Back to Leica M, regret my change to NEX

[satijntje]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

just as an intro, I used to own Leica M8 and M9 that I had sold due to frustrations with out of focus pics.

Current camera is a NEX7 with 50mm 1.8 lens and the new SONY RX100 pocket cam.

 

Although I will keep the RX100, I'm planning to sell the NEX7 to come back to Leica again.

 

If I go through my 15000 pics on my MAC, the nicest shots were all made with Leica M.

 

So I must say that I definitely regret the change and that I intend to buy a M8 or M8.2 with a 35mm lux or cron (again).

 

Who has seen this before?

 

My main question here is however related to the focussing. Are there differences "how easy to focus" with the different lenses. Obvious that a 2.8 Elmarit might result in less out of focus pics that a 1.4 lux when shot wide open, but are there differences in the different lenses or even brands (VC or Zeiss).

 

I'm using glasses but intend to buy the -3 dioptry correction lens to shoot without glasses. This seems to me the best solution to get best results.

 

Looking forward to an interesting discussing and to helpful replies!

 

 

Thanks a lot

 

John

 

 

p.s. my main purpose for shooting with M will be street photography and I like the pics with a nice bookeh

[Advertisement]

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

[kanzlr]

hm....easiest to focus for me is the Minolta 40/2 as the focusing tab moves so easily and fluidly. Much easier to focus fast than any of my other lenses.

[jaapv]

The M9 FAQ (also highly recommended for M8 owners:))

 

Note that the rangefinder is exactly as accurate for all focal lengths, it really makes no difference for which lens you focus, However, long and fast lenses will show up your errors more easily.

 

Question: I come from an autofocus camera background. What is the best way to get good focus on the M9?

 

The M9 works the same way as any rangefinder camera, the central patch in the viewfinder is your focussing tool.

It is important to look through the viewfinder in the optical axis. Looking into the camera skewed will result in inaccurate focus.

 

The first thing to do is to ascertain that you can see the rangefinder patch properly. A correct match between the rangefinder and your eye is even more important than it is using an SLR.

Leica sells corrective diopter lenses. Determining which one you need - if any- can be done by going to your optician and holding his try-out lenses between your eye and the viewfinder. The one that allows you to see the rangefinder patch and framelines sharply is the correct one. Order the nearest value from Leica. In a pinch you can use over-the-counter reading glasses for this test. If your eyes need special corrections, you can use your spectacles, provided you can see clearly at 2 metres distance ( the virtual distance of the rangefinder patch).

 

For special cases there are viewfinder magnifiers. They can help, especially with longer and fast lenses and they can give confidence, but they can also be not very useful; they cannot correct errors in the focussing mechanism. Leica offers a 1.25x one and a 1.4x. These need diopter correction like the camera, but often of a different value than the camera viewfinder.

 

There are also third-party magnifiers, sold by Megapearls, that include a variable diopter correction. 1.15x and 1.35x. For patent reasons they cannot be sold in the USA and Germany for use on a Leica camera, but they can be purchased for use on for instance a rifle scope.

Basically, for an experienced user, magnifiers are not needed and will only lower contrast and brightness, but many users do like and use them.

 

Once the viewfinder is corrected optimally, there are three methods of focussing, in ascending order of difficulty aka training.

 

1. The broken line method. Look for a vertical line in the image and bring it together in the rangefinder patch to be continuous.

 

2. The coincidence method. Look for a pattern in the image and bring it together to coincide. This may lead to errors with repeating patterns.

 

3. The contrast method. Once you have focus by method 1. or 2. a small adjustment will cause the rangefinder patch to "jump" into optimum contrast. At that point you have the most precise focussing adjustment.

 

Side remarks:

 

If you try focussing on a subject emitting polarized light like a reflection it may happen that the polarizing effect of the prism system in the rangefinder will blot out the contrast in the rangefinder patch, making focussing difficult. In that case rotate the camera 90 degrees to focus.

 

Note that when one focusses and recomposes the camera will turn. For geometrical reasons one must bend slightly backwards to keep the focussing distance constant.

 

Question: What about diopters? How do I find the strength? Will a simple diopter do or do I need an adjustable magnifier or the WalterXeyepiece?

 

Answer:

 

Ideally you should use the DIOOY diopter tester to check.

 

Failing that the best way is to visit your optician and use his testing lenses to check which strength will give you the sharpest view of the RF patch. In a pinch you can use over-the-counter reading glasses for this test.

 

The advantage of a diopter over a magnifier is that it does not reduce visibility of the outer framelines and that it does not reduce the contrast of the viewfinder. You need the contrast to focus. I find that 1.35 magnifier not very useful, it is not as brilliant as the Leica ones and thus hinders more than that it helps.

 

If you have an eye condition that can be corrected by a diopter ( and that is most often the case) a diopter works better than shooting with glasses.

 

The WalterXeyepiece is specifically designed for the situation where a normal diopter fails, i.e. astigmatism. If you do not have astigmatism it is silly to pay four times the price of a normal diopter, which is extortionally high anyway imo.

