Jump to content
shirubadanieru

Sonnar 50mm f1.5 focus shift noticeable on film?

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi everyone, I was wondering if anyone has used the Sonnar 50mm f1.5 on a M film body and can tell me if the focus shift is noticeable? 
I used to have this lens and loved it's small size and bokeh, but the focus shift on my digital M was too much so I decided to sell it.

Thanks in advance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The focus shift will be identical on film. However, as film is less focus-sensitive, due to its inherent thickness, it will be less noticeable, but still present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been using the lens on my M7 for a number of years - can't say that I have noticed any focus-shift.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regards to the modern Zeiss Zm 50mm f1.5 Sonnar, it depends both on when in production the lens was adjusted as well if the owner of the lens sent it in for recalibration of their choosing.  Apparently Zeiss early on adjusted focus for f2.8 .  Therefore the lens would front focus at f1.5 and back focus at f4.  By f5.6 and beyond, the depth of field would generally cover the back focus.  I believe it wasn't changed to adjusting the lens at f1.5 (although Zeiss may have implemented this, but many sent in their lens to precisely have that done and Zeiss welcomed those that wanted this optimization done at f1.5.  The most recent change going back a few years, is Zeiss compromised and adjusted focus for approx. f2 .  In my opinion, this worked best.  There is a small amount of front focus at f1.5, especially at shot subject distances and a smidgen of back focus at f2.8 but at both f1.5 and f2.8 with this latest adjustment for focus at f2, for most intents, its hardly noticeable.  I confirmed this with my own extensive testing of such a lens.  Others who have more recent lenses also confirmed this as well as did Zeiss.  My findings were done strictly on M digital as Jaap suggested, with film's thickness, it should mask even this small amount of front/back focus.

 

Dave (D&A)

Edited by DandA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just my input. I know what focus shift are but it must have to do with my work flow that I've not thought about that at all. Just take the picture with the aperture you think is best then focus. I can't understand how it's a problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 @dickgillberg with all lenses that I use, I just shoot without thinking about any technicalities such as focus shift, but that's because all other lenses that I own this is not an issue so I never really think about it, but this lens does clearly have a focus shift issue (at least in digital), but given that I love its rendering and shoot film mostly nowadays, I've been thinking if I should buy it again. 

Thanks for everyone input so far, really appreciate it! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

All of the RF type Sonnar lenses from the 1930's onwards also have distinct curvature of the focus field, which it is very easy to mistake for aperture shift, which although present, is less apparent than field curvature on the 50 Sonnars. I sold my 50 Summilux ASPH, as I  did not like its over-clinical rendering, purple fringing on digital due to high edge contrast and extreme sharpness of the focus tab, which together with an extremely stiff focus ring, literally made focussing a painful process (the next owner, also a forum member gave up on it as well for this reason). I then bought a 50mm ZM Sonnar, as I quite liked using my father's 1954 50/1.5 Opton-Sonnar on a Amedeo Muscelli Contax to M adapter ring, apart from the "wrong way round"  focusing. What you will excuse, as a charming feature on vintage lenses, which I  use quite a lot, can be just a plain irritation on a modern lens and that is what I found with the modern Sonnar. It was just too left field for an everyday lens. Oddly I have replaced it with another slightly left field lens, a 1999 year Summilux III 50/1.4 Special Edition LTM (used with its supplied LTM to M ring or on digital Leicas with 6 bit detectors, a coded Rayqual LTM to M ring). This lens does aperture shift a bit but as long as you have it shimmed to have a tiny bit of front focus at 2m and f1,4, the aperture shift is within the Dof of at least film. To my eyes it renders beautifully and I suppose this would apply to all of the e46 versions of the 50 Summilux III. I suspect the aperture shift would be more of a problem on the 47MP sensor of the SL2, with a much smaller CoC than the usual figure of 0.029mm for high resolution 35mm film like Ilford Ortho 80. 

Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dickgillberg said:

Just my input. I know what focus shift are but it must have to do with my work flow that I've not thought about that at all. Just take the picture with the aperture you think is best then focus. I can't understand how it's a problem.

Unfortunately, that's not how it works when using a rangefinder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The other thing to remember when folks are discussing back and front focus, this refers to the location of the sharpest image inside the camera relative to the imaging medium and not the object being taken. 

Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dickgillberg said:

Just my input. I know what focus shift are but it must have to do with my work flow that I've not thought about that at all. Just take the picture with the aperture you think is best then focus. I can't understand how it's a problem.

That is only correct if you focus through the lens with working aperture.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jaapv said:

That is only correct if you focus through the lens with working aperture.

