My take on The One Thing Leica Users Get Wrong

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

33 minutes ago, John Ricard said:

These are excellent points -most of which I agree with.  I think it would be fair to say I agree with all of them.    I would only take issue with the idea that Leica users can focus faster than a modern AF camera.  I've seen that claim made on this forums -often accompanied by a tack sharp shot or two, but I consider these posts to be anecdotal.  I'd love it for a NYC based Leica shooter to reach out so we can do some side by side testing on video.  Nothing intended to embarrass anyone.  I'd even do it without video if anyone were interested. But I'd be shocked beyond words if a Leica user could manually focus on different subjects faster than I could nail focus on a Z6.  Hell, I'll even use my 10+ year old Nikon D3s and I'm confident the camera autofocuses faster than anyone can manually focus a rangefinder or any other type of manual focus camera.  

To be honest, John, I have always struggled with auto-focus.

My first auto-focus camera was an F5, then a D800e, then the T, TL2, SL and X1D II and none of them were as reliable or fast in practice as my manual focus FE/FM cameras, manual focus AI Nikkor lenses or my M cameras.  With each I had what were supposed to be the best AF lenses, and still I struggled.  Worst was my niece’s wedding, where I elected (for reasons I still don’t understand) to take the X1D II, with the 21, 45, 80 and 135 (& 1.7 converter).  Switching lenses was a nightmare, lugging those lenses drove me crazy, and the AF just wouldn’t focus quickly enough to grab those moments which make wedding photographs so special.  And, of course, manual focus by wire is very poor compared to Leica’s manual focus M primes.

To be fair, the few images that worked were favoured by the happy couple over the professional photographer’s images, taken with what looked like a DX with an auto-focus zoom.

Now, I’d be the first to admit that my dislike of AF has stood in the way of my mastering it for the last 30 years or so.  But AF in my experience too often fails to focus at all, or fails to focus on the right thing.  In your test, it may be quicker than an M lens, but will it focus on the right thing?  I have never been able to achieve that with AF.  When I see a potential image unfold, I think about where I want the subject, what is going to happen next and the depth of field I want (most of this instinctive), then I frame, focus and take the image.  I know what I’m going to get in focus.

With my SL, I back-button focus, then adjust manually.

Auto-focus with some of Nikon’s best lenses has never achieved that for me.  I suspect the fastest part of the process is a couple of inches behind the viewfinder.  I appreciate your experience differs, but there is, perhaps, a reason why Leica continues to produce so many, such fine, manual focus M lenses, and they sell.

Edited October 27, 2021 by IkarusJohn

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, LocalHero1953 said:

But you don't include image quality and colour in your criteria?

Maybe not surprising, based on this comment...

 

Jeff

[Tailwagger]

11 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

To be honest, John, I have always struggled with auto-focus...

 But AF in my experience too often fails to focus at all, or fails to focus on the right thing.  In your test, it may be quicker than an M lens, but will it focus on the right thing?  ...

 I suspect the fastest part of the process is a couple of inches behind the viewfinder.  I

Great points. I'll confess that even though I've found the latest SL2 firmware to be a big improvement, there's remains that nagging worry as to whether or not it locked on to my target rather than some other random vertical somewhere in the bounding box.  I'd add that as yet even the best AF systems require you inform them as to what you up too. Shooting faces, single vs multiple, fast moving objects, static scenes, etc. Not being a studio shooter in control of his subjects, all too often I find myself in scenarios requiring multiple AF modes in a short space of time.  I've missed nearly as many shots to unexpected scenes while in incorrect modes or fumbling through menus to change configs or settings, often getting the wrong one in haste, as I have by changing optics at the wrong moment.