 

I understand that when you consider using a M camera, SLR thinking habits can be difficult to break out of. So let's take this systematically.

 

When you look into a M finder, you see frame lines and the edges of the rangefinder patch. These are actually rear-illuminated cutouts in a metal mask just about one inch from your eye. But because of optical arrangements, you see these items at a virtual distance of 2 meters. This means that if, with the naked eye, with the help of spectacles or whatever, you can see things sharply at two meters, then you can see the edges of the mask cutouts sharply too. I use a pair of progressive specs for everything, including focusing my Leicas, without any problems.

 

What you use for focusing however is NOT these cutouts, but two optical images of the subject, one larger viewfinder one, and one smaller rangefinder one (but with identical magnification) which are superimposed within the space of the RF patch. And as the subjects are at varying distances, the 'optical' distances of these two images, just as the image seen through a binocular, is at varying distances so that we must focus the binoc's eyepieces. The two pictures in the M finder are in fact delivered by two separate telescopes. The rangefinders of screw-thread Leicas from the III on (1933) had in fact such a focusing device, bcause these rangefinders had 1.5x magnification.

 

The M finder has 'negative magnification' of usually 0.72x or 0.86x. So the distance variation of the image seen is normally within the depth of field of the normal eye, and no focusing of the finder image is necessary. We should see both images with full sharpness so we can use them for focusing. But don't automatically assume that the finder and rangefinder images are at a fixed distance of two meters. You will have to try out your requirements and ability by empirical 'reality tests'. Try focusing at points at different taking distances.

 

This is of course totally different from a SLR. There, the finder image is a 'real image' on a matte screen which is indeed at a fixed, unchanging distance from your eye. You can adjust the eyepiece once and for all. The M finder however is not just an image of reality – it is reality, though at a smaller scale.

 

Note that the M finder is the same for all lenses. No matter if you focus an 18mm lens or a 135mm one, you focus with two images that are the same size. Again, this is different from a SLR where the finder images vary in size with the focal length of the lens used. This finder size provides for accuracy enough to correctly focus a 135mm lens, something I do regularly with my 3/4 century old eyes. The problem is that the 135mm frame is quite small, which makes composition difficult. You can screw in a magnifying eyepices (Leica do furnish these in 1.25x and 1.4x magnification) but enlarging the images means of necessity lowering their contrast. And contrast is basically what we use in focusing: A sudden increase of contrast in the RF patch means that the images overlap correctly. So many of us find that we focus a 135mm lens easier without a magnifier than with it.

 

As usual, the proof of the pudding is in the printing. But the M's finder system is the fruit of more than a half century of development, in order to make it useful for most of us. So there is hope for you. There is of course a learning curve, but with instant digital feedback, it has became shorter than before. Start climbing it – there's a pot of gold at its top!

 

The old man from the Analog Age

 

 

Common misconception: to work the -0.5 into the equation. It is there for a reason: easier accommodation to middle distances for a 20/20 eyesight. So when you calculate the diopter correction for your eyes, the end result should be -0.5 again. But do check with a test lens, as simple theory is not always a substitute for reality.

[satijntje]

Interesting statement on KennRockwells HP:

 

"The LEICA 50mm f/1.4 SUMMILUX-M ASPH is preferred by the LEICAMAN, however is it less sharp than the SUMMICRON, weighs much more, isn't as easy to focus, and blocks the viewfinder. The SUMMILUX-M ASPH has superior bokeh to any other LEICA lens."

 

gr

 

John

[Jeff S]

Ken makes a lot of interesting statements.

 

But, some lenses do in fact have different, sometimes problematic, focus action (sticky action) than others. There have been threads here on that issue for some samples of the 50 Summilux asph. In addition, some lenses have short focus throws, while others are longer; different people may prefer different mechanics.

 

These are ergonomic considerations, which may affect one's ability or comfort to focus smoothly. But that's a different issue than whether such lenses are any more or less accurate when focused properly.

 

Jeff

[lct]

In my modest experience with 20+ M lenses on 2 R-D1 bodies and one M8.2, main focussing poblems come from:

1. My sight. Choosing "the" good correction lens is the first thing to do.

2. Film lenses. Don't believe people claiming that there is no difference between film and digital lenses. It is not true. Some of my vintage lenses work as well (or as bad) as with film Ms but a good number of them needed to be calibrated for use on digital cameras.

3. The rangefinder acccuracy. The least vertical or horizontal misalignment may play a role in poor hit rates. Having them fixed may solve your problems (almost) definitely.

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The easiest lens to focus I have is the 50 Elmar-M, I agree with correction of lenses and a check of the camera. You don't need to go to Leica, check the specialists.

[trs]

Interesting statement on KennRockwells HP:

 

"The LEICA 50mm f/1.4 SUMMILUX-M ASPH is preferred by the LEICAMAN, however is it less sharp than the SUMMICRON, ...."

