December 20, 2014 by lct

[Exodies]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

@Luigi : is smidgeing more precise than rocking your body backwards and forwards to bracket focus?

[Lenshacker]

Have you tried a 1.25x magnifier with the viewfinder? I use a Leica 1.25x and a Chinese version found on Ebay for $100- both work perfectly well. This increases the accuracy of the rangefinder. It makes the M9 more like an M3 in terms of accuracy.

 

You might also want to test the focus of your lens using a ruler, or some other way to measure error. Sometimes a lens needs to be matched to the camera for best results. So far as which lens is sharpest: in the real world using the camera hand-held with life in motion, most differences between lenses is in how they render rather than absolute resolution. You kill the latter with any movement of the camera or subject being photographed. Studio work, still-life done with a tripod, differences will be more noticeable. I rarely bring out my "sharpest" lens.

 

Once that is done- practice. You might try pre-focusing on a spot and wait for a moving subject to come into position.

 

Minolta 50/1.4 wide-open, Leica M8. ISO 1250, 1/180th sec.

 

This was "f1.4 Zone focus", ie pre-focus, wait for subject to come into position.

 

Skate2_ISO1250

Edited December 21, 2014 by Lenshacker

[james.liam]

ict:...The Summilux....at f/2 it is sharper in borders and corners but not in the center of the frame....according to my samples at least.

 

Don't think that's quite right, sample variation being as it is.

 

From MTF measurements in the same article I reference above, by Roger Cicala/LensRentals:

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited December 21, 2014 by james.liam

[lct]

Thank you James but charts are what they are and i can only confirm what i said above as far as my samples are concerned sorry. For different charts, closer to my findings, you may wish to take a look at J.M. Sepulchre if you read French.

Edited December 21, 2014 by lct

[Jeff S]

Of all the great photographs I've seen from some of the world's best photographers, I can't think of one that resonated with me because it was super sharp, or didn't impress because it wasn't quite sharp enough. Both of the lenses you mention are very capable, and nobody but you will know which was used…or how long it took you to make the pic. Find a process that suits your style.

 

Jeff

[james.liam]

Thank you James but charts are what they are and i can only confirm what i said above as far as my samples are concerned sorry. For different charts, closer to my findings, you may wish to take a look at J.M. Sepulchre if you read French.

 

No doubt sample variation has a lot to do with it. The graph data posted was from an average of three samples each for the Summicron and Summilux so it seemed relevant. But YMMV always applies.

[luigi bertolotti]

@Luigi : is smidgeing more precise than rocking your body backwards and forwards to bracket focus?

 

For my experience , YES : try yourself IN FIELD : unless you are in a comfortable standing on position, any movement of your head often means some other movement of your body... to keep equilibrium... even if one cannot realize, while the movement of your focus - body firm, if well accustomed to make it, is only IT.

[uhoh7]

Those charts chime with Putts also. The 50 lux is famous for the mid frame dip, but it's overall the sharper 50 by many many accounts.

 

Wish I had one LOL

 

I'm surprised the 50 cron is so uniform at f/2, but it's was "the perfect 50" forever, and those numbers show it. I love mine.

 

I saw a LN V4 tabbed at RFF for only 950USD. The lux is hovering at 2800.

 

I should sell some lenses and get one

 

Duncan by unoh7, 50cron WO

[thighslapper]

Low DOF photography tends to be a fad that afflicts you when you get a very fast lens ...... for a while ...... and then you tend to be a bit more pragmatic with use .

 

Although portraits can have a nice look at 1.4 ...... getting the eyes in focus with such a shallow DOF is difficult .... and you have to decide what you are really after .... the overall softer look ...or the sharp delineation of the in focus plane .... you often can't rely on getting both.

 

With more distant subjects it's easier to achieve both ....although with the 50/0.95 and 50/1.4 the softness that is apparent close up tends to diminish.

 

I tend to stick to f2 or 2.8 which gives a nice narrow DOF without a lot of the problems you encounter at 1.4 .... or 0.95 ...... and reserve these apertures for very specific subjects .... and then take great care in focussing .....

 

....... and be aware of focus shift wide open with fast lenses..... particularly at close distances ....

[james.liam]

Low DOF photography tends to be a fad that afflicts you when you get a very fast lens ......Although portraits can have a nice look at 1.4 ...... getting the eyes in focus with such a shallow DOF is difficult .... and you have to decide what you are really after .... the overall softer look ...or the sharp delineation of the in focus plane .... you often can't rely on getting both...... and be aware of focus shift wide open with fast lenses..... particularly at close distances ....

 

I would agree with nearly all your contentions.

The 50 Summicron is indeed a stellar lens but on digital, focus shift really mucks up matters from f/2.8-5.6 and makes it less the "50 for life" it was on film. As far as the shallow DOF on super fast lenses, it is tricky enough nailing an eye on an AF camera WO, but nothing less than a bone fidé skill on a RF. For me in swapping for the Summilux there is less this DOF style of shooting than having the extra stop in the dark and it being nearly as sharp at f/1.4 as it is at f/2. I can detect no focus shift at the medium apertures and this is a great boon. It is still a compact lens unlike the formidable Noctilux.

[lct]

The 50 Summicron is indeed a stellar lens but on digital, focus shift really mucks up matters from f/2.8-5.6 and makes it less the "50 for life" it was on film.

Never got focus shift at f/2.8 personnaly. A bit at f/4 and f/5.6 from time to time, mainly with my v4 which has not been calibrated for digital but i need to pixel peep a lot to perceive practical issues with my coded v5. Close ups at f/4 and f/5.6 here (6MB files). No EVF of course. FWIW.

http://lctphot.smugmug.com/photos/2697725248_KxdtwXp-D.jpg

http://lctphot.smugmug.com/photos/2697726666_FJxbFnT-D.jpg

[james.liam]

Never got focus shift at f/2.8 personnaly. A bit at f/4 and f/5.6 from time to time, mainly with my v4 which has not been calibrated for digital but i need to pixel peep a lot to perceive practical issues with my coded v5. Close ups at f/4 and f/5.6 here (6MB files). No EVF of course. FWIW.

http://lctphot.smugmug.com/photos/2697725248_KxdtwXp-D.jpg

http://lctphot.smugmug.com/photos/2697726666_FJxbFnT-D.jpg

 

Also noticed it at f/4 & 5.6 but for medium to far distance, f/5.6 rocks. It's just that being confined to f/2 and 5.6, 8 seemed unappealing.

[tobey bilek]

So it takes a few extra sec to focus. Therefore a guess (zone or general area ) should work better and faster.

 

Lots of luck.

 

I use the 1.25 magnifier.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M