Ok, thanks. Then I’m confused and I might got the hole thing wrong. Do you mean that you can’t focus a lens properly that has some kind of focus shift with a rangefinder? Not even at a choosen aperture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dickgillberg said:

Ok, thanks. Then I’m confused and I might got the hole thing wrong. Do you mean that you can’t focus a lens properly that has some kind of focus shift with a rangefinder? Not even at a choosen aperture?

Correct. That is why the f1 Noctilux is basically a "one trick pony" to take very shallow DOF shots, unless you carry a focus correction table with you. That is the reason some lenses with extreme aperture shift work better on cameras with liveview, like the M240. 

Wilson

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

....I then bought a 50mm ZM Sonnar, as I quite liked using my father's 1954 50/1.5 Opton-Sonnar on a Amedeo Muscelli Contax to M adapter ring, apart from the "wrong way round"  focusing. What you will excuse, as a charming feature on vintage lenses, which I  use quite a lot, can be just a plain irritation on a modern lens and that is what I found with the modern Sonnar.

I don't understand what you mean here about 'wrong way round focussing'. Surely the modern ZM Sonnar focusses in the standard way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, dickgillberg said:

Do you mean that you can’t focus a lens properly that has some kind of focus shift with a rangefinder? Not even at a choosen aperture?

Grossly speaking that is correct. The camera RF mechanism has no way of knowing what lens is mounted or whether it has focus shift and how much at what aperture. The RF has to assume that all lenses focus correctly at all apertures.

However, as mentioned above, a given lens with focus shift can have its connection to the camera (the focus cam) factory-adjusted for correct focus at a specific aperture.

And focus shift varies in amount from lens design to lens design - it is present in a Zeiss 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar, but not the same as the shift in a Voiglander 35 f/1.4 Nokton.

As to adjustment, one can have that set for a given aperture one uses a lot (say, f/1.5) or for a compromise location (say, f/2, with minor shifts at f/1.5 and f/2.8). And always remember that at some aperture the focus shift goes away anyway, since the defocused rays from the outer edge of the glass (spherical aberration) are cut off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sinjun said:

I don't understand what you mean here about 'wrong way round focussing'. Surely the modern ZM Sonnar focusses in the standard way.

Read wlaidlaw's sentence this way:

Quote

"I quite liked using my father's 1954 50/1.5 Opton-Sonnar on a Amedeo Muscelli Contax to M adapter ring, apart from the "wrong way round"  focusing."

It is the 1954 lens for Contax mount that has the "wrong-way round" focusing. Not the modern Sonnar.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But his next sentence implies the same thing applies to the ZM Sonnar.

2 hours ago, wlaidlaw said:

...What you will excuse, as a charming feature on vintage lenses, which I  use quite a lot, can be just a plain irritation on a modern lens and that is what I found with the modern Sonnar. It was just too left field for an everyday lens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, dickgillberg said:

Ok, thanks. Then I’m confused and I might got the hole thing wrong. Do you mean that you can’t focus a lens properly that has some kind of focus shift with a rangefinder? Not even at a choosen aperture?

Correct. The camera does not look through the lens to focus. Thus the lens setting of the aperture cannot influence the focusing. Normally such a lens will focus correctly at the aperture that it is adjusted to. All other apertures will misfocus to a certain extent, but at smaller apertures DOF will hide the effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, sinjun said:

I don't understand what you mean here about 'wrong way round focussing'. Surely the modern ZM Sonnar focusses in the standard way.

Yes but older Contax mount Sonnars focus the other way infinity to near focus compared with Leica lenses. The Amedeo Muscelli adapters for Contax RF to Leica M, copy the focus direction of Contax RF cameras. I have my father's Contax IIA Colour Dial Camera with the 50/1.5 Opton Sonnar, which he bought on a business trip to Germany in I think 1954 or 55. He could never get used to the "wrong way round" focus either, being like me a dyed in the wool Leica RF user, so the camera is basically unused. When I  had a CLA done a few years ago on the Contax, the repairer said it was just like it had come out of the Stuttgart factory yesterday. 

Wilson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are two types of Amedeo adapters for either Contax or Nikon: the original version indeed focuses in the "wrong way", whereas the helical of the most recent version for 50mm lenses turns in the "right (Leica) direction". The "recent" version has been available for at least a couple of years now and also has a focus tab.