 

Is this true? Four years ago, I thought 50mm Sumilux ASPH was tauted as sharpest 50mm lens available, was not it? Some people went back to pre-asph version becauce they wanted less sharpness for potrait.

 

In anycase, 28 Elmarit ASPH is easiest to focus (of three lens I have).

[jenxi]

Sharpness is subjective I've come to appreciate that a crisp, sharp image isn't necessary better than one that's less sharp. Coming to terms with this has helped me with my transition to Leica M from DSLR.

 

You need to try out various techniques for manual focus on a rangefinder. I have settled for one where I simply move the focus lever in a smooth motion. And when the images line up in the focussing patch, I press the shutter button. It's been more effective for me than trying to stop shifting the focus lever at the right point and then press the shutter. Of course, this works if the subject is in the middle of the frame. I fall back on the latter method when I need to focus and reframe.

 

It also helps to stick to using one lens until you are familiar with it. I only use one lens on my M8 and I roughly know how far I'm focussing just by feeling the position of the lever. It helps a lot as I can guess the focus and simply need to fine tune the focus.

 

Btw I'm shooting with a CV 35mm 1.4 wide open most of the time. I started off practising manual focus on still objects and then to moving subjects. Using a digital Leica M gives you the advantage of being able to see the results immediately and it is very useful to learn rangefinder focus.

 

I'm only three months into my switch so I speak from minimal experience compared to many veterans here but I hope this helps. I've been trying to convince my cousin to switch from his NEX5 to Leica M.

[satijntje]

sooooo, the purchase is done!

Bought a well kept M8u silvercolour with guarantee with new shutter (1/4000th s) and new leather including a few filters, black dot, thumbie for a amazing price!

Hunting now for a small silvercolour lens for a reasonable price (Elmar 50mm or the 40mm summicron)

 

This will bring me back to the Leica family; looking already forward to hold this nice piece of equipment (again) into my hands.

Any recommendations for the lens (I will only be using on lens for streetfotography)

 

John

 

p.s. thanks to T, your baby is in good hands and it will be treated with care :-)

[iedei]

sooooo, the purchase is done!

Bought a well kept M8u silvercolour with guarantee with new shutter (1/4000th s) and new leather and a few filters, black dot, thumbie for a amazing price!

Hunting now for a small silvercolour lens for a reasonable price (Elmar 50mm or the 40mm summicron)

 

This will bring me back to the Leica family; looking already forward to hold this nice piece of equipment (again) into my hands.

Any recommendations for the lens (I will only be using on lens for streetfotography)

 

congrats M8.1 brother! good decision!

 

i am really happy with my CV 35mm f1.4 Nokton for street use.....was affordable ($600) and is quite nice.

[jaapv]

On an M8 - I would go for 28 or 35 for street. Any Summicron 35, or, very nice, an Elmarit 28 version 3 or 4 ( but no silver I fear ) Or - nice and small- the CV Colour Skopar 35.

[lct]

...i am really happy with my CV 35mm f1.4 Nokton for street use...

So no focus shift at f/2.8 and on? Mine (SC) is useless there.

[fred2511]

On an M8 - I would go for 28 or 35 for street. Any Summicron 35' date=' or, very nice, an Elmarit 28 version 3 or 4 ( but no silver I fear ) Or - nice and small- the CV Colour Skopar 35.[/quote']

 

I have that cv colour skopar and love it

[satijntje]

On an M8 - I would go for 28 or 35 for street. Any Summicron 35, or, very nice, an Elmarit 28 version 3 or 4 ( but no silver I fear ) Or - nice and small- the CV Colour Skopar 35.

 

You are probably right Jaap, 35 or even 28 is better on a M8 for street.

I have left the initial idea of having a silver colour version, so now I have more possibilities.

My budget is however limited to the 500-1000 Euro range.

As I already experienced focusshift on a CV, I will not burn my fingers twice.....

 

Maybe I should hunt for a used summarit 35mm.

John

[jaapv]

I'm not sure if the colour-skopar shows significant focus shift. I never noticed it.

[LucisPictor]

On my M8 I love the Voigtlander Ultron 2/28 as a universal lens.

[tobey bilek]

I looked at a Nex 5 once. Not even tempted. It is like looking at an old analog TV screen from 8 inches. YUCK. The 7 is supposed to be better, however this was so bad I figured a one generation jump would still not be acceptable. Also the 7 produces cyan corners. There must have been a patent infringement or cost reduction.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lct]

The Nex-6 could be tempting if it behaves like a 5N with Nex-7 EVF.

[jaques]

a good street lens would be the 40 summicron- you can pick one of these up for under $800- and get a Leica CL free film body.

 

Grind the lens cam so it brings up the 35mm framelines and you are set. Very small well made lens that performs very close to the 35 summicron but costs perhaps a third as much.

 

an advantage of a wider lens is a more depth of field to cover focus error.

 

another wider option would be the voigtlander 28mm f2 lens which I found worked brilliantly on the m8- huge DOF on the street in the daytime: stop down a little and just about everything is in focus. Very sharp lens.