Why are toes cut off?

[ckchen72]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know there has been a lot of discuusion about frameline accuracy. From my understandig at close distance, it's pretty accurate, and the further away you are more of the image is captured outside of the framelines. Then why is it when I am using my 28, do I notice a lot of feet, toes cut off at the bottom. It's not just me, Costas Manos, and other instructors have noticed this as well.

 

Thanks people still learning,

Calvin

[sean_reid]

There's still a degree of parallax involved with rangefinders and not all 28 mm lenses show exactly the same fields of view. Some are a little narrower and some are a bit wider. So the frame lines will be tighter for some lenses than others.

[Guest tummydoc]

...mainly gangrene secondary to diabetes, and accidents involving mowing one's lawn whilst barefoot; and in far lesser proportion, 3rd-degree burns and frostbite

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Interesting but this happened when I first started with RF. I guess my issue was without realizing it i was aiming up more than i thought and peoples heads were in the middle of the frame instead of towards the top ergo feet cut off. It just took a little time to get that correct in my head but all is well now. For me it was a visual thing that i straightened out

[charlesphoto99]

This happens a lot with RF newbies (it did me many moons ago when I got my first M6). Problem is forgetting to recompose after focusing. One automatically goes for the face to focus the rangefinder patch and without re-framing that leaves the subjects head smack in the middle of the frame.

 

So with Leica it's always focus and then frame, focus and frame, focus and frame. One gets quite quick at this after a while.

[Shootist]

Excuse me but I don't think that is what the Op is talking about, IE using the face as focus point and not re-composing.

 

I have noticed that with several lenses not only are the frame lines inaccurate, but they are one sided at certain focusing distances, IE the parallax adjustment is off AT certain distances.

As in this image.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

I focused on the face of the doll, re-composed to include ALL of the chair and ALL of the doll, including the feet, INSIDE the frame lines for the 75mm lens I was using.

As you can see the chair is cut off on the left and the feet are cut off on the bottom. Since this was taken in portrait orientation that means the top and left frame lines are outside what the actual lens & sensor capture for this focusing distance, which was about 3-4 feet.

So not only are the frame lines inaccurate for overall amount they are also off of center for certaion lenses at certain focusing distances.

[ckchen72]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, I agree with the last post. While I have yet to do formal tests, I feel like when I have shot with the 28 sunmicron, the bottom right of the frame seems to cut off some of the picture (like feet) that originally seemed to be in the framelines.

[Jamie Roberts]

Yes, I've noticed a similar effect as well, though I always put it down to user error and parallax. I purposely (well, when I remember) shave the top of the frame now and it seems to work better.

[carstenw]

Hmm, this goes against what I have seen in my tests in the "Frameline Accuracy Comparison" thread. Would you of you footchoppers be willing to set up something at 1m, 2m, 10m and infinity, and carefully note where the frames are. Perhaps there is actually some slop in the adjustment of the frames within each M8. That would be sad.

[Shootist]

Hmm, this goes against what I have seen in my tests in the "Frameline Accuracy Comparison" thread. Would you of you footchoppers be willing to set up something at 1m, 2m, 10m and infinity, and carefully note where the frames are. Perhaps there is actually some slop in the adjustment of the frames within each M8. That would be sad.

 

 

Carsten I actually started to after I saw/read your other thread. But after setting up outside it was just TO HOT here in Atlanta, even in the shade. So I'm back in the AC for the rest of the day. Maybe tomorrow morning.

[carstenw]

Well, you could do 1m and 2m indoors, if you felt like it

[ckchen72]

Thanks for the replies. I'm going to have to look for a tape measure and such

[Iron Flatline]

That's why I chimp - I don't trust the framelines (or my ability to use them) so I like to shoot a little wider, and also check to see what I actually shot.