I'm not affiliated with Amedeo, but he's a great guy, - who has now moved to the US,  but manages to keep making adapters in his Venezuelan workshop despite the situation his home country finds itself in - so here's a link:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Zeiss-Contax-Sonnar-50mm-rangefinder-to-Leica-M-M9-M240-adapter/133226303286?hash=item1f04e80f36:g:yVgAAOSwP~tW3VtL

Time to put that Opton Sonnar to good use perhaps ūüėČ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ecar said:

There are two types of Amedeo adapters for either Contax or Nikon: the original version indeed focuses in the "wrong way", whereas the helical of the most recent version for 50mm lenses turns in the "right (Leica) direction". The "recent" version has been available for at least a couple of years now and also has a focus tab.

I'm not affiliated with Amedeo, but he's a great guy, - who has now moved to the US,  but manages to keep making adapters in his Venezuelan workshop despite the situation his home country finds itself in - so here's a link:

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Zeiss-Contax-Sonnar-50mm-rangefinder-to-Leica-M-M9-M240-adapter/133226303286?hash=item1f04e80f36:g:yVgAAOSwP~tW3VtL

Time to put that Opton Sonnar to good use perhaps ūüėČ?

Mine was I think the first M mount adapter Amedeo made, quite a long time ago, his earlier ones being LTM. I have so many classic and modern Leica lenses in 50mm, LTM, M, R and L, that I really don't need to rob my Contax IIa of its lens. I also have a very nice 1953 LTM Canon Serenar "Hiroshi" Sonnar clone 5cm/f1.8, the all chrome one with the infinity lock, that I think is at least as good as my 1950's Leica offerings and has the advantage of hard coating, so there is not a mark on the front element. I bought it for a Leotax, which I acquired, as it came with three of the superb Leotax spring loaded wind on spools. I am using two of these in my IIIa and Reid and Sigrist Model 3 Mk.2 (a IIIb clone). They are so much easier to use than the Leica spools - no more broken finger nails! I was going to sell on the Leotax which in total cost me less than the two spare and much sought-after Leotax spools would have cost but it was so nice, I decided to keep it. 

Wilson

Edited by wlaidlaw

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Similar Content

    • By Anigrapher
      Hallo werte Leica-Forumsteilnehmer,
      vor gut einem Jahr hatte ich mich wegen eines Belichtungsproblems meiner R4 hier im Leica-Forum bereits zu Wort gemeldet (und weiss nun endlich auch, dass der kleine Elektromagnet, der die Springblende im rechten Moment stoppen soll, defekt ist. Alle bisherigen Reparaturangebote √ľberstiegen aber bei weitem den Wert der Kamera, so dass ich mir als "vorl√§ufigen" Ersatz f√ľr mein R-System eine zweite R5 zugelegt habe, die auch gl√ľcklicherweise tadellos funktioniert...).
      Ich möchte Heute aber ein anderes Thema ansprechen, welches mir schon seit einiger Zeit sprichwörtlich "unter den Fingernägeln brennt": Findet ihr auch, dass innerhalb von nur gut ein bis zwei Jahren das Preisniveau der Analogfotografie exorbitant gestiegen ist???
      Klar, dass das fast schon unterirdische Preisniveau f√ľr alte Kameras, Filme, Entwickler & Entwicklungslabore von vor gut zehn Jahren l√§ngst Geschichte ist, nie mehr wiederkehren wird und sicherlich auch dem Fortbestand der filmbasierten Fotografie nicht unbedingt f√∂rderlich war. Nischeninteressen k√∂nnen durchaus kostspielig sein, und dazu geh√∂rt klassisches Fotografieren auf Film ja inzwischen eindeutig. Aber was jetzt gerade abgeht - ganz ohne Corona-Krise - ist nun wirklich teils schon absurd! Da werden etwa f√ľr uralte, abgelaufene 135er-Diafilme wie Agfa Precisa oder Kodak Elitechrome teilweise reinste Wucherpreise verlangt. Hier mal ein Beispiel aus dem bekannten Online-Auktionskaufhaus:¬† https://www.ebay.de/itm/Fur-Sammler-1x-Agfa-Agfaphoto-Precisa-CT-100-36-Diafilm-Ablaufdatum-2014-12/223921237768?hash=item3422beef08:g:-OAAAOSwvRJeTrdi Aha, f√ľr Sammler also - ernsthaft?! Es gibt wirklich schon Leute, die jetzt unbedingt noch mal einen erst vor kurzem ausgelisteten Drogeriemarkt-Diafilm verknipsen wollen und bereit sind, derartige Wucherpreise zu berappen??? Bei den gebrauchten Kameras sieht es nicht besser aus. Auch hier meint wohl mittlerweile jeder windige, Opas Keller ausr√§umende Erbschaftler irgendeiner banalen Durchschnitts-Spiegelreflex, er habe das gro√üe Los gezogen und m√ľsste hinsichtlich des aufgerufenen Verkaufspreises nun einen auf Fachh√§ndler machen. Kam mir jedenfalls so vor, als ich unl√§ngst eine Kamera f√ľr eine fotografierende Freundin aussuchen durfte, die nicht allzu teuer sein und einen PK-Anschluss haben sollte. Also mal bei Ebay-Kleinanzeigen nach alten Ricohs umgesehen, weil diese entsprechend eigener Erfahrung einfach, gut und robust sind. Doch dann kam tats√§chlich nur sowas hier bei rum: https://www.ebay-kleinanzeigen.de/s-anzeige/ricoh-xr-10-mit-zubehoer/1332175555-245-4619 Die gleiche Kamera - ich w√ľrde sie als ganz gut ausgestattetes Einsteigerger√§t bezeichnen - habe ich noch mit einem deutlich besseren 50er-P-Rikenon vor drei Jahren f√ľr sage und schreibe 15 Euro bei einem Fachh√§ndler (!) als W√ľhltischfund erworben. Sie funktioniert √ľbrigens ganz ausgezeichnet, was ich von den genannten Privatangeboten eher nicht erwarten w√ľrde... Ich bin wohl nicht der Einzige, dem dieses aktuelle Wucherpreisniveau auf dem Gebrauchtmarkt aufgefallen ist, auch der von mir sehr gesch√§tzte Foto-Youtuber Steffen Sch√ľngel hat dies unl√§ngst thematisiert: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YN1hXQmbaNA
      Was meint ihr, findet ihr auch, dass die derzeit stark steigende Preisspirale im Endeffekt zu einer weiteren Abnahme an Filmfotografie-Interessierten - inzwischen soll das "Jammertal" ja schon durchschritten sein und wieder mehr auf Film fotografiert werden - und damit irgendwann zu einem selbst f√ľr den geneigten Leica-Nutzer kaum noch bezahlbaren Vergn√ľgen werden k√∂nnte? Die verschiedenen Meinungen hierzu w√ľrden mich mal interessieren.
       
