M 240 and wide aperture lenses.

[epand56]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Does the M 240 represent the end of wide aperture photography?

After taking lot of pictures at f1.4 on Summilux lenses and at f2 on Summicron ones, with very poor and unsatisfying results, I am now forced to use f2.8 on the first and at least f4 on the latter if I want my pictures to be as sharp as I want.

At these apertures, the M 240 is amazingly sharp (sometimes even a little bit too much, according with my 82 yo vain father).

But if used at f1.4 or f2, the focus is soft and sometimes it's even off. This often makes these expensive lenses, which are designed for this purpose, to be useless at their maximum aperture.

Is there any other member in the forum dealing with this frustration?

How do you fix this problem?

[kape06111]

Hi,

 

i was in the same situation using the 35 lux pre fle and the 50 f1.5 zm, although the results were nice, sometimes i wanted to see the pictures sharp wide open, but no, it was no possible.

Now I´m using the 35 Lux Fle and the 50 cron V5 and i call tell that i get sharp images wide open.

One question, did you check using the Liveview if your results are better, maybe you are not getting the right focus with you OVF, because of any reason, (miscalibration, mistake ..).

[Advertisement]

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

[01af]

Is there any other member in the forum dealing with this frustration?

Yes, definitely

 

In my experience, single most-important cause for this frustration is the absurdly short focus throws of most modern standard and telephoto M lenses. The older Summilux-M 75 mm or current Noctilux-M 50 mm Asph are so much easier to focus precisely at full aperture than the Apo-Summicron-M 75 mm Asph or Summilux-M 50 mm Asph, even though the former's maximum apertures are even wider than the latter's.

[jaapv]

I use the Summilux 50 asph and Summilux 24 as modern lenses and the are razor sharp exactly where I want to wide open. But even older lenses like the Summarit 1.5/5 leave nothing to be desired.

And my Canon 1.8/50 from the early 50ies is eyewateringly sharp.

 

There is something to be said for Olaf's observation, however. The shorter focus throw makes the process more fiddly and dependent on manual dexterity.

 

Still, I strongly suspect that there is something going on in your case. Either the system calibration is slightly off, or there is something in your vision that you don't notice in daily life, but manifests itself in focusing.

Edited July 7, 2014 by jaapv

[ayewing]

Enrico, I have been a Leica user for over 40 years and have always been a staunch supporter of the rangefinder method of focusing but I have to admit that when using my 50mm Summilux I get sharper results at f1.4 when focused using the EVF. At smaller apertures my results with the rangefinder are fine. Using a tripod makes no difference unless shutter speeds are very low.

 

The causes for this are either the camera rangefinder or the lens needing adjustment or in my case because my visual acuity is not quite as good as it used tobe as I am in my seventies.

 

It would be worth trying with the EVF if you have not done so already.

[250swb]

But if used at f1.4 or f2, the focus is soft and sometimes it's even off. This often makes these expensive lenses, which are designed for this purpose, to be useless at their maximum aperture.

 

They are designed to be relatively well corrected and usable wide open, but they will still be sharper at f/4 than at f/1.4 however accurate the focus is.

 

Steve

[Dannybuoy]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I get variable results [sharpness] from my 50 Lux Asph and cron 35 Asph. Sometimes focus is razor sharp. When I nail it I'm still blown away by how sharp the combo can be. But I guess user error is to blame for when I get softer shots. If you're not getting any sharp shots then something's off. You could try focus bracketing to see if you can get some sharp results. That way at least you can tell if it's the lenses or your eyes :-)

[xrogers]

My most demanding lens is likely the 35 Lux ASPH, pre-FLE. I had some trouble at 1.4, but solved the problem completely by getting a Walter Rx eyepiece about five months ago.

 

At age 51 I don't have to wear glasses driving or reading, but I clearly must correct my astigmatism to focus a Leica properly.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

Digital Leicas are certainly more fussy than film ones (as are all digital cameras) when it comes to focus. Plus we're now dealing with huge resolution that's so easily blown up to 1:1 on a modern monitor.

 

However if my technique is good I get a very high accuracy count even wide open with my faster lenses. For still subjects I'd be around 95% with the rangefinder and 99% with the EVF. I'm much faster with the rangefinder though.

 

But we're all getting older and our eyes do age. Mine get tired after a long day shooting. SO it's hard to say whether it's you or your gear. If you feel you're really getting accuracy in the rangefinder but slightly OOF images it may be woth having your camera/lenses checked. If you're having trouble telling if the rangefinder is coincedent it may be the vertical being slighhtly out or maybe a dioptre or focus magnifier might help.

 

So, it should be possible to get consistant sharpness wide open. But it's not always easy and there could be more than one contributing factor.

 

Gordon

[helged]

I agree that rangefinder focussing is much quicker (and feels more intuitive) than EVF focussing. That being said, I tend to use EVF when critical focussing is desirable and doable.

 

The nice thing with M240 though is that the two focussing mechanisms can be easily checked. Put the camera on a tripod with 2 sec delay, rangefinder focus on something at close, intermediate and large distances, possibly with a few exposures at each distance, and redo the exercise based on the EVF. The exercise can be done with different apertures to check focus shift. A quick check on any decent monitor will uncover the need for lens (or rangefinder) adjustment. I typically do this for the Lux and Cron lenses (35, 50, 90) and the 50 Noct. And yes, M240 can and should deliver stunning results also at f0.95, 1.4 or 2.

 

The rangefinder on my M240 is ok but not perfectly calibrated, so the body will be shipped to Leica soon. This in contrast to my MM+50Noct combination that happen - for the time bing - to be spot on. What a delight it is to have a fully calibrated instrument in the hand...!

