Precision Focusing with M10 (and other Leica M cameras)

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

13 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

I'm still trying to figure out the reflections in that eye

Parents and a grand father taking the photo

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[MikeMyers]

Wow!!!!!  You 'did good' !!

[fenykepesz]

simply amazing, that reflection in the pupil !

i brought this up many times though it may be a sacrilege to the community : it's this issue of focusing difficulty and using technical aids to master such, as i outlined it under M11 more recently 

i spoke to several high-tech engineers, friends of mine, and a technical solution for this does not seem be an impossibility for them, but 'just' a question of RD, money and physical space available in the OVF.  i dream about a laser-supported system that real-time upon button-press projects red dots on a highly transparent film in the RF's OVF that circumscribe the area of greatest sharpness as seen by the sensor.  the button to activate i envision may sit in the front just as it's now the (entirely neglected and unused) case on my M10-D.  now, some technicalities need to be worked out such as the necessary parallax adjustments as well as the positional issue of the photographer's ever moving eye which is evidently not always in the middle of the OVF window. 

the photo attached was shot with a lux50/1.4 at asa:400 f:4 1/125, then color2gray converted as TIFFs, and shown here at JPEG quality 88% (size limit 2.44MB).  here a low-res weblink of the same photo.  as you may 'appreciate', i 'enjoy' with my M10-D an ever-lasting back-focusing problem, and that ultimately is the reason why i bring this topic of electronic sensor-driven focus-aid up once in a while...

any comments ?

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 18, 2022 by fenykepesz

[fenykepesz]

here a second example that underpins the same problem (of back focusing) : i focused on the right eye with the reflection but it's the left eye with its eye lashes that is the area of maximal sharpness.  photo was shot with 50/1.4 at asa:800 1/125 and f:4 (accounting for back focusing).  attached JPG (2.4MB) was created at 82% quality only, original was DNG and c2g processed as TIFFs.

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!

[lct]

25 minutes ago, fenykepesz said:

the photo attached was shot with a lux50/1.4 at asa:400 f:4 1/125, then color2gray converted as TIFFs, and shown here at JPEG quality 88% (size limit 2.44MB).  here a low-res weblink of the same photo.  as you may 'appreciate', i 'enjoy' with my M10-D an ever-lasting back-focusing problem

Difficult to say on that small a picture. You may wish to show a 100% crop of the critical area. For now it looks like you focused on the window instead of the child. Otherwise the eye of the baby above was shot with a low res camera having not the same motion blur issue as the M11 at low shutter speeds. I suspect your problem is simply a camera and/or a lens needing calibration.

[lct]

10 minutes ago, fenykepesz said:

i focused on the right eye with the reflection but it's the left eye with its eye lashes that is the area of maximal sharpness

Then as suggested above it seems that your camera and/or lens needs some calibration. Nice pic BTW .

[fenykepesz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

thank you, lct - and yes, true, i also believe that my camera as well as the 50/1.4 lens needs to be re-calibrated. 

however one or two years ago i was discouraged by a Leica dealer who briefly tested my equipment and found nothing wrong with it.  but now, with time, this issue becomes prevalent and simply annoying to say the least.  i hesitated till now as i just abhor the idea of not having a camera/lens for weeks or months while the pair does its transatlantic sightseeing...

Edited October 18, 2022 by fenykepesz

[lct]

A good repair shop can fix that sort of issue unless your gear is still under warranty. DAG Camera Repair is not close to Montréal but there are certainly good repair shops in Canada as well.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello Everybody,

1 thing that people figured out in the 1930's, when rangefinders became more commonly built into cameras, is: First compose the photo. Then, rotate the camera 45 degrees, 1 way or the other: Then focus the rangefinder. Try both directions (Clockwise/Counter Clockwise). See which is better for you. Maybe 1 way is better sometimes & the other way is better other times.

When focusing a moving rangefinder patch in a camera being held diagonally: The image moves both down & up as well as left & right. All at the same time. When the patches coincide: Then recompose & take the photo.

