Focus peaking with an EVF

[Jennifer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Is it just me or do others find it difficult to focus accurately using focus peaking through the EVF with 'slowish' lenses.

 

I've been experimenting with my (new) EVF combined with a SEM 21. Accepted the DoF with this lens, even at f/3.4, is never shallow and hence focus peaking will tend to indicate over a broad sweep of the focus ring. However, even putting it as close to the centre of the range as I can estimate, I find the whole process very hit and miss with accurate focusing really only guaranteed if performed conventionally through the OVF. As a result, for me at least, the EVF in combination with the 21 is only really useful as a framing aid.

 

I've not tried it yet with my Lux 75 but I hope, given that lens' waffer thin DoF and the difficulty in nailing focus through the OPV, it'll prove more useful. If it doesn't, buying an EVF will have proved an expensive mistake, and I'll kick myself for not having gone for a 1.4x magnifier plus, maybe, a 21mm viewfinder instead.

[Advertisement]

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

[pop]

I find focus peaking to be of limited use (or even less) with short focal lengths and narrow apertures. As you suspect, for short focal lengths the EVF is perfect for framing and not so for focusing.

 

However, I find focus peaking immensely useful for longer focal lengths and larger apertures. This starts in low light with the 1:2.5/50mm and in daylight with the 1:2.5/75mm. The Tele-Elmar 1:4/135mm I can manage with focus peaking only.

[jip]

You could have gotten the Olympus EVF which is exactly the same as the Leica version, but only cost like 100 euro...

[Jennifer]

You could have gotten the Olympus EVF which is exactly the same as the Leica version, but only cost like 100 euro...

 

Yes, I know I could but I did a package deal to include quite a few other things.

[01af]

Focus-peaking with the electronic viewfinder is useful in some situations and next to useless in others. Don't consider the purchase of the EVF a waste of time and money just because you've stumbled across a situation of the latter kind. Even when used for framing only, the EVF is much nicer than an optical accessory finder with framelines—way more precise, no parallax, fits any focal length, can be tilted upwards, and supports the artificial horizon (since firmware 2.0.1.5). Also, it can be used for visual focusing using the 5× and 10× magnifications which often is more precise than focus-peaking and can be, in some situations, even more precise than rangefinder focusing.

 

Focus-peaking is more useful with longer focal lengths at shorter focus distances, and especially so in the dark. It doesn't replace rangefinder focusing but complements it.

[jaapv]

I find focus peaking to be of limited use (or even less) with short focal lengths and narrow apertures. As you suspect, for short focal lengths the EVF is perfect for framing and not so for focusing.

 

However, I find focus peaking immensely useful for longer focal lengths and larger apertures. This starts in low light with the 1:2.5/50mm and in daylight with the 1:2.5/75mm. The Tele-Elmar 1:4/135mm I can manage with focus peaking only.

What Philipp said.

 

I might add that the focus peaking as implemented by Leica is very good. It is less pronounced than we are used to by other brands, but the result is that it is far more accurate. Use it with a magnification of 10x with focal lengths from 90 to 180, above that dial back to 5x magnification.

It may appear jittery with long focal lengths, but that is an indication you are waving the lens around too much. Once you get the stability controlled in the magnified view with focus peaking, you will find you have reduced motion blur dramatically. And you can focus in the middle of DOF with a long lens.

[Jennifer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Saved by the lens. The focus peaking through the EVF is spot on with my Lux 75 That'll teach me to shoot off my big mouth without giving the product a proper trial.

[250swb]

Focus peaking is great for longer lenses, but I still use the rangefinder for anything 50mm and wider. The EVF does also come into it's own in another way by allowing an accurate view of a scene, rather than an approximate view, so I often focus with the rangefinder and compose with the EVF. In all it's a great feature to have as an option.

 

Steve

[gravastar]

To add a useful tip: With older design large aperture lenses you may find focus peaking is more visible and precise if the lens is stopped down slightly, say half to one stop. This increases the micro contrast enhancing focus peaking.

 

Bob.

