Ming Thein on 24-90 focus shift

[David Dennis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ming Thein said this in his "cameropedia" page about the 24-90:

 

Leica 24-90/2.8-4 Vario Elmarit SL** (Apr 2016, 4/10) – Sharp wide open, but focus shifts badly when stopped down – to the point that the f8 result at the focal plane is actually softer than f4. There is no way of compensating for this, either. It’s also huge, heavy, imbalanced on the SL and overpriced. Not recommended.

 

 

 

I would think that if the focus shift was a significant problem, we would hear more about it on the forum, especially since most SL users seem delighted with the SL and that lens specifically.

 

Any feedback?

 

(Ming's page is https://blog.mingthein.com/equipmentdatabase/ ).

[LocalHero1953]

Ming Thein said this in his "cameropedia" page about the 24-90:

 

 

 

I would think that if the focus shift was a significant problem, we would hear more about it on the forum, especially since most SL users seem delighted with the SL and that lens specifically.

 

Any feedback?

 

(Ming's page is https://blog.mingthein.com/equipmentdatabase/ ).

Yes, plenty - do a search for the thread in which this was discussed. The consensus was that it wasn't focus shift, but an oddity in the SL focus point firmware which, if it existed (and some people never found it), was corrected in an earlier f/w update. I dare say someone will now say it's a massive failure.

[thighslapper]

Who do you believe......

 

the tiny number of people who review cameras, often make a living from it ..... and voice their own opinions .... often based on pre-production cameras and firmware, usually just for a few days ......

 

..... or the thousands who own the equipment, use it daily, and would without a doubt bombard forums like this if they consistently found issues ?

 

Jono Slack used the SL + 24-90 for many months before release ...... and has continued to use it as his main Leica camera since He has not found any issues of note ....... and has a hotline to Leica when it comes to reporting things ...... plus they clearly monitor this forum and are usually aware of 'issues' ..... if they really exist ..... and usually .... eventually, do something about it. 

 

The first firmware update specifically addressed focussing accuracy by increasing the density of focus points ...... in response to some occasional issues with what Ming erroneously called focus shift. 

[rriley]

Ming Thein is a very smart guy.  I hope that we hear more detail from him on this matter.

[IkarusJohn]

Ming Thein is a very smart guy.  I hope that we hear more detail from him on this matter.

 

Unlikely.  He has no interest in this camera.

 

On his other points (huge, heavy, imbalanced and overpriced), this is all true, until you do some comparisons with other similar gear.  Ming loves the new Hasselblad X1D, yet it is the same size as the SL (which he hates), the 240-90 zoom is comparable in size to other offerings of similar range and functionality, and I'm not sure how the balance thing works for him.  The laws of physics rather dictate the size of the lens.  If the camera was bigger, then they cries of outrage would be deafening; smaller and the balance issue would be a real problem.

 

It is what it is.  If you want AF zooms of 24-90 and 90-280 (at an f stop which keeps the size and weight manageable), it's hard to imagine how the camera or the lenses could be smaller or lighter.  If you don't want AF, why even look at the SL?

 

As for price, it fits the Leica pricing about right.  The camera is about the same price as an M camera and cheaper than an S camera, and the lenses a bit more expensive than the M average price, less than a Noctilux or 21 Summilux, and in the same range as the S lenses (also AF).

 

The truth of the matter is that Ming just doesn't like the SL (and nor does his mate Diggy Lloyd).

[Jeff S]

Lloyd Chambers cited this supposed issue first, then Ming.  As noted, there is already over 200 posts on the issue, perhaps best summarized by Godfrey (ramarren) and Jono...

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255186-24-90mm-focus-shift-diglloyd/?p=3085820

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255186-24-90mm-focus-shift-diglloyd/?p=3085993

 

Jeff

[steppenw0lf]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ming Thein is a very smart guy.  I hope that we hear more detail from him on this matter.

 

 

Ming Thein is more interested in the X1d and it is very long ago that he tested the SL - so I do not expect anything useful from him.

Maybe Diglloyd has anything ? But currently I am not subscribing. Does anybody know ?

 

After the 2.1 firmware upgrade I asked about the status of the once described problem (asked for confirmation if solved or still existant or replaced by new problems). the few people answering were all finding no problems.       And Jono explained the problem in a different way.

 

So here is the chance to repeat any still existing problems.

[Jeff S]

Ming is now a Hasselblad ambassador, though of course he cites his neutrality.

 

Jeff

[rriley]

Unlikely.  He has no interest in this camera.

 

The truth of the matter is that Ming just doesn't like the SL (and nor does his mate Diggy Lloyd).

 

Ming is a Hasselblad Ambassador and, of course, the Leica SL is a competitor to the X1D in an overlapping market.