Rather than end it all and perhaps as a defense mechanism against serious psychological damage, I concluded a number of years back that there are a million prize winning shots missed in every corner of the globe every second of every day.  As photographers we have to accept that neither the camera nor we are omniscient. I often come back from a day of shooting wondering if I had just turned one more corner, veered left rather then right, perhaps looked back over my shoulder rather than only seeing what was in front of me, would I have come away with something far more worthy than what I ultimately wound up with? Misses are everywhere at all times. It's just part of the deal. There's no doubt, however, that when one is lucky enough to have a good opportunity right in front of the lens but fails, the miss is more frustrating when the loss was more attributable to the limitations of the camera than the fool holding it, be it MF or AF.  We simply have to accept the loss, try to learn from it and move on to the next. 

[adan]

2 hours ago, John Ricard said:

I would only take issue with the idea that Leica users can focus faster than a modern AF camera.

Faster - probably not. Although that may be situational (focal-length or field-of-view, distance, f/stop, yadayada)

But that is not the same thing as "slower."

More accurately (as in "down to the specific eyelash, virtually as quickly as I can decide on it") - most of the time. With a 75mm at f/1.4 - f/1.5 - f/1.8 - f/2.0.

Most AF focus-points I've used just cover too large an area (even if they seem tiny in the viewfinder) to "know" exactly which often-one-pixel-wide "thing" they are supposed to focus on.

An entire eye, probably - the center of the eye in an oblique shot, not so much.

It does take some experience. Not practice as such, but simply learning tricks such as "if I can see that the far end of the eye (or the nose) and the close end of the eye (or eyelid) are equally non-aligned in the RF patch - the actual alignment point must be halfway between them." Takes more time to read than to do.

75mm Heliar Classic at f/1.8, M10 - click to enlarge

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 October 28, 2021 by adan

[Erato]

1. Some outstanding engravers based in the US could even engrave the most expensive watches.

2. The speed rewinder design is based on M3.

3. Leica RF focusing mechanism is relatively reliable while compared with 5D/Df or so. On the other note: I like AI/Non-AI lenses on FM2 or else but AF.

4. Use the hairdryer to make everything much easier while you try to remove it. Those marks on the sticker are certifications for many standards and criteria. And as a matter of fact, we don't care whether it's there or not.

[pgk]

13 hours ago, John Ricard said:

I would only take issue with the idea that Leica users can focus faster than a modern AF camera.

Again, it depends. If you are shooting say, landscapes AF is a moot point and a pre-set up M is probaby both faster and more precise.

[aristotle]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How did we get from sticker to focus?  As for me, I'm a "don't care" regarding sticker.  I'm a "huh?" regarding focus speed.  I suppose I could observe that my m1000RR isn't as good off-road as my R1250GS, but most folks don't get a m1000RR to take off-road.  Anyway, it's all good fun.

[John Ricard]

13 hours ago, adan said:

 

More accurately (as in "down to the specific eyelash, virtually as quickly as I can decide on it") - most of the time. With a 75mm at f/1.4 - f/1.5 - f/1.8 - f/2.0.

 

This is a valid point for sure.  And one of the things I like best about using my Leica M bodies is that I always feel that I know exactly what is going on. With my Z6 often it is in a focus mode that I don't want it to be in, or it is in a mode where the image is showing on the monitor but not the viewfinder or its switching between the 2 automatically.  The camera is doing one thing and I want it to do another.  So I definitely get what you're saying here. I would add though, that the newer AF systems that have eye controlled autofocus can be super accurate at nailing the AF exactly where I want it to be.  There is a huge difference between the accuracy of my D810 as compared to my Z6.  The Z6 is light years ahead.

[charlesphoto99]

I struggle less with accuracy and speed with the Leica vs the dslr etc AF I've used. Of course a 70-200 2.8 is going to focus better with AF on a moving subject than my 135 APO. Otherwise I feel in many situations the manual focus of the M a lot less constraining than AF. I get to focus on exactly what it is I want to. But I've also used rangefinders (Leica and Mamiya) since about 1992, so lots of practice. I even shot a book on breakdancers using a Mamiya 6 and 7. 

[Stephen.s1]

speaking of focus et al: Nikon Z 9: First Mirrorless Flagship | B&H Explora