hoppyman Posted January 8, 2011 Share #1 Â Posted January 8, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Very frequent rain here currently. I used a brief respite to shoot some frames with the M9 and APO Summicron 75 ASPH. Boke and focus shift are popular thread discussions but we often see largely opinion or preference rather than example. Five frames here from F/2 to f/8 starting with this one. APO Summicron 75 ASPH 2 metres f/2 Subject distance 2 metres (common for people shots for me). Subject is just a garden shrub. Lower left has out of focus leaf forward of focus point. Centrer right has a point highlight (end of light housing) showing rendition at different apertures. Fine reed thatch roof fringe at top for high frequency elements behind focus point (~4 metres) Vertical grey streaks in some shots are rain drops in front of focus. Â All identically focused/cropped/minmally processed downsized crops from top to bottom of horizontal frame. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 8, 2011 Posted January 8, 2011 Hi hoppyman, Take a look here APO Summicron 75 boke and (no) focus shift examples. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest mc_k Posted January 8, 2011 Share #2 Â Posted January 8, 2011 Thanks for these. Â I think this test for shift is too informal, though. I still hope someone will check the 90/2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share #3 Â Posted January 8, 2011 I'm not sure what you think is informal in this test series. Tripod mounted, measured subject distance oftwo metres, focus unchanged for every shot. I see no visible shift in sharpest plane from f/2 down to f/8. Boke/rendering is certainly personal preference and varies with different situations as well. But they are real world examples in controlled conditions nothing more or less. Shots from my indiviual lens and one specific situation. By all means do something similar with another lens with whatever setup is meaningful to you. Everyone is welcome to evaluate my examples for themselves of course and draw any conclusions they like. That's what they are for. I planned to also do series with the 50 Summilux ASPH and the new 35 too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted January 8, 2011 Share #4 Â Posted January 8, 2011 Lovely shrub there, Geoff. The rain certainly seems to have enhanced the colors. Â I'd venture that focus shift is an inevitable quality of all high-speed, small-format camera lenses - but is largely mitigated by Leica's latest generation floating element designs. To the point of practical inconsequence. Like your series shows. I guess I'm a little surprised there's still worry about it out there. Â I didn't know you had an S2! (Probably because I - quite deliberately - don't venture into the S2 forum!). I'm properly jealous... ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted January 8, 2011 Share #5 Â Posted January 8, 2011 I have a brand new 2/75 and focus shift has not been an issue, but it backfocuses a lot. It seems to be absolutely spot on at 1 meter but it does not focus to infinify. I have just sent it to Leica for recalibration, and I hope they will sort it out. It is surprising that Leica releases a lens like this and that this problem is not spotted in the final check. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted January 8, 2011 Share #6 Â Posted January 8, 2011 What's strange about this is that we hardly ever - if at all - hear of problems in the actual glass - bubbles, elements back to front, poor coating and so on. The problems are all to do with the mount alignment and they get worse as the complexity increases. Lenses with a single helicoid are typically fine, those with two are getting difficult and by the time you are relying on the focussing ring to move the lens barrel at one rate, the close focussing correction at a second and the rangefinder cam at a third, it's a wonder it works at all. Â It's no accident that the basic geometry of the M rangefinder is set around the movement of a 50mm lens as you focus it from infinity to closest focus. When it was put together, lenses such as the APO 75mm Summicron and 24mm Summilux were simply not envisaged. It's also why I use a 50mm Summicron as a focussing reference to allow me to say with confidence: It's the lens/It's the camera which is causing my focusiing problems. Â Like a stuck 33 1/3 rpm record (some might say 78 rpm), I've long argued for a new method of sensing focus. The rangefinder as a focussing aid is simply not good enough. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesk8752 Posted January 8, 2011 Share #7 Â Posted January 8, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) (snip)Like a stuck 33 1/3 rpm record (some might say 78 rpm), I've long argued for a new method of sensing focus. The rangefinder as a focussing aid is simply not good enough. Â Modern sensor technology would certainly allow contrast-detect AF to serve as a more precise aid to manual focusing; the problem IMO is the conservative nature of Leica and its most dedicated users. While I can hope that it will eventually come in a future Leica body, my head says that it will take a major shift in the mind set of the user base. Â Regards, Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share #8 Â Posted January 8, 2011 Oh no, I just had lunch with the Rep once. The look on his face when the brand new camera was handed back with mayonnaise fingerprints on it was priceless ........I didn't know you had an S2! (Probably because I - quite deliberately - don't venture into the S2 forum!). I'm properly jealous... ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 8, 2011 Author Share #9  Posted January 8, 2011 For Mark, Ivar and James these are just examples from my lens of course to illustrate that it operates perfectly and to provide actual samples since bo-ke, focus shift and rendering come up so often in threads. I think I actually have a photo from 2009 OF Ivar taken with this lens  New Summilux 35 ASPH next. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted January 9, 2011 Share #10 Â Posted January 9, 2011 I'm not sure what you think is informal in this test series. ...I see no visible shift in sharpest plane from f/2 down to f/8... Â You can't know where the focus plane was, or therefore where it moved to...really, I think this kind of test is a very poor choice. Â The other test is great; it shows the cookie-cutter highlights at 2.8 and down, but also a beautiful lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share #11 Â Posted January 9, 2011 I disagree. I think tthe plane of best sharpness is obvious and it is where I intended it. However I'm not seeking to provoke any arguments, just show actual examples. That is the entire point. Not opinion or argument, just controlled samples. Â Saying "really, I think this kind of test is a very poor choice" is rather ungracious of you. If you don't find them useful you can ignore them or construct another test and share it if you wish. