Leica M focusing and "street photography"

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When I returned from a ten day trip a few days ago, where I exclusively used my M10, I decided to get out my Fuji X100f and get re-acquainted.  Compared to the Leica, the Fuji felt so strange in my hands, but after reading some reviews (mostly from Ken Rockwell) the Fuji started to once again become part of me.  Last night I wanted to do some more reading about this, which led me here:  https://www.35mmc.com/07/01/2020/fujifilm-x100f-analog-rangefinder/  ....which explained how to use the Fuji as if it was simply an old fashioned rangefinder camera, or in my case, my M cameras.

The article described how Leica lenses with the large "tab" can be used efficiently - just remember where the "tab" needs to be to set the focus, which is much faster than what I've been doing, glancing at the focusing scale on the lens, or just guessing.  For my 35mm Summilux, maybe this is a trick that all of you already know from ages ago, but it was news to me.  All I need to do to know the focus setting is to check where the "tab" is, which I can do by feel.

Of course the Fuji doesn't have any such "tab" that can give this kind of information, let alone the fact that the Fuji's focusing ring is electronic and  turns endlessly, with no "beginning" or "end".  This is more like my using my old 50 Summicron, where I would move the focusing ring to the stop at infinity, then move it back to where I guessed the proper focus setting might be.

The article then led me here https://www.lenstab.com  where they sell different size rubber rings, with a tab, that can go over the focusing ring and behave like the tab on my old 35mm Summilux.  They are reasonably priced, and while the article explains how to use it on the Fuji, it should work just as well on my old 50mm Summicron.

Before I buy one of these, I was wondering what the rest of you use for fast focusing using M lenses that don't have a "tab".

 

The article had lots of information on the Fuji X100 cameras, which I somewhat disagree with.  The author wishes Fuji had kept the camera more "simple", and not provided so many additional things that it can now do.  For my way of thinking, I can just ignore those additional functions, and only use the controls and features I care about (which might be very different from what others care about).  As I see it, the Fuji does most of what enjoy about my M, but if you accept Ken Rockwell's point of view, the Fuji X100 goes beyond what an M can do.  https://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/x100f.htm  I've owned the Fuji X100, X100S, and the X100F which I now have.  The newest X100V I'm less excited about - it shifts a lot of things to a "touch screen", while I've been struggling to turn off image viewing all together, even (especially?) on my M.  If I was wealthy, I'd probably buy an analog M without the viewing screen.  (Ken's point about the X100 is that it does so many things to automatically give you the best possible image, firing the flash when needed, focusing on a person's eye automatically, and a lot more.   Personally, I prefer the Fuji - I can even see the image I just captured in the viewfinder window for long enough to know it I got what I wanted.  With the Leica M, I get no such feedback unless I use the viewing screen to "chimp" which I'm trying NOT to do.

 

Back to this post.  Now that I've learned how to use the "tab" for estimating the focus, I'm wondering if this would help with m 50mm lenses - do new Leica lenses even come with a 'tab' for focusing?  It all has to do with speed, and for "street photography", autofocus isn't as fast or accurate as manual focusing with a "tab".

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!

[250swb]

If this is about speed in street photography the speedsters don't focus, they set their camera for the hypercocal distance and use a mid scale f/stop such as f/8.

[Advertisement]

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

[earleygallery]

Another option is to pre focus on an object that is close to where your subject/s will be (i.e. if you are looking to photograph people walking past you can focus on a paving slab or bollard etc.).

[caloosajo]

For street photography, I subscribe to hyperfocal or zone focusing with a 28 or 35 (film & digital). But in answer to the tab-less 50mm, I’ve learned to prefocus with my black chrome 50 Lux with pretty good success, not as fast as the above methods but my focusing accuracy has grown tremendously with some intentional practice. 
 

Maybe this is a good opportunity to re-commit to learning your 50 Cron more intimately. Aside from a Thumbs Up on my digital Ms, I’ve shied away from too many add-ons, and I’d be wary of any third party accessories for your M lenses.

[JonPB]

Pre-focus with or without a tab is just like setting manual exposure: anticipate your subject, take a measurement on a suitable proxy, and go find a photo. For example, when I cross into or out of direct sunlight, I'm adjusting exposure. Similarly, I might read focus for subjects on the other side of the street, make a mental note of the focus position, and keep it there until I see something more specific; then I might see a crowded restaurant entrance and focus on that, then slowly pull focus as I approach, then revert to the across-the-street distance after passing by.

