Q2: Faulty distance scale makes zone focusing more difficult.

[Dave in Wales]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm sorry Mr Moderator, as a very new Q2 owner, just one week, IMVHO you are talking a load of rubbish.......IF IT'S THERE IT SHOULD WORK.....regardless of whether it's used or not.

So what is it then, just another Leica idiosyncrasy that we have to put up with.....just because it's a Leica.

I have never used zone focusing, well I may have done back in the 1960's, and wasn't intending to use it now.......BUT IT SHOUD WORK.

My car is German as well, it's automatic with manual override....never use it......BUT IT WORKS.

I'm loving my purchase, will it put me off......NO.

I can't reach the Directional Pad either without serious movement of my whole hand.....so what......it's a Leica, an ergonomic disaster.....just put up with it.

I've just come from Olympus M4/3....ergonomically superb....IMVHO.

Any regrets....NONE....those Leica images are something else.

OH...BTW, Im sitting waiting for the delivery of a decent hood/cap to replace the disasters that came fitted, why not a round hood with a pinch cap.

The cap is something else, €30 for a replacement, rip-off of the century, the velvet is already started to peel, just after one week......Ho-Hum.

BTW the hood/cap I'm waiting for is ........Hoage LH-LQ

But who cares it's a Leica.....Ho-Hum.

Edited January 28, 2022 by Dave in Wales

[Razvan M]

1 hour ago, jaapv said:

Quite common in a discussion, I never had a problem with opposing opinions. It is not unusual on camera forums to discuss ways of operating a camera, personally this forum taught me a lot.  However, I can understand that one likes a feature to work properly - it appears that the jury is out on this one. The next question, what does working properly mean? Is it intended as a rough guide or as a precision tool?  On many EVF cameras I find the distance scale more of a toy than a useful tool, one nearly always has to fall back on other focus tools for critical focus. Leica appears to be no exception.

What puzzles me is the fact that the issue is with the lens and the markings on it, which should be working properly being more... analog/mechanic let's say. If it was a focus by wire only lens, I would've easily understand the issue and it could've been fixed by some firmware update. This is an inconsistency between the markings on the lens and the position of the elements in it.. as in where the focus actually is. For a manually assembled camera it's beyond my understanding how no one at Leica caught this issue. IMO, on the Q2 it has nothing to do with the sensor or the EVF, although it might be the case for other camera brands.

[jaapv]

Focus is by wire so it should be fixable by firmware. 

[SoCalLeicanator]

Also, what's up that it goes from 2m to infinity?  Where 3 5 an 10?

[hdmesa]

AF lenses don't have a mechanical hard stop at infinity. Infinity focus position changes depending on temperature, so the DOF markers on the Q lens will never be as accurate as an M lens. And at 47mp, variances in infinity focus are going to have a much bigger impact at 1:1 than they do at 24mp.

Fujifilm has a great way of dealing with DOF scales in the digital age. On the GFX, I can show a digital scale at the bottom of the screen with a moving bar that shows how DOF is changing as I focus. But here's the kicker – they offer two options for DOF scales: digital and analog. Analog emulates the DOF we were used to getting in film days. Digital is a much more conservative standard, and the bar showing the DOF in digital mode is up to half as narrow as it is in Analog mode.

General wisdom when adapting manual focus lenses to digital has been to look at the DOF scale and adjust your thinking for digital. For 50-100mp cameras:

• If shooting at f/16, use the lens markings for f/8
• If shooting at f/8, use the lens markings for f/4

There is a reason there are no DOF markers on the SL lenses, and I don't think Leica should have put them on the Q, either.

[robnyc1]

Having a killer AF system doesn't change the fact that the zone focus markings are inaccurate on the lens. For a $5K camera this a clumsy detail to mess up

[david strachan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm not sure DOF scales have much relevance nowadays with digital zooming and digipeeking...there will always be complaints about what's in or out of focus.

 

Have to just shoot enough to find your own numbers, and f-stop.

...

[Life By Stills]

I use my Q2 in both AF and MF. When I use MF I like to be able to do both precision focusing and zone focusing, situation depending. I haven't tried zone focusing yet on my Q2 but will test it out for sure now.

I can however tell you that the infinite marker seems to be accurate on my Q2. I had manually set it to the infinite marker to do a some northern lights photography recently, and it was accurate in terms of infinity marker being the point when stars in the night sky looked most in focus to my Q2.

But I'll certainly see if I can test out some zone focusing now! And intrigued!!!

[viramati]

I agree that leica should be able to get this right on such an expensive camera and I have the feeling that my original Q used to be more accurate but could be wrong.. I don't think it is something that could be adjusted in firmware but again I could be wrong but I really think that Leica should try to calibrate it better. I have though learn't after a bit of trial and error where I need to place the ring in MF to get the zone focussing I need especially for landscape work. 

[Pelu2010]

I just checked it with my feet (☺️😉)

My camera seems to measure correctly. 

Maybe it’s more a thing to get used to the distance with the new camera. 
If you are good at zone focusing than maybe by practicing you will narrow it down. Maybe the difference between sharp and I sharp are higher on the q2.