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted January 9, 2011 Share #12  Posted January 9, 2011 What's strange about this is that we hardly ever - if at all - hear of problems in the actual glass - bubbles, elements back to front, poor coating and so on. The problems are all to do with the mount alignment and they get worse as the complexity increases. Lenses with a single helicoid are typically fine, those with two are getting difficult and by the time you are relying on the focussing ring to move the lens barrel at one rate, the close focussing correction at a second and the rangefinder cam at a third, it's a wonder it works at all. QUOTE]  You seem to be on to something very important here. An M9 user I know has bought 5 or 6 new M lenses, including the 0.95/50. All lenses except one (1.4/35 ASPH FLE) has had to go back to Solms for recalibration, and some of them more than once. This is so annoying he questions whether owning an M9 is a good idea at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted January 9, 2011 Share #13 Â Posted January 9, 2011 ....This is so annoying he questions whether owning an M9 is a good idea at all. Â As the M9 only reveals the faults of the lenses, the question might be whether owning a lens was a good idea at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jan_brittenson Posted January 9, 2011 Share #14 Â Posted January 9, 2011 I think it's also important to know what the bokeh looks like close to the focal point, not just way back or front. Here's a couple of shots that show close-range bokeh - which IMO is stellar from this lens. Both at f/5.6. http://www.rockgarden.net/download/cambodia/L1124405_-1100.jpg http://www.rockgarden.net/download/cambodia/L1124407_-1100.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted January 9, 2011 Share #15  Posted January 9, 2011 I disagree. I think tthe plane of best sharpness is obvious and it is where I intended it. However I'm not seeking to provoke any arguments, just show actual examples. That is the entire point. Not opinion or argument, just controlled samples. Saying "really, I think this kind of test is a very poor choice" is rather ungracious of you. If you don't find them useful you can ignore them or construct another test and share it if you wish.  no I don't think it's controlled, that's the point. Is there some reason you couldn't shoot a chain link fence or something like that? I don't think there is any way you can "see no visible shift"; you would have to shoot something uniform to see a shift, unless it was huge. If you shoot a lot of hair-clothes-faces, you know you can be fooled by the different textures, and hair or apparel can look more focused than skin at the same distance. Anyway I will repeat: "thanks for these...the other test is great...a beautiful lens."  I don't have the lens, so I am dependent on whatever info I can get from other people. Actually, I wish I had got this one instead of the 50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 9, 2011 Author Share #16 Â Posted January 9, 2011 Controlled in the context of a test series means that the variables are reduced so that you can reliably compare the results. Â The leafy bush was chosen because it has a large number of closely spaced, well defined edges over a depth of (at least) a human head. Â Controlled here means that the camera was on a tripod with consistent technique, the chosen subject distance was a typical working range for me and identical, the focus was identical for every shot, the ISO was the same. In processing every variable setting was identical. Â This is a very frustrating exchange since the intent was to make available actual comparable samples. There are already plenty of debates and opinions in other threads. I have taken down the originals since I haven't seen anything positive from sharing them in this thread.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
k-hawinkler Posted January 9, 2011 Share #17 Â Posted January 9, 2011 Very frequent rain here currently. I used a brief respite to shoot some frames with the M9 and APO Summicron 75 ASPH. Boke and focus shift are popular thread discussions but we often see largely opinion or preference rather than example.Five frames here from F/2 to f/8 starting with this one. APO Summicron 75 ASPH 2 metres f/2 Subject distance 2 metres (common for people shots for me). Subject is just a garden shrub. Lower left has out of focus leaf forward of focus point. Centrer right has a point highlight (end of light housing) showing rendition at different apertures. Fine reed thatch roof fringe at top for high frequency elements behind focus point (~4 metres) Vertical grey streaks in some shots are rain drops in front of focus. Â All identically focused/cropped/minmally processed downsized crops from top to bottom of horizontal frame. Â When I click on your link I get: Â Error Item not found. Â Back to the Gallery Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoppyman Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share #18 Â Posted January 10, 2011 Yes. I took them down. Thank you for wanting to take a look. I might be able to show some more and different shots as comparisons for those interested later. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mc_k Posted January 10, 2011 Share #19  Posted January 10, 2011 ... This is a very frustrating exchange since the intent was to make available actual comparable samples. There are already plenty of debates and opinions in other threads...  many of those threads also have tests, and everybody is free to add their criticism; not sure why your thread should be any exception. This is the definition of "test," that whatever you did is open to question. The more questions you get, the better your next test is, maybe. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted January 10, 2011 Share #20 Â Posted January 10, 2011 _k, I'm amazed at you. Â There you go again, making your own definitions of what's acceptable and what's not, and criticizing others for not doing things your way, but not bothering to explain why your ideas are better. Â Why don't you offer your own test? Show us your chain link fence. Â Â In the words of the great 17th century traveler, I Organize the Truth, you Allegate the Sense, Disbending cominous defects, in your absurd pretence. (1632 Lithgow Trav. x. 488) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.