I do prefer tabs, though. When I'm shooting regularly -- not the past 18 months -- I find the lens is sometimes focused without any conscious action on my part before the viewfinder reaches my eye. Because I normally shoot tabbed lenses wider than 50, I'd strongly prefer a tabbed 50; fortunately, this group includes some splendid options, such as the Summilux Asph and Summarit 2.4 or 2.5. If I had a non-tabbed Summicron, I'd most likely buy or make something like that "taab" thingajiggy. But 50 and longer definitely require more precision than a 35, and a knurled ring gripped with fingertips is about the most precise human-machine interface, so there's good reason that tabs aren't ubiquitous. (For precision, I grip the tab between thumb and forefinger.) For precision while shooting street, well, (a) feel free to try but don't expect much and (b) continuously watch for good targets to focus on because chances are your subject won't be an ideal focusing pattern ... and because good focus targets have high contrast edges, which in turn are great for image composition.

[Editorial comment: here begins a rant. My apologies for taking tangents which are already familiar to folks here. I'm planning to sit on a grand jury for a month so I've wound down most of my projects and my stir-craziness is manifesting in writing about photography and associated gear.]

If the Fuji meets your needs -- your methods and priorities -- keep using it. Better photographers make better photos, and using the same gear consistently and repeatedly allows the technical stuff to become automatic so that you can focus on becoming a better photographer. Fuji makes some splendid tools; they won't hold you back unless you're trying to do something they're not good at, and they're good at a very wide range of things. For instance, I set my Fuji to manual focus but use a focus-lock button to trigger an AF cycle instead of twisting the focus ring.

Conversely, Leica M is good at a very narrow range of things. Within that range, they're amazing; even borderline near the edge of that range, though, they can be quite maddening. The way I prefer to shoot is squarely centered within the M wheelhouse. I think of it like a well-trained but energetic dog: mention a command and the job is done before you know it, but say nothing and you'll start finding bits of your stuff shredded and ripped.

To my mind, chimping is antithetical to street shooting. Reviewing means looking at what's already happened, which breaks the flow/mindfulness I need to shoot productively. Chimping can also be a safety issue for me because I wander into traffic.* If I get something wrong, then I got it wrong, no big deal; but if I investigate whether I got something wrong or whether I could have done it better, then I'm in an analytical/editorial headspace, not the perceptive/creative mindset that I cultivate. Actually, if I get something wrong, that's wonderful. Mistakes are fantastic because they give me a clear, distinct opportunity to learn. If I make the same mistake multiple times in an outing, so much the better. Then, in the leisure of my home or hotel, I can study the mistake, find a tentative solution; then I can practice that method, and if it works, develop it into a habit so that I unconsciously avoid that problem in the future.

Mistakes are beautiful things. Make them. Make them hard enough that you'll learn from them, make them fast enough that you'll move on quickly. Don't try to avoid them. Instead, figure out what you want, figure out how to achieve that, then set it up so that'll happen when you next press the shutter.

I don't want an M-D, though. Having the opportunity to chimp is amazing. Tricky exposure can be nailed down very quickly with a histogram...but that's not image review, that's anticipating what sort of light I'll want to capture in the present environment. On the other hand, when I know something's off, I can stop shooting and practice and learn in that exact environment. Then, auto-review on every shot provides instant feedback: did I use that technique successfully? But I'm honest with myself: at that time, I'm no longer a photographer but a student; I ignore opportunities but seek practice drills.

Otherwise... well, if you absolutely, positively must get this shot, then bracketing and bursting is far faster and more reliable than chimping, considering, modifying, and re-shooting. Chimping is like working in a minimalist studio, and that sort of shooting really benefits from working in a real studio, tethered to a computer with the photo processing tools that you'll be using later on. Actually, if I shot portraits, I'd chimp a ton -- not to look at the photos but as a bit of theater to make the sitter relax while I fiddle with my gear until we get to the "real" shots, which I'd be taking all the while, but that's not really chimping, only acting. Chimping is also good for is admiring one's own work, enjoying a sense of productivity-in-process. I certainly do that when I stop by a pub for a break, but, like the beer, it is something that makes me feel better without doing a thing to improve my photos.

And, others are far better than me at what they do, and I've never seen anybody better than me who uses my methods,** so to each their own.

 

*This reads like hyperbole or sarcasm. It is neither. But, in fairness, I wander into traffic to get the shot, and it only becomes a safety issue when I stop paying attention to the next wave of vehicles. 