      Gr√ľ√üe an alle Leica-Fans,
      Anigrapher
    • By Al Brown
      Please share your opinion - if you have used or owned both lenses or any opinion on the topic. Mostly interested in comparison of render, sharpness, bokeh, pop etc. according to you - digital sensor or film.

      Early reports indicated the Hexanons were inferior. According to LHSA "some Hexanon early samples were reported to have focusing discrepancies, long since resolved, and that adversely affected initial sales. The current consensus: Konica KM and Leica M lenses, even those with longer focal lengths and wider apertures, can be used interchangeably on both cameras without problems." Lots of posts ot the tiny flange difference between the cameras, but here we discuss the lens.

      Mr. Rockwell even went as far as comparing the build of Summicron 50 (V) to the Hexanon-M 50 side by side and they indeed look almost identical. Check the pic on his webpage under the Hexanon topic.
      I have recently acquired a Hexanon-M 50/2 (photographed below on my M) and it is a stellar performer, slightly better wide open (especially corners) compared to Summicron M 50/2 (IV) in all the tests I did.
      YMMV.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By gwpics
      Life is pretty quiet photographically for me at the moment, mostly due to really bad weather with heavy rain which makes street photography almost impossible. This means I am continuing my journey through my archives, and this I had forgotten. It shows a typical English pastime - playing bowls. The white clothes are the standard dress for everyone, and afternoon tea is almost compulsory. English tradition at its best.
      Leica M3 + 50mm Summicron f2. Ilford 400 Delta. 1997.

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By Kanykei
      Hi there
      Can anybody please explain what these numbers mean on the rear coma adjustment ring on Miyazaki lens
      Specifically what happens on these?:
      -- infinity 
      -- 5
      -- 3
      -- 2
      -- 1
       
      Thank you in advance! 

      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
      Hello guest! Please register or sign in to view the hidden content. Hallo Gast! Du willst die Bilder sehen? Einfach registrieren oder anmelden!
    • By ashley12234
      Hello everyone!
      I'm new to the leica film cameras but I came up a rather very nice iiif in great condition which comes with a summarit 50mm f1.5 going for about $550. This sounded like a pretty good deal to me, however, upon closer inspection the lens seemed to have a lot of haze (not sure about fungus) as when I performed the light test there were specks everywhere. It seemed to be internal and in the second glass?? Not sure how to fix it or if I even can, also the focus ring was pretty stiff (but that isn't a deal breaker or anything). Like I said, the body of the camera was in very good condition however the lens is my biggest concern. As most of you are owners/experts and such please help me out and let me know if this is a good deal or not. 
      Thanks, Ashley
  • Recently Browsing ¬†¬†0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

√ó
√ó
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy