6bit Posted March 15, 2017 Share #1 Posted March 15, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I found it truly bizarre. Anyone else? I have never walked around with my M6 on hyper focal hoping and praying I get my shot in focus. I focus the shot. I just want to get a feel for other opinions to check myself against. https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/4118757797/a-german-in-japan-leica-m10-shooting-experience Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 15, 2017 Posted March 15, 2017 Hi 6bit, Take a look here Anyone read the M10 DPReview article (March 14)?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #2 Posted March 15, 2017 Indeed weird. Why use a rangefinder camera when your only aim is to zone focus? Zone misfocus I call it... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
antigallican Posted March 15, 2017 Share #3 Posted March 15, 2017 I found it truly bizarre. Anyone else? I have never walked around with my M6 on hyper focal hoping and praying I get my shot in focus. I focus the shot. I just want to get a feel for other opinions to check myself against. https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/4118757797/a-german-in-japan-leica-m10-shooting-experience It's a silly piece of writing. The picture of the young lady with the book is terrific though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicauser7 Posted March 15, 2017 Share #4 Posted March 15, 2017 Funnny, I looked at the caption of the shot mentionied above -- the girl with the book. He cites the 35 lux as an example of a modern lens with impressively little field curvature where that is the one modern lens that displays a notoriously wavy and hard to master field curvature... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
zlatkob Posted March 15, 2017 Share #5 Posted March 15, 2017 What is bizarre about the common zone focusing method? Setting the hyperfocal distance happens to be easy with a Leica M thanks to the clearly marked lens barrels. The argument is often made against other cameras that they are not as good as Leica for zone focusing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xixi_gelly Posted March 15, 2017 Share #6 Posted March 15, 2017 My question is the converse: why would anyone bother with a rangefinder if they never zone focus? Modern DSLR autofocus is exceedingly fast and accurate. The rangefinder still stands apart in this day and age because you can use nearly instantaneous pre-/zone-/hyper- focusing. It's a big part of the joy of using rangefinders and Leica lenses with distance markings and finger tabs -- and has been so for decades. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted March 15, 2017 Share #7 Posted March 15, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't. Why do I bother with a rangefinder? Compact, fantastic manual lenses, no added crap I don't want or need, and fantastic image quality. What's zone focussing got to do with it? I never shoot from the hip; well, in the literal sense! I look through the viewfinder with all my cameras, first for framing and second for focus and composition. I also see the exposure setting through the viewfinder. Focussing isn't a bother with any camera, apart from the SWC, and then I do have to estimate ... What the problem with focussing? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #8 Posted March 15, 2017 What is bizarre about the common zone focusing method? Setting the hyperfocal distance happens to be easy with a Leica M thanks to the clearly marked lens barrels. The argument is often made against other cameras that they are not as good as Leica for zone focusing. There is noting bizarre about the method, it is bizarre to think that one needs a rangefinder camera to do so. By definition one does not need any focusing mechanism at all, You can screw the marked lens barrel onto any box. The other thing is that many advocates of zone focusing -including the writer of the article- think that the DOF is a zone of sharpness. It is not, it is a zone of acceptable unsharpness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #9 Posted March 15, 2017 My question is the converse: why would anyone bother with a rangefinder if they never zone focus? Modern DSLR autofocus is exceedingly fast and accurate. The rangefinder still stands apart in this day and age because you can use nearly instantaneous pre-/zone-/hyper- focusing. It's a big part of the joy of using rangefinders and Leica lenses with distance markings and finger tabs -- and has been so for decades. I bother with a rangefinder because I like to use the mechanism provided to focus. That there is a method to get an acceptably sharp image without focusing is a bonus and an emergency workaround in my book. As you correctly point out, the method has been made obsolete with the advent of effective AF. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmahto Posted March 15, 2017 Share #10 Posted March 15, 2017 Author likes 28mm lens because he can use the entire view finder.... bizarre. My 10min wasted. But in his defense, he himself admits that he is shallow hipster and likes M for aesthetics than anything else. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2017 Share #11 Posted March 15, 2017 I can not see myself using hyperfocal focus more than 10% of the time, but it has it's uses and times where it works. Plenty of other lenses these days don't have the markings (perhaps because of the AF world), so I am pleased that Leica and Voigtlander do mark their manual lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 15, 2017 Share #12 Posted March 15, 2017 I bother with a rangefinder because I like to use the mechanism provided to focus. That there is a method to get an acceptably sharp image without focusing is a bonus and an emergency workaround in my book. As you correctly point out, the method has been made obsolete with the advent of effective AF. However you could say that manual lenses have been obsoleted to a large extent by AF lenses. Thank heavens they have not. I used to have every camera since my M6 years ago with AF, I thought it was going to be far better. After all those years I end up with an M10 and manual lenses and don't miss AF at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
otto.f Posted March 15, 2017 Share #13 Posted March 15, 2017 I would indeed warmly welcome a horizon level guide which is suggested in the article Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stephen.w Posted March 15, 2017 Share #14 Posted March 15, 2017 I have never walked around with my M6 on hyper focal hoping and praying I get my shot in focus. With a depth of field scale, you don't have to pray. Zone focussing with wider lenses and/or at narrower apertures is of course a legitimate and time-honoured way of using an M. It certainly doesn't go hand-in-hand with shooting "from the hip". See eg: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramarren Posted March 15, 2017 Share #15 Posted March 15, 2017 I found it truly bizarre. Anyone else? I have never walked around with my M6 on hyper focal hoping and praying I get my shot in focus. I focus the shot. I just want to get a feel for other opinions to check myself against. https://www.dpreview.com/opinion/4118757797/a-german-in-japan-leica-m10-shooting-experience In answer to your question, I see no reason to waste my time reading a DPReview article about the M10 other than for the amusement value. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #16 Posted March 15, 2017 I would indeed warmly welcome a horizon level guide which is suggested in the article Very often one can use the framelines as a substitute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #17 Posted March 15, 2017 However you could say that manual lenses have been obsoleted to a large extent by AF lenses. Thank heavens they have not. I used to have every camera since my M6 years ago with AF, I thought it was going to be far better. After all those years I end up with an M10 and manual lenses and don't miss AF at all. Somebody who has to rely on zone focus does miss AF. I think Leica has replaced the M as a streetshooters' tool. By the Q. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
justj Posted March 15, 2017 Share #18 Posted March 15, 2017 I never bother with focus at all when shooting with ultra wide angle lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted March 15, 2017 Share #19 Posted March 15, 2017 I do. Especially the Summilux 24 needs focusing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshua Lowe Posted March 15, 2017 Share #20 Posted March 15, 2017 This isn't the first time I've been surprised and disappointed by comments on here regarding zone / hyperfocal focusing techniques. It doesn't reflect well on the community. These are techniques that have been used for decades by some of the most highly regarded PJs and street photographers. It's simple math. It's not "hoping and praying." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.