**Or worse than or the same as, for that matter.

[Ko.Fe.]

Not sure why FijiNoFilm was brought here. I have zero interest in it mostly no decent manual focus. Not even snap focus they had in XF10. 

As for focus by tab, I lost my count, how many times I wrote about it on LUF and elsewhere.

I had typ 3 Cron and added focus tab to it. It is called cable tie.

I don't have tabless lenses for RF. If I can't add tab, I'm not buying this lens.

[MikeMyers]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

47 minutes ago, JonPB said:

......[Editorial comment: here begins a rant. My apologies for taking tangents which are already familiar to folks here. I'm planning to sit on a grand jury for a month so I've wound down most of my projects and my stir-craziness is manifesting in writing about photography and associated gear.]

If the Fuji meets your needs -- your methods and priorities -- keep using it. Better photographers make better photos, and using the same gear consistently and repeatedly allows the technical stuff to become automatic so that you can focus on becoming a better photographer. Fuji makes some splendid tools; they won't hold you back unless you're trying to do something they're not good at, and they're good at a very wide range of things. For instance, I set my Fuji to manual focus but use a focus-lock button to trigger an AF cycle instead of twisting the focus ring.

Conversely, Leica M is good at a very narrow range of things. Within that range, they're amazing; even borderline near the edge of that range, though, they can be quite maddening. The way I prefer to shoot is squarely centered within the M wheelhouse. I think of it like a well-trained but energetic dog: mention a command and the job is done before you know it, but say nothing and you'll start finding bits of your stuff shredded and ripped.

To my mind, chimping is antithetical to street shooting. Reviewing means looking at what's already happened, which breaks the flow/mindfulness I need to shoot productively. Chimping can also be a safety issue for me because I wander into traffic.* If I get something wrong, then I got it wrong, no big deal; but if I investigate whether I got something wrong or whether I could have done it better, then I'm in an analytical/editorial headspace, not the perceptive/creative mindset that I cultivate. Actually, if I get something wrong, that's wonderful. Mistakes are fantastic because they give me a clear, distinct opportunity to learn. If I make the same mistake multiple times in an outing, so much the better. Then, in the leisure of my home or hotel, I can study the mistake, find a tentative solution; then I can practice that method, and if it works, develop it into a habit so that I unconsciously avoid that problem in the future.......

I love the way you took a lot of thoughts buzzing around my head, and put them into words that anyone can understand.  Thank you!!

The tab - I think that's why I preferred using the 35 instead of the 50, and once I get used to the "position" of the tab, and a distance, I'll be all set.  As it was, I looked at the distance scale, and picked something that seemed appropriate.  It should have been (but wasn't) obvious that once I learn this, I can set the focus just by moving the tab to an appropriate place.

Fuji and Leica, for me, so similar, but I use them very differently.  The Leica is always a challenge for me.  The Fuji already knows what it wants to do, so most of what I deal with is composition.  I'm proud of what I get from my Leica because I had to "do" everything, but the Fuji leaves me free to concentrate on what's most important.

 

That article I linked to about the Fuji is something I found very interesting, and it gave me some insights on how to better use my Leica.  It's all a learning experience.  The Leica and Fuji are similar, and completely different from my DSLR gear.  And sticking with just the Leica and Fuji, the Fuji "cheats" in ways that work out beautifully.  I'll post just one image below from today's session with the Fuji.  Not only did the Fuji automatically focus on a "right eye", it automatically fired the flash just enough to make the girl's skin tones better.  Had I shot this with my Leica, knowing what I know now, and with no extra equipment, I doubt this photo would have come out so nice.  All I had to worry about was timing and composition.  I still prefer to use my Leica, but everything Ken Rockwell wrote about the Fuji was true - it does a gazillion things automatically that improve my photos.  I'm much more "proud" of my good Leica photos, because the Leica allowed me to do what was needed.  On the other hand, the Fuji just "does them".

 

Thanks for what you posted.  It brought a lot of things into much sharper focus in my mind.

 

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!

Edited August 2, 2021 by MikeMyers

[Dennis]

58 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

I don't have tabless lenses for RF. If I can't add tab, I'm not buying this lens.

Can you tab a 2.8/35 ZM? One year ago the guy from Lens TAAB told me it was not compatible. Is there any other way? I really love the lens, but w/o the tab, it's not the same. I'm fine shooting SP with the Zeiss, but with a tab I would do it better, for sure.