[viramati]

focus peaking with wide and slow lenses is really not very accurate and personally I still use the RF to focus with the WATE and CV 21/1.8. The 28 cron asph I will sometimes focus with the EVF but once again I usually use the RF and maybe the EVFforf more accurate framing. On longer lenses and for the C35/1.2 I use the SonY A7 which has a higher resolution EVF and moveable point focus magnification. On the whole I don't find the leica's focus peaking not to be very useful or accurate and prefer to use magnification if possible but the real bummer with the M is not being able to move the focus area

[jaapv]

I'm interested about your finding about the Sony A7. In my eyes the focus peaking is close to useless as it covers a wider span than DOF, and comparing the EVF to the Leica one I find it a bit better, but not so much that it makes a real difference. I see the point about moving the focus area, but for me it would only work with static subjects on a tripod as it is much slower than focus-halfpress-recompose. In the whole I prefer the Leica accuracy. Talking about long lenses/macro of course.

[viramati]

I'm interested about your finding about the Sony A7. In my eyes the focus peaking is close to useless as it covers a wider span than DOF, and comparing the EVF to the Leica one I find it a bit better, but not so much that it makes a real difference. I see the point about moving the focus area, but for me it would only work with static subjects on a tripod as it is much slower than focus-halfpress-recompose. In the whole I prefer the Leica accuracy. Talking about long lenses/macro of course.

Each to his own. The only manual lenses I use on the A7 are the CV 21/1.8 and 35/1.2 and leica apo telyt 135 and I find that I can generally focus these without actually having to use either peaking or magnification due to the higher res EVF. I don't actually use peaking a lot as what really annoys me about the Sony is that it doesn't turn off on half shutter press

The WATE I use exclusively on the leica as I like to be able to get accurate focus with the RF and I actually like to able to put the RVF in an upright position and shoot at a lower angel for landscape work.

[thighslapper]

....... and I've found that with 35mm and below the Leica EVF has sufficient resolution to focus by eye and forget peaking anyway ...... or just use the RF if you are wide open and want to be 100% sure you are spot on.

[lct]

Never use peaking with my M240 and Fuji X-E2 either. Image magnification alone is enough for me and allows for accurate focusing at surprisingly slow apertures like f/5.6 or f/8 with lenses as wide as 21mm (21/2.8 asph, 21/3.4 asph, CV 21/4). The Leica is more jittery unfortunately but it can bring up magnification by simply turning the focus ring instead of pressing a button which is quite handy with coded as well as uncoded lenses.

[bocaburger]

At 135mm and below, which encompasses all the M lenses I ever use, I find the rangefinder is far more positive. If I wanted an SLR I would use my 5D. For lenses above 135mm (a 70-210/4 Vario Elmar, 400/6.8 Telyt, and several Nikon lenses I own) the EVF is obligatory, but I find with the shallow DOF of those lenses I can focus quite accurately without peaking and at normal magnification. To focus accurately with magnification, either the camera needs to be on a tripod, or Leica should've put IS in the body. I find it an absurd assertion that finder jitters at 5x or 10x is my fault for not being steady enough. 5x210=1050mm, 10x=2100mm. Anyone who can hold a lens of that magnification steady enough to focus has my undying admiration, they are a human tripod.

[CheshireCat]

I might add that the focus peaking as implemented by Leica is very good.

 

This is very subjective. I find it one of the worst implementations.

[lct]

The opposite would have been surprising.

[xrogers]

I like the focus peaking on the M. I use it to check depth of field and precise focus on stationary objects with all my lenses (including very wide). I much prefer it to the peaking on my Sonys.

 

When speed matters, however, the whole EVF (including peaking) is too slow, and I use the RF or an optical finder. Also for focus on a single object, I prefer the RF.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

At 135mm and below, which encompasses all the M lenses I ever use, I find the rangefinder is far more positive. If I wanted an SLR I would use my 5D. For lenses above 135mm (a 70-210/4 Vario Elmar, 400/6.8 Telyt, and several Nikon lenses I own) the EVF is obligatory, but I find with the shallow DOF of those lenses I can focus quite accurately without peaking and at normal magnification. To focus accurately with magnification, either the camera needs to be on a tripod, or Leica should've put IS in the body. I find it an absurd assertion that finder jitters at 5x or 10x is my fault for not being steady enough. 5x210=1050mm, 10x=2100mm. Anyone who can hold a lens of that magnification steady enough to focus has my undying admiration, they are a human tripod.

 

Thank you for your admiration. It is, however, just a matter of technique and training.

Who said it was your fault though?

[bocaburger]

LOL well technically it is my fault I can't hold a telephoto lens steady enough at 10x to focus critically and therefore rely on IS. In the same way it's technically my fault I can't flap my arms and fly and therefore rely on airplanes