Another help is to move the viewfinder window side to side after focusing. The properly focused overlapping rangefinder patch images will stay still. The part not focused on moves.

All of this assumes that the rangefinder is operating correctly. As per what lct wrote above.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited October 18, 2022 by Michael Geschlecht

[simoneM]

2 hours ago, fenykepesz said:

here a second example that underpins the same problem (of back focusing) : i focused on the right eye with the reflection but it's the left eye with its eye lashes that is the area of maximal sharpness.  photo was shot with 50/1.4 at asa:800 1/125 and f:4 (accounting for back focusing).  attached JPG (2.4MB) was created at 82% quality only, original was DNG and c2g processed as TIFFs.

 

 

in June I had the same problem, so the Leica Store in Milan they told me that my M10M and all optics should go to Wetzlar for a recalibration.
After 8 weeks I received everything and I must say that the MAF is perfect, better, precise. 

 

[MikeMyers]

So both your lenses, and the rangefinder, needed recalibrating?

Does "back focus" imply that the rangefinder OR the lens is not right?  How many different lenses did you try this with?

I can understand that the camera rangefinder might need to be recalibrated, but the lenses?

[chris_tribble]

There's also a question of shooting style and the purpose of the image.  If you're doing a corporate photoshoot where the headshots need to be spot on everytime, the a DSLR or equivalent is the best option.  That's why I have the SL2 + 75 Apo.  It's a delight to work with and now super reliable with face/eye recognition.  For other work the M's can make all the difference as they're non-intrusive / non-intimidating and you can focus with both eyes open with practice - thereby keeping engagement with the subject.  I use M when it will do the job - and I accept its limitations... (n.b. the first shot is Leica M with 35 summicron asph, the second was Canon 5D3 with 85 L 1.2)

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!

 

[evikne]

I don't think it's possible to completely get rid of focus shift on a lens with such problems, because it's a characteristic of the optical design. But if you for example have a Summilux with back focusing issues at f/2.8–f/4, you can have it calibrated to focus perfectly at f/2 instead of f/1.4. Then you will have a very slight front focusing at f/1.4, and from f/2.8 and smaller, the increased DOF will more or less hide the back focusing.

Edited October 18, 2022 by evikne

[lct]

1 hour ago, MikeMyers said:

I can understand that the camera rangefinder might need to be recalibrated, but the lenses?

Some lenses designed for film need to be calibrated for digital. Was the case for my 90/2 v3 and 90/2.8 v2 for instance but curiously enough my 135/4 from 1971 is spot on.

[MikeMyers]

The people on the Red Dot Forum shows say that the problem with using lenses designed for film is that they don't have the resolution that modern digital lenses are designed with.  

If what you just wrote is true, then those of us who shoot. both film and digital may be in trouble.

Is there a standard procedure that those of us who wonder about this can verify if our rangefinders are calibrated properly?

As for me, I've got lots of my old film lenses, most of which I use much of the time for digital.  I also bought the Voigtlandar 50mm APO LANTHAR which I've read is supposed to just about as good as the Leica lenses that may cost four or five times as much.  I guess my lens collection is called "vintage" nowadays.  Then there are people who prefer the "vintage look" to the "digital look".  It's all very confusing.  

I thought a good test for rangefinder calibration might be to focus on something a mile or two away, and verify that the camera showed it as being at "infinity".  

I've also read many, many times, that one of the best uses for the Leica cameras is "street photography", where precision focusing isn't relevant.  

I've got my own "issues" that my 78 (almost 79) year old hands aren't as steady as in the past.  To minimize that, I've shortened my camera strap, and now put "tension" on it as I'm about to take a photo.  That helps.  I'm also replacing my #14312 Leica Camera straps with a heavier duty all leather camera strap, that seems to help.  With the M10, I'm also shooting at a higher ISO which allows me to shoot at a higher shutter speed.  Oh, and I agree with you about the 135mm Tele Elmar - sharper than I ever dreamed it would be, but to get that sharpness I find myself using a tripod more often.