In the 21-35 range, for me, a focus tab is needed and very welcome. Starting from 50mm, I can leave w/o it. 

[250swb]

4 hours ago, Dennis said:

Can you tab a 2.8/35 ZM? One year ago the guy from Lens TAAB told me it was not compatible. Is there any other way? I really love the lens, but w/o the tab, it's not the same. I'm fine shooting SP with the Zeiss, but with a tab I would do it better, for sure.

In the 21-35 range, for me, a focus tab is needed and very welcome. Starting from 50mm, I can leave w/o it. 

I don't see why not, as Ko.Fe. has said in post #6 just use a cable tie. You can get reusable cable ties that have a bigger lock/clamp/widget type thing and so give more leverage than a conventional cable tie, and also allow you to reposition it while setting your datum point.

[cboy]

21 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

Back to this post.  Now that I've learned how to use tab

MIC lenses like 7 artisan lenses give out tabs that can be attached with an 3M adhesive... Why bother with a more bulky ringed tab attachment?? Just get that adhesive tab accessory.

Btw using a tab for a focus by wire system like x100 series isnt ideal as youll be constantly setting the defined distance from which to rack. Its meant for autofocus which its inherent flaw as a rangefinder styled system suits manual focus like a focus clutch system with distance scale.

[Ko.Fe.]

11 hours ago, Dennis said:

Can you tab a 2.8/35 ZM? One year ago the guy from Lens TAAB told me it was not compatible. Is there any other way? I really love the lens, but w/o the tab, it's not the same. I'm fine shooting SP with the Zeiss, but with a tab I would do it better, for sure.

In the 21-35 range, for me, a focus tab is needed and very welcome. Starting from 50mm, I can leave w/o it. 

I was able to focus with 50 and tab without looking at the lens. Matter or practice. I don't have anything longer. Makes not so much sense on M, IMO.

ZM lenses have focus tab. It just disproportionately rudimentary. In situations where tab is needed keep it at middle distance. It is easy to push even this Zeiss pimple to close and far distances. I used 50/2 ZM like this.  

Don't know what SP is, sorry.

I would never buy another ZM again. ZM are not the lenses for quick RF photography. IMO. Focus pimple and too much of the aperture clicks are for slow photography of something which is not moving and you have time to kill. IMO. I could change aperture on Summarit-M 35 2.5 by one finger and without looking at the ring (because it has normal amount of clicks).   

[Dennis]

7 minutes ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Don't know what SP is, sorry.

Sorry, it meant to be an abbreviation for Street Photography

 

[Ko.Fe.]

4 hours ago, Dennis said:

Sorry, it meant to be an abbreviation for Street Photography

 

Thank you for clarification. I work in TV industry. SP means Sony tape where .

I have seen one of the rare animals like me dude on the street with M and 35 2.8 ZM. No aids added. He looked confident and after chat I have trust in him.

[Rodrigo castillo]

23 hours ago, earleygallery said:

Another option is to pre focus on an object that is close to where your subject/s will be (i.e. if you are looking to photograph people walking past you can focus on a paving slab or bollard etc.).

I use hyper focal time to time but maybe is me but that just work in very automatics modes …. I am talking about lighting …. In my kind of photos I change Angles so I change lights too fast … so, for me the best way is pre focus way… I say, ok, I will Shoot this way and to the angle, or any other reference, with 5.6 or more and 2 or 3 meters … this way I have time to set the aperture (fine tuning) and light just if I feel I need it and photos get in perfect focus …. With very bad light I also use this way wide open at 1.4 etc 

[MikeMyers]

While I enjoy doing my best at what you all describe, I get the most satisfaction from seeing something that would make a lovely photograph, and spending enough time to get the most out of it, composition, framing, and all the rest.  I guess when it's times like that, I'm using my M10 as if it was a view camera, composing, adjusting, and shooting.  I get a lot of enjoyment out of that.

As I'm walking around, I'm usually making adjustments to the settings, especially the focus, so I'm either ready or almost ready to quickly capture a scene, but I always force my self to use the camera smoothly, so I don't "jar" it.  It's nice that the M10 has so much resolution that I can capture "my scene" somewhere within the frame lines, so I can crop it later.  To me, the 50mm lens "feels" too long - I know it's supposed to be "normal", and when I first started with photography, it was my only lens.  Because of the capability of the M10, my 35mm lens has been slowly becoming "my" normal lens.

Next time I'll try some of the above ideas, especially learning the "tab".  For the past two weeks I'd look at the focus scale, and pick a distance that was most likely to be close, and set the camera there.  