[IkarusJohn]

Ming is a Hasselblad Ambassador and, of course, the Leica SL is a competitor to the X1D in an overlapping market.

 

 

Actually, I think Ming is above that.  I like him, and I generally like his perspective on things (most of his pictures don't do too much for me, but there are one or two which stand out).  If he doesn't like the Hasselblad, he will say so - at least, to Hasselblad.

 

He does actually quite like Leica products (or he has done so in the past).  He has come to Hasselblad only relatively recently, and he reviewed the SL long before the X1D was announced.  The SL is more of a Nikon D810 competitor than X1D - all they have in common is being mirrorless.  I don't think Hasselblad or anything else coloured his thinking on the SL - he found the grip uncomfortable, the SL with 24-90 zoom heavy, it is expensive (compared to Nikon, Canon and Sony - he doesn't like that much either).  When he found that the focusing produced what he and Lloyd decided was focus shift, that was it.  I doubt he has picked up the SL since.

 

The real test for focus shift is to switch off AF, put the camera in M mode, set the aperture at f2.8, zoom in (the effective aperture changes to f4.5) and focus on something very accurately (using magnification to check).  Take the shot.  Then, without changing anything, stop down to f8 and take the same shot - is it in focus?  If the answer is yes, Ming and Lloyd have shown poor technique; if the answer is no, then we have focus shift.  Does it matter?  Well, for me?  Not really.  With that lens, I don't know why I would use that technique.  

 

First, my standard settings are either aperture priority or M - I set the aperture I want at the outset.  Second, I will use AF and perhaps adjust fine focus manually for the shot before I fire the shutter.  As the EVF reads off the sensor, if the final image is going to be out of focus, it will be out of focus through the viewfinder.  Third, I will mostly use the AF with that lens on that camera.  I'm not a huge fan of AF, so I will take some care to be sure what the camera is focusing on - focus shift doesn't come into it, provided the AF is properly fixed on what I want in focus.  In practical terms, if the lens has horrendous focus shift, it will only become apparent if you carefully focus on a particular point and you then change the aperture without refocusing.  This means either manual focusing, or AF and you keep your finger on the shutter to lock the focus as you stop down.  Sounds daft to me.

 

Now, if you are a watch or food photographer doing still life pictures with strobes and tripods, I could well understand that you might set up the shot, manually focus accurately, then perhaps do a series of shots at different apertures without changing anything else.  That implies that you have done all that, but haven't calculated the depths of field (which would be odd).  It also means that you've done all that and not checked focus prior to each shot.

 

In short, even if Ming and Lloyd are right (which seems unlikely from people here who have used this lens far more than them), does it matter?  I don't believe there is focus shift of the proportions these guys claim for a minute.  I can't imagine Leica overlooking something so fundamental (more so for M lenses where there is no focus confirmation off the sensor), but I do think it was an AF issue.  Do I actually care?  Not really - focus confirmation before you press the shutter is rather second nature for me, whether AF or manual focus.  Changing aperture while keeping the focus fixed is only something I might do on an M camera, but focus shift is an issue there.

 

Cheers

John

[Jeff S]

Ming has been candid....here's what he wrote regarding his relationship to Hasselblad...  

 

In the interests of full disclosure, I am a Hasselblad Ambassador, so my objectivity may be in question. But I do have a significant amount of skin in the game, too – all of the V system (including CFV) was acquired prior to my appointment, and good chunk of the H system was purchased by me at retail.

 

He's liked and owned Hasselblad for quite a while.  The SL...not so much.

 

Jeff

[Guest VVJ]

It is not an issue and has never been an issue for me personally but I only got the SL in May when firmware 2.0 was already around.

 

Please note that all online reviewers (who live of clicks from their website) use the same strategy.  They push certain brands and in order to do so make other brands look worse than they really are.

 

I personally probably rely more on actual customer reviews on Amazon, B&H, etc than on reviews from so-called "professional reviewers". 

[Joshua Lowe]

I used the 24-90 extensively in a variety of situations and had no issues with focus shift.  Maybe I'm just not enough of a pixel peeper.

 

On the other hand, I did have an issue with the zoom mechanism freezing.  Now that's an actual problem.

 

[kikouyou]

Both Minh and Digilloyd are interesting as they test all kind of equipment but they are indeed biased. You have to read their reviews and remove their emotional spikes as there is still knowledge in their write-up. Some of their test are probably done with rental equipment that is out of shape. I have not been able to reproduce some very clear lens issues in the reviews with some TS lenses. 

This is more even true when the lens brand is different to the body brand used for the testing. They rarely take into account the thickness of the glass in front of the sensor (not well published info for sure) that can ruin a lens made for thin glass like the M family when used on a thick glass sensor (like Sony or some Canon/Nikons)...