[MikeMyers]

59 minutes ago, chris_tribble said:

If you're doing a corporate photoshoot where the headshots need to be spot on everytime, the a DSLR or equivalent is the best option. 

If I was to do a corporate photoshoot where everything needs to be perfect, I would leave the Leica cameras alone and use my latest Nikon D780 camera, with spot focusing.

If I had to use the Leica, I'd get out the Visoflex 2, and use the camera's focusing aids.  

Everything about the Leica is "approximate", while with the D780 everything is exact, including the area that is covered by the camera/lens.  I think the Leica was designed more for speed, and the D780 for precision.  Camera would be on a tripod, and the images would be sent to my computer.

 

.......but I haven't done a "corporate photoshoot" in ten or twenty years, and for the types of photos I take, either camera would work - but I would replace my M10 with an M11 for the resolution, if nothing else.

If I was still working, or if I could afford it, I suspect I would already be buying an M11, although for the types of photos I take nowadays, I think my M10 is a better choice for me.  Heck, I still thoroughly enjoy using my M8.2, and I had Don at DAG Cameras fully restore my M3.  

But for the sake of this specific discussion, I think the M11 and the new Visoflex might get me the best results.  

[pedaes]

8 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

who wonder about this can verify if our rangefinders are calibrated properly?

There are many examples you can find. Camera must be on tripod. and a line of on end dominos on a table top will do, with the focus point two meters from film/sensor plane.. Unless you are using f1.4 or f2 probably not worth fussing about as depth of field latitude will kick in.

One of the stated issues with older film era lenses is that film emulsion is 'thicker' than the recording surface of a sensor, and film therefore had more latitude,  to give a feel for the degree of precision we are talking about.  

[lct]

12 minutes ago, MikeMyers said:

If what you just wrote is true, then those of us who shoot. both film and digital may be in trouble.

Is there a standard procedure that those of us who wonder about this can verify if our rangefinders are calibrated properly?

A camera properly calibrated for digital will work fine with film AFAIK. As for checking lens calibration it is not difficult if you have a camera with live view.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Jeff S]

2 hours ago, MikeMyers said:

So both your lenses, and the rangefinder, needed recalibrating?

Does "back focus" imply that the rangefinder OR the lens is not right?  How many different lenses did you try this with?

I can understand that the camera rangefinder might need to be recalibrated, but the lenses?

The RF and the lens are each calibrated to an independent standard.  Users can conduct their own careful testing, but Leica Service typically requests that the user sends in camera and lens(es) to avoid guesswork and unnecessary back and forth shipping. 
 

Jeff

[fenykepesz]

may i return to the original question which is how to optimize the focusing process on a digital M camera ?

there are variables that are not fully under our control, and those are human errors (inattention, eye fatigue etc) and camera and/or lens misalignment that all can occur at any time.  why can we not convince RD at Leica to implement a 'hybrid' VF, which is a regular OVF/RF with the areas of maximal sharpness projected into (upon button press) in form of red laser spots/pixels ?  i know this sounds like a broken record - but is this such a faux-pas for the M community ?  i never got to hear any feedback since i started to whine about this for the last two years or so.

i hate the idea of using that Visoflex thingy on top of my M10-D, and that's not for aesthetic but for practical reasons : i don't want to interrupt my workflow by switching back and forth between OVF and EVF.  i want to keep my eye on the object, or let's call it 'sujet', my by-the-second ever-changing piece of art : that's where i want my mental (and manual) focus to stay on !  in that sense i feel this HVF (H for hybrid) would be least reactionary and most compatible with the M philosophy, which is to take (sharp) pictures with the least amount of technical distraction possible.

what do folks think here ?  or should i just shut up about this sci-fi cockpit pilot helmet red-spots idea ?

Edited October 18, 2022 by fenykepesz