Because of what I've been learning, the "tab" has changed from being an annoyance, to potentially being a great way to set the focus.  I guess I'll take several days to learn where to move the tab, to get the focus distance I'm after. 

I wish I knew all this stuff a life-time ago.  For so many years, since the 1960's, I lived by matching up the rangefinder windows.  Sometimes that worked for me, and other times I missed the photo I wanted.

 

OK, back to the discussion.  What is the reason for using the "hyperlocal distance"?  As long as I get the area I am interested in into proper focus, why would or should I care about all the rest of my image beyond the point I'm trying to capture?  Maybe I'm missing something, but wouldn't it be better to get things from 6 feet to 15 feet in focus, rather than 6 feet to infinity?

[250swb]

16 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

 

 Hyperfocal distance is the DoF for any given aperture that encompasses 'acceptable' sharpness given an anticipated ideal focus point.. If you don't want things in focus all the way from 6 feet to infinity don't use a small aperture, if you want a narrower hyperfocal range use a medium or wide aperture. The downside of limiting too much the amount of DoF you are employing in getting things in focus is that judgement of distances can become confused given it is a point and shoot method without any focusing beyond the initial estimate. So if you or your subject moves away from the 6 feet to 15 feet range set on your lens you then need to change the focus or aperture so defeating the whole idea of hyperfocal focusing. Generally speaking you would choose the smallest aperture available given the minimum shutter speed. 

edit - not sure where the 'quote' disappeared to but my answer relates to your last paragraph

Edited August 3, 2021 by 250swb

[MikeMyers]

1 hour ago, 250swb said:

 .......If you don't want things in focus all the way from 6 feet to infinity don't use a small aperture, if you want a narrower hyperfocal range use a medium or wide aperture. The downside of limiting too much the amount of DoF you are employing in getting things in focus is that judgement of distances can become confused given it is a point and shoot method without any focusing beyond the initial estimate. So if you or your subject moves away from the 6 feet to 15 feet range set on your lens you then need to change the focus or aperture so defeating the whole idea of hyperfocal focusing. ........

Using hyperlocal distance for focusing means the background should be in acceptable focus.  I prefer the background to be out of focus if possible.  I agree that's more difficult, but that's what I'm usually trying to do.   If I'm predicting something, say, ten feet away, is what I'm photographing, I would prefer the background to be noticeably out of focus.  I usually have the aperture pre-set.  For the above example, using my selected aperture, I'd like to know where the tab on the lens needs to be so the subject, ten feet away, will be acceptably sharp, but the background will not be sharp.   ......which is why I usually don't use hyperlocal distance for focusing.

I think we may be saying the same thing, except I no longer think about it so carefully.  I don't need a "blurry" background, I just prefer the subject to be obviously sharper than the background.  I'm trying to accomplish the same thing with my M10, adjusting things manually, that my X100f usually does automatically.  All the Fuji needs to do is recognize that there are "eyes" someplace in the image.

Someone up above suggested using two fingers on the "tab" of the lens.  In retrospect, that makes a lot of sense to me.  It will be more obvious where the tab is, and therefore where the focus is set to.

[250swb]

There is a scale engraved on your lens that tells you exactly what will be within an acceptable range of focus for any given aperture and distance. Leica have given you the answer but similar tables are avalaible for almost any lens imaginable. But if you set the focus and aperture according to the scale on your lens wherever the tab ends up is basically where it is meant to be.

Edited August 3, 2021 by 250swb

[MikeMyers]

Quite true, but if you read the article I linked to at the beginning of this thread, by the time I do all that the image I wanted will be gone.  The purpose of the tab is to allow me to focus instantly, without even thinking about it, doing it all by "feel".  Using the tab is even faster than autofocus, which isn't an option on my Leica anyway.

With my old 35mm Summilux, if I quickly move the tab until it is pointed downwards, the focus is set for eight feet.  If the lens is set for f/5.6, the depth of field will be around 6 feet to 12 feet.  Maybe I can get away with remembering this one setting, and then "nudging" the tab one way or the other for a small change.  As to the shutter setting, the most important thing for me is to minimize blur from camera movement.

Thinking about all this now, it seems "obvious". It sure wasn't obvious two weeks ago.  I think I'm a slow learner.

(Long ago, I wanted to be able to aim and focus my M3 without looking through the viewfinder.....  I still need to work on that.)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jdlaing]

There’s an easier way.