Jump to content

Focus recompose at f/0.95. (MERGED)


bbbonthemoon

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is it possible on Leica rangefinder cameras? Any mediocre change in distance makes your focus subject go OOF, when shooting at 1.4-2 apertures. I usually focus on person eyes, and then try to "build" the scene, what usually requires to move viewfinder or even alter camera height, what shooting handheld inevitably affects distance, just in few mm, but usually it's enough to shift the focus. Any suggestions or techniques to avoid this?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Essentially you are on very tricky ground with what you're doing - there's not really a way around it to the best of my knowledge, other than a bit of leaning and guesswork. There is sort of a solution with an AF camera that has outer-sensors, but until we get cameras with multiple RF patches (don't hold your breath) it's always going to be hit and miss....

 

Why Focus-Recompose Sucks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello bbbonthemoon,

 

Welcome to the Forum,

 

Reframing & fast shooting wide open is one of the sets of circumstances M's were designed for.

 

You just have to practice. This includes creating practice circumstances w/ problems & solving them. The more you practice the luckier you get.

 

Putting a camera on a small, strong table tripod w/ a large ball head & cable release steadied against your chest or against a wall, tree, etc when possible has been known to help also.

 

High quality pictures shot & reframed quickly @ large apertures have been made on a regular basis since well before the invention of either auto-focus or digital.

 

M photography is to a certain extent minimalist photography. You give up certain things to acquire or better use others.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Focusing and reframing at wide apertures, and particularly close up, are the Achilles Heel of the not only rangefinder cameras but older SLR's. This is why so many photographs made with a Noctilux have the subject placed dead centre in the frame. But with some practice you can avoid the lens dictating the composition of the photograph and by using a digital camera for instance you can check the results quickly ready for another go. Done often enough it is possible to reduce your failure rate, but it will never be 100%, and if you are using film it can be a long drawn out process....

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reframing & fast shooting wide open is one of the sets of circumstances M's were designed for.

 

That assertion I would venture is totally untrue.

 

Nothing about the M system makes it any more suited to focus-recompose than an SLR, or any other camera. In fact an SLR with a ground-glass screen would be eminently more suitable, since focussing across the entire frame is equally possible.

 

I love the Leica RF system, but let's not pretend that a small centre RF patch is somehow a superior focussing method.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Steve,

 

Perhaps the Achillies Heel is to some extent the lack of practice, over-reliance on technology & the therfore lessening of thought about & input into what potential situations might arise & how to deal w/ them. A lot of sucessful hunters do both target practice & dry fire practice when they are not out hunting.

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well one does at least.

 

Perhaps you might like to elaborate on what it is that *you* feel makes the Leica M, with its small centre-patch rangefinder focussing system, the *superior* tool for wide-open focus-recompose situations, in fact "designed for such circumstances" if I may paraphrase you slightly.

 

I don't doubt that with a lot of practice and zen-like skills you can work around the limitations of the Leica in this circumstance, but I'd like to hear your arguments on what it is that makes it *better*

Link to post
Share on other sites

DSLR with multiple focus points is indeed superior in those specific circumstances (fast lens, wide open and short distance to subject), at least in well-lit environments. Using peripheral focus points that are less sensitive (in most DSLRs) than the central area can sometimes be difficult in low light.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fluff, check the history of the rangefinder camera.

 

No one said (except you) that it's better than an SLR in this type of work. Michael said that it was designed for such work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It just takes some practice, I do it often at f/0.95. Simply rotate about the same axis after focusing centrally. What's nice about the rangefinder is one can see in the peripheral part of frame to ensure the background isn't distracting while rotating about the axis. I do believe rangefinders are better for this reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have good eyesight, just try to speed up the process of focus/shoot. It is unnecessary with a rangefinder M to go to and fro checking the focus. It is either correct or not, assuming proper calibration.

 

John.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have good eyesight, just try to speed up the process of focus/shoot. It is unnecessary with a rangefinder M to go to and fro checking the focus. It is either correct or not, assuming proper calibration.

 

John.

 

Please read my link from earlier in the thread and you'll see this is not true.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fluff, check the history of the rangefinder camera.

 

No one said (except you) that it's better than an SLR in this type of work. Michael said that it was designed for such work.

 

If indeed it was 'designed' for such work, it would imply that it was well suited to it, which it isn't, any more than any other camera which requires one to recompose after focussing, which, as per my link is accompanied by inevitable parallax errors.

 

Please link to any history of rangefinders that shows that shooting a fast lens wide open and then recomposing after focussing was part of what they were designed for. I'd be very interested to read it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You have a digital camera.

It is capable of continuous shooting (although limited in the M9's case).

Use the machine gun principle.......

Just take loads of shots.

One is bound to be ok.

I'm not aware of any Leica rules that state you only get one shot or that all have to be perfect ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

If indeed it was 'designed' for such work, it would imply that it was well suited to it, which it isn't...

 

It was designed to simplify picture taking, allowing unobtrusive shooting in lower light than was previously convenient.

 

Part of that is learning to work with one's tools.

 

No camera was designed for focus-and-recompose, but that has been done since the beginning.

 

Most of us are aware of the problems that entails, which are greater with digital than with film, and greater the faster the lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...