[250swb]

But it's not always easy and there could be more than one contributing factor.

 

I suggest another contributing factor is 'expectation'.

 

To start with even with a perfectly calibrated viewfinder and a professional photographer with perfect eyesight there will be a far higher failure rate than making a photograph with the lens stopped down. It is common sense. And of course people don't increase their luck by using a tripod because 'Leica's aren't meant to be used on tripods' ().

 

And then we get absurd statements from inexperienced photographers along the lines of 'these lenses are made to be used wide open'. Well yes, perfectly true they have a f/1.4 stop. But the baggage in the statement is that they are made specifically to be used wide open, which they aren't.

 

So the truth is we have a situation where expectations are high for a fast lens to deliver spectacular results because new owners have listened to hype, yet the truth of common sense says the failure rate of a fast lens is very high. And people blank out one truth or the other. The overriding truth is that lenses used at wide apertures will always be more difficult and have a much higher failure rate than any other (apart maybe from extreme telephoto's), and it is managing expectation that is required to use them successfully, not the usual statements like 'I've never had a problem' or 'check this or that'. Generally speaking people allow themselves to be too easily disappointed by not realising the difficulties even the best photographers have with fast lenses.

 

Steve

[M9reno]

^"absurdly short focus throws"^

 

Agree completely: this is also what makes these otherwise great lenses completely useless for zone focusing or other types of rough-and-ready techniques for, among other things, street photography. Whenever this is my aim, the old Summicron II comes out.

[Dannybuoy]

Ultimately, wide aperture lenses are meant to be shot wide open. I've never had a problem. Maybe you should check this or that?

[jaapv]

About being made "to be used wide open".:

In general yes, there are many if not most lenses that will improve on stopping down moderately.

 

However, Leica has a number of lenses that are diffraction limited at maximum aperture:

The Apo Summicron 50, the ApoTelyt 280/4.0 R, The R modular Apo system, to name but a few.

Those lenses will indeed have their best performance wide open and stopping down will only increase DOF (and diffraction)

[HeinzX]

I have no problem with the Summilux 50 1,4 FLE ASPH on the M 240 with wide open aperture. For me focussing is easier than with the M 9. In critical situations I use the Live View with magnification. In analog times the focussing with the M 6 and with the Noctilux 1,0 was much more difficult - and my eyes were much better at this time.

[viramati]

Personally I have really get this 'have to shoot wide open' argument. for me a lens is a tool and a wide aperture just makes it more versatile. if I need 1.4 for a certain look the I shoot 1.4, if I need f8 for another look then I shoot f8. Yes leica lenses are known for their quality wide open but then it is true that with high MP count cameras we are just going to see flaws that we would't have seen on film. God forbid that they ever bring out a 36mp M:)

As to the OP's original question I have solved the problem with the Sony A7and the amazing Sony/Zeiss FE55/1.8 (incredibly sharp wide open and easier to hit the focus) and now only really use my M with the 28 cron asph (good wide open but gets a lot sharper on edge at f4 down) and the WATE

Edited July 8, 2014 by viramati

[01af]

However, Leica has a number of lenses that are diffraction-limited at maximum aperture: the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph, the Apo-Telyt-R 280 mm 1:4, the modular Apo-Telyt-R system, to name but a few.

Can't say for the R lenses ... but the Apo-Summicron-M 50 mm Asph is not diffraction-limited wide open. Optimal aperture is f/2.8 - f/4 for the frame's center and approx. f/5.6 for the corners. That said, performance at full aperture is so high, no-one ever will miss anything in terms of sharpness. In this sense, stopping down is not required to improve sharpness. This does not mean, however, that sharpness wouldn't improve at all.

 

I guess it's the same for the R lenses you mentioned.

[jaapv]

No, those are described as "truly diffraction limited" by Erwin Puts, which the Apo-Summicron indeed is not.

 

In the meantime, whilst it can be useful to be aware of the technical behaviour of a lens, I think it a bit silly to let the photograph be dictated by this kind of consideration.

Edited July 8, 2014 by jaapv

[lct]

...How do you fix this problem?

Hi Enrico, by calibrating faulty lenses in the first place. Many lenses born in the film age need some calibration. Once calibration is done the problem will be gone mostly. Remember how difficult it can be to focus lenses like 90/2 or even 90/2.8 on the M8. The M240 is more accurate due to its longer effective RF base length and the better contrast of its VF probably. Now some lenses like 90/2 or 75/1.4 have always been tricky to focus at full aperture on M cameras and the absence of grain renders OoF pictures more visible than they used to be in the film days. AFAIC all i can say is that my coded 90/2 asph is surprisingly easy to focus at f/2 on the M240 and that, after calibration, it is the same for my late 90/2.8. Same for my uncoded 50/1.4 asph when it returns coded and calibrated from Wetzlar hopefully. It remains that magnification can always been useful with fast and/or long-focus lenses, be it optical with a 1.25x or higher magnifier or electronic with the EVF. FWIW.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[digitalfx]

My lens collection consists of all wide aperture lenses, and I tend to shoot wide open (24, 35, 50 Summilux- 50 Noctilux and 90 Summicron) I have been shooting M cameras since M2 and have used all the digital M's (M8, M9, M240)...and if anything I find the M240 easier to nail focus with. Its always been difficult as just the slightest movement changes the plane of focus...so its always hit and miss. On the old film M's it was more forgiving because the resolution and grain helped hide the fact you weren't perfectly in focus. But bottom line is that I get great results...it just takes work.

You should send in your body and lenses to Leica and make sure they are all calibrated correctly. Don't expect 100% success...50% is more obtainable though.