In the case of the SL24-90 test it seems they have done the tests with early FW and possibly defective lenses as none of us can reproduce the issues seen with the 24-90 in their blogs. My 24-90 has been flawless I have it.

[IkarusJohn]

I'm not so sure; especially our friend Lloyd.

 

One of his "shock horror" discoveries was the shift in the depth of focus when using a Monochrom with a red filter.  All made perfect sense in theory, but I have been unable to reproduce this effect in practice with my Monochrom.  Using a tripod, focusing a Noctilux on a building in the middle distance, with and without a red filter, no difference.  I posted the results here some time ago - not sure where.

 

As JorisV notes above, these guys drive traffic to their sites (sometimes) with such shock discoveries.  These can be useful, but often they are not. A bit like reading the Red Top press in the UK ...

[jaapv]

Lloyd often has it wrong; his grasp of (ancient?) photographic basics appears to be a bit shaky. In this case he cried "focus shift" which is something quite different. In reality he found an AF anomaly with the focus not measured centrally in the AF box, so obviously focus varied with zoom. Leica corrected the firmware soon after.

[R3D-D0T]

"The SL is more of a Nikon D810 competitor"

 

Why would you pick the SL over the D810? Ever?

 

(Serious question)

[LD_50]

"The SL is more of a Nikon D810 competitor"

 

Why would you pick the SL over the D810? Ever?

 

(Serious question)

A few:

 

EVF for critical focus

 

Build quality

 

M lenses

[Jeff S]

A few:

 

EVF for critical focus

 

Build quality

 

M lenses

 

Also if one owns S or R or T lenses.  And an SL body along with native SL lenses offers robust weather sealing.

 

There are many other feature and spec differences, which different people will value differently....  http://cameradecision.com/compare/Leica-SL-vs-Nikon-D810

 

But beyond that, people choose cameras (and lenses) for lots of reasons. That's abundantly clear based on any broad perusal of forum discussion.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[steppenw0lf]

"The SL is more of a Nikon D810 competitor"

Why would you pick the SL over the D810? Ever?

(Serious question)

 

I have the D800 since 2012 and am using Nikon gear since about 2000, since the digital era. (first simple Fuji, then Fuji with Nikon mount, then Nikon)

I never upgraded to the D810 (for me the difference was too small). The D800 gave me everything I needed.

For a special project I bought a Canon 5Ds with tele lenses in 2015.

 

I had begun photography with Leica R and later M (in the 80s). The Nikons never were a replacement for R cameras. The Canon is some sort of replacement, at least the R lenses can be attached without modifications. I kept the old Leica lenses so had a "installed base" of Leica gear.

 

I always did a lot of macro photography.

When the SL came it surprised me how well it worked with manual lenses - and for macro I use the lenses manually. Before I had only 3 Nikon micro lenses and the R Macro lenses that were not usable on Nikon and difficult to use on Canon. (or NEX 7)

Of all modern cameras (AF cameras) the SL is by far the best regarding manual usage. The sensor is great (colors) and the EVF is the best I have ever seen. Much better than an OVF for macro photography. (10x zoom, focus peaking, preview of result). I can now choose between macro lenses from Leica, Zeiss, Nikon, Pentax, ...

Even the Nikon 2/135 DC works much better on the SL (better control of resulting bokeh.)

 

Then - after a long wait - I received the SL 90-280. And it beats anything I used before from Nikon (I have used most 2.8/80-200 or 2.8/70-200, which are typically Nikons best lenses). It is even great for portrait use (minimal distance 1.4m in the Nikon zooms, 0.6 m in the 90-280). Its AF is extremely fast and at the same time completely noiseless (different to CaNikon). OIS is very reliable and also almost silent.

So this lens made the SL even more valuable for me.

 

I still use the Nikon, mainly for flash, because this is really simple. (But I use flash rarely). And the battery life is very long.

I still use the Canon 5Ds, mainly for tele (because of the special AF/IS programs (6 cases). The 50 MP are also useful (sometimes). Or for long-time exposures and time-lapse.

 

I use the SL for everything else, because it is simply better (and much more flexible). I can now use lenses side by side, that come from 5 decades and 6 different producers. I can pick the best from each line - and have now as many "special" lenses as never before.

The SL is a perfect base for almost anything (a single base for almost any lens system) 

 

So you see the technical specs do not count for me, only the usability and the resulting images. So a theoretical comparison by feature list is useless for me. (The type DxO produces).

 

What convinced me most for the SL was the "field report" Jono Slack published in October 2015, and the report of D. Farkas of the 90-280 lens (probably April 2016). 

My older cameras are simply not good enough by comparison. I love, that I can throw almost any problem or any lens at the camera and it works. It's a lot of fun!

 

This is probably different for you - so let's leave it at that.