[erl]

Well, I have just finished shooting 2000+ images over the 2 days just gone and I am appalled at the innacuracy of the M8 framelines. I am NOT innexperienced as a an M shooter. Been shooting 3 M's (analog) for quite a few years professionally. I was shooting two separate concert rehearsals and performances which required me to work reasonably smartly, which I am used to doing. The number of cut-offs of body parts and instrument parts was terrifying. I was forced to constantly chimp and re-shoot (when possible) which is very obstructive to a smooth work flow. Because I was changing lenses a lot and varying vertcal and horizontal format, I had no absolute measure of when the trouble was most prevalent, but it bodes ill for next weeks shoot which will not allow the luxury of shimp & re-shoot. I am beginning to doubt the useability of the M8 when coupled with other problems that are surfacing, such as back focussing.

 

The only way I can operate at present is to 'compensate' focus each time I focus, varying the amount depending on which lens and aperture used. What a joke!

 

I have tried (at my dealer) 4 different bodies, and they ALL backfocus seriously. He offered me a loaner, all of which proved to be worse than mine! It seems mine needs to go back to Germany (again!) for RF adjustment. I would buy:eek: another body to tide me over the 2 months or more without it, but I fear the same problem in the new body.

 

Apologies for the rant, but it has been a hard week.

[carstenw]

Erl, with respect to the backfocus, what have you tried so far? Living so far from Europe, I would strongly recommend that you do some very careful testing not only of your body but also of your lenses, and I would also suggest that you learn how to tune the rangefinder yourself. A simple bump can put it off, and with a wait of weeks, it seriously affects your photography.

[dorman]

The parallax correction only works for objects in the plane of focus. Anything in front or behind the plane of focus will appear to be shifted in the viewfinder compared to what the lens sees.

If you need accurate framing, particularly on close objects with depth, you need an SLR

[Guest stnami]

A vicious gang of Rangefinder film extortionists, headed by someone known as ' McVic the Butcher' using Raelene as a decoy is preying on the M8 user group, using bolt cutters to hack off their fingers and toes in order to persuade them to return to film........... :D

[erl]

Erl, with respect to the backfocus, what have you tried so far? Living so far from Europe, I would strongly recommend that you do some very careful testing not only of your body but also of your lenses, and I would also suggest that you learn how to tune the rangefinder yourself. A simple bump can put it off, and with a wait of weeks, it seriously affects your photography.

 

Carsten, I have spent a whole 5 hrs testing the body with a range of seven lenses. I also (previously stated) tested on other M8 bodies. I tested on a marked "picket fence" style railing round one of my balconies AND extended the testing to 30mtrs using defined objects.

 

The key offender is the Noctilux @ f1.0, followed by the 90 Cron @ f2.0. These are key players in my pack. They are 'out' to varying degrees on all bodies tested, BUT are OK on my three M analog bodies. The Noct has just returned from Germany after being sent for backfocus correction & 6 bit coding. I now believe the backfocus was the body, not the lens. Focussed at 5mtr, the Noct on the M8 backfocusses about 1mtr!

 

I will seriously consider your suggestion of learning to adjust the RF myself, for the reason you quote, despite the fact that it will probably void my warranty. Trouble is, I understand it is very limited what we 'users' can adjust on the RF. I am arranging an 'informal' discussion with a local technician who may be prepared to undertake the work because he has the equipment. The ensuing week will tell.

[erl]

The parallax correction only works for objects in the plane of focus. Anything in front or behind the plane of focus will appear to be shifted in the viewfinder compared to what the lens sees.

If you need accurate framing, particularly on close objects with depth, you need an SLR

 

Geoff, You are correct, but what I am experiencing is far worse than that sort of error. As I said above, I am no stranger to using RF cameras and know (I thought) when to expect some error and how much, more or less. The M8 is definitely worse in this respect than the M6 or M7 which are both manageable.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[xrogers]

I've also noted the framelines tend to be loose toward the camera top, and tight on the bottom. I treat the bottom line as gospel and the top as a loose suggestion, but like Jamie, don't always remember to get it right.

 

--clyde