My Astigmatism is making the M10 tough - SL?

[Dr. G]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a dilemma.  I really like the M10 with the APO summicron combination, but I'm having a tough time with the rangefinder due to my astigmatism.  I could get the Walter correction lens, but I'm wondering if moving to the SL is a better choice.  I have the Q on order after shooting with it for a while and also have the RX1R ii.  I like different things about each the Q and the RX.  Keeping them both would put me at around $8K.  For a bit more I could have the SL and grab a prime lens (maybe SL 50mm which would also give me AF) or the 24-90.  Obviously it would give me the EVF vs the RF.  I do shoot a lot in low light and the Sony sensor in the RX is exemplary in this regard.  Any thoughts?  

[LD_50]

I would rent an SL. It’s a very different camera than the M.

[Advertisement]

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

[leica1215]

the only thing is heavier, much heavier. I found SL is so good except weight. the astigmatism you can wear glasses, I have astigmatism as well, i have no problem to use M camera. I like the video capabilities, and AF on SL. 

[andybarton]

You need to correct the astigmatism.

 

If you don't, the viewfinder of any camera won't do it for you.

[Jeff S]

I have been using glasses to correct for distance and astigmatism, and using M cameras, for over 35 years. The M10, with the bigger VF opening, better eye relief and higher magnification than prior digital Ms, accommodates glasses well. Especially with thinner, flexible frames. The only change as my eyes have aged, other than tweaking prescriptions, has been the recent addition of a +.5 diopter.

 

I prefer glasses to the Walter since I need sunglasses in daylight and because I want to be able see the focus patch (set at a virtual distance of 2m) and distant subjects without taking glasses on and off. And the Walter seems awkward.

 

But viewing preferences vary as much as eye conditions. One must experiment and then decide. And eyes should be corrected as needed for proper viewing on any camera, including the SL.

 

Jeff

Edited November 19, 2017 by Jeff S

[HeinzX]

I have changed from the M 240 plus EVF to the SL with the 24/90  mainly  because of my eyes. It is a much heavier camera, but it was the right step for me and has solved my problems.

[otto.f]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If your astigmatism is caused by getting older then you might meet weight as a growing problem after having sold the first with your SL. I have mild astigmatism since 1997 which never bothered me, until recently when I had to start wearing glasses permanently. I use the loupe 1.40 on my M10 for 50+ lenses, which needs an adapter to screw it on the viewfinder, but this is a far better solution than working with the diopters that came out for the M10. I cannot go to heavier cameras because of artrosis in my toe, but apart from that I wouldn’t want that. I’ve had my time with the R8 12 years ago and that was, although a very sympathetic camera in your hands, enough for me to say goodbye to heavy handheld camera’s in a shoulder bag. I even vaguely blame my R8 for this artrosis to come up. For me it’s either handheld and then as light and compact as possible, or tripod and then it’s large format and carrying a backpack. A backpack spreads the weight better for my toes, but I hate it for handheld camera’s.

Edited November 19, 2017 by otto.f

[jaapv]

There is the waltereyepiece, which is said to be the perfect solution for astigmatism.

 

 

http://walterleica.com/#EYEPIECE

[Jeff S]

There is the waltereyepiece, which is said to be the perfect solution for astigmatism.

 

 

http://walterleica.com/#EYEPIECE

The OP mentioned it, and I discussed why it's not perfect for me.

 

Jeff

[thighslapper]

The SL viewfinder brightness, clarity, peaking and magnification all make focussing far easier ..... with or without specs and would definitely help.

 

The camera/lens combo is not awkward or particularly heavy in actual use ...... unless you have major wrist issues.

 

The carrying weight can be negated by avoiding neck straps and opting for something broad over the shoulder and possibly a wrist grip as well ... there are several helpful threads on this. An SL with 24-90 is not a lot heavier than an M, EVF and 3 or 4 equivalent prime lenses, and a lot less messing about ..... plus you have very reliable fast and accurate AF.

[trickness]

Shoot the SL with M glass. It’s not SO much heavier than the M, and it is much easier to get a good result out of it with old eyes because WYSIWYG. The people that complain about the weight difference between an M and the SL are usually picking up the SL with one of its native lenses attached, and of course that feels like a huge difference. Put M glass on it and while it is a slightly heavier, bulkier camera, it really is a joy to use.

[jaapv]

I'm not sure whether any other viewfinder/focusing  system would be  significantlybetter if astigmatism is the problem.

I think the only two solutions are either to adapt the M viewfinder by the Walter diopter or to switch to autofocus. All other attempts at improvement will turn out to be unsatisfactory in the end.

[Jeff S]

Well, glasses provide the best focusing 'system' for me, correcting astigmatism and providing the best opportunity to then consider other pros/cons of various camera viewing systems.

 

Jeff

[sillbeers15]

I have a dilemma.  I really like the M10 with the APO summicron combination, but I'm having a tough time with the rangefinder due to my astigmatism.  I could get the Walter correction lens, but I'm wondering if moving to the SL is a better choice.  I have the Q on order after shooting with it for a while and also have the RX1R ii.  I like different things about each the Q and the RX.  Keeping them both would put me at around $8K.  For a bit more I could have the SL and grab a prime lens (maybe SL 50mm which would also give me AF) or the 24-90.  Obviously it would give me the EVF vs the RF.  I do shoot a lot in low light and the Sony sensor in the RX is exemplary in this regard.  Any thoughts?

In low but visible light situation, the EVF of the SL is superior comparing to M10 with manual focus lenses. It is especially so when the AF is such a breeze on the SL with native lenses. Howveer ther are situation that the reverse is true. The casual snapshot below is taken with the M10, lux 35 with manual off camera flash fired through WLAN. The spot was so dark, I had to fall back on using my mobilephone light to set the focus distance by estimation. The Live View could not show the focus peak highlight of my subject as the environment just do not provide sufficient light for me to focus my M10. There were distance marking on the M lenses which provided me the solution unlike the SL lenses w/o distance marking.

L1000172 by sillbeers15

Edited November 20, 2017 by sillbeers15

[LD_50]

... There were distance marking on the M lenses which provided me the solution unlike the SL lenses w/o distance marking.

Native SL lenses offer distance marking via the illuminated top screen. No distance marking is required.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Everybody,

 

There is a tried & true way to take photos with an M camera, using a 50mm APO Summicron, if a person has astigmatism.

 

Have proper (Not progressive.) glasses made for the astigmatism, etc.

 

Buy an M3

 

Add a "quick load".

 

Best Regards,

 

Michael

[ramarren]

I've never had great performing eyes ... been wearing glasses to correct both astigmatism and myopia since I was in fourth grade. However, I've always been able to focus a Leica M—ANY Leica M—to the accuracy tolerance of its rangefinder. It's not as hard as critically focusing an SLR or EVF equipped TTL camera where you need to evaluate sharpness on a screen of some kind.

 

The major advance made by EVFs is the ability to use magnification as well. That can net even better critical focusing capabilities, once you learn how to see focus with a magnified image.

 

Note: Too much magnification doesn't help, and can get in the way with longer lenses.

Edited November 30, 2017 by ramarren

[MT0227]

Is the issue with your eyes ONLY the astigmatism, or do you have additional near/farsighted corrections?  The Walter eyepiece is certainly one solution...its effectively an eyepiece that is custom made to your prescription, and can be sent back to modify as your prescription changes.  Seems like a reasonable, but costly investment overtime as you prescription changes.  The latter is why I've held off thus far.

 

I have a moderate astigmatism, along with moderate near/farsighted issues.  I typically will use my progressives with both my M's (M10/M6) and my SL; mainly because that is what I wear the majority of the time. I have no issues with 35/50 focal lengths seeing the frame-lines, at 28mm it not really possible.  Using the SL in the same fashion, things become much easier for reasons stated by others (ttl view capability, zoom..etc), the issue which arises here is when you are shooting in very bright conditions.  Light will creep in the EVF if you don't get a good seal.

 

I also have contact lenses which correct my astigmatism and farsighted ability; I then use the appropriate diopter to bring things into focus.  This allows the 28mm frame lines to appear and it provides much better performance in bright conditions with the SL given you can get a proper seal.  

 

As someone said above, eyes should be corrected as needed for proper viewing on any camera.  I'm due for an exam after the holiday's an plan to bring my M10 in order to achieve the best possible solution.  I will probably go with the contact lens + diopter solution as the default and use my progressives only when my contacts are not in my eyes.

[thighslapper]

There was never any clarification from Dr G as to whether his issue was using the camera with specs or without.

 

If he has the correct prescription for his glasses then there should be no problems using ANY viewfinder ...... and if there is it means there must be some other visual issue, such as early cataracts or macular degeneration etc..... which he should seek advice about. The proviso with that statement is that very high corrections may cause problems with the visual axis not being centred exactly when using the VF ...... in which case eye relief and VF size becomes important. 

 

If he uses the camera without specs then there should be little problem with lower grades of astigmatism but higher grades will need correction and a walter eyepiece would help. The brighter EVF on the SL would help generally in difficult conditions, but not specifically with astigmatism.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Dr. G]

Is the issue with your eyes ONLY the astigmatism, or do you have additional near/farsighted corrections?  The Walter eyepiece is certainly one solution...its effectively an eyepiece that is custom made to your prescription, and can be sent back to modify as your prescription changes.  Seems like a reasonable, but costly investment overtime as you prescription changes.  The latter is why I've held off thus far.

 

I have a moderate astigmatism, along with moderate near/farsighted issues.  I typically will use my progressives with both my M's (M10/M6) and my SL; mainly because that is what I wear the majority of the time. I have no issues with 35/50 focal lengths seeing the frame-lines, at 28mm it not really possible.  Using the SL in the same fashion, things become much easier for reasons stated by others (ttl view capability, zoom..etc), the issue which arises here is when you are shooting in very bright conditions.  Light will creep in the EVF if you don't get a good seal.

 

I also have contact lenses which correct my astigmatism and farsighted ability; I then use the appropriate diopter to bring things into focus.  This allows the 28mm frame lines to appear and it provides much better performance in bright conditions with the SL given you can get a proper seal.  

 

As someone said above, eyes should be corrected as needed for proper viewing on any camera.  I'm due for an exam after the holiday's an plan to bring my M10 in order to achieve the best possible solution.  I will probably go with the contact lens + diopter solution as the default and use my progressives only when my contacts are not in my eyes.

 

I had my exam recently and my Rx changed a bit.  I'm getting new glasses tomorrow.  I was able to try out the SL and, for me, it seems like it's a better choice than the M10.  I like the ability to precisely frame and see the focus magnification.  That being said, I was able to pick up a pre-owned APO Summicron-M 50mm for a really good price while I was waiting for ehat I thought would be the M10.  I'm thinking that the APO and the SL will work really well.  I spoke to someone at Leica Miami and they told me that the Summilux-SL 50mm f/1.4 gave them better results on the SL than the APO Summicron-M when used with the SL.  It's a much bigger lens, though, and the plan was to travel with 2 cameras - one being the Q for quick shots and the other (originally) to be the M10 with the APO 50.  I'm sure it wouldn't be tough to sell the APO, but the tradeoff in size and weight with the Summilux-SL is significant.