MP and parallax

[hirohhhh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

MP is my first film rangefinder and since the first roll I noticed the parallax effect. It didn't bother me much since I don't shoot anything that such accuracy would be critical. Now I wanted to test it a little bit more and figure out how exactly parallax works, which side of the frame is cut and how much, so I can, when I need it, compensate it manually. But then I found this in the user manual:

The LEICA MP’s bright-line view- and rangefinder is not only a very high-quality, large, brilliant, and bright viewfinder, it is also a highly accurate rangefinder coupled to the lens.
The size of the bright-line frames corresponds to an image size of 23 x 35mm (slide format) at the shortest setting distance for each focal length. At longer distances, the camera records more of the subject than shown within the frames.
The bright-line frames are linked to the focusing mechanism so that parallax – the misalignment between the lens and the viewfinder axes – is automatically compensated and the image within the bright-line frames and the recorded picture are identically centered throughout the entire distance setting range from 0.7 m to ∞.

So I'm wondering what I'm missing here? I'm almost sure that the parallax exists on my MP. What I see through the viewfinder is not always what I get on the film. I didn't do any proper test for this specifically, but I noticed that some of my images are bit off sometimes, and I'm sure I framed them properly when I shot them.

Or did I?

[earleygallery]

The viewfinder is corrected for parralax at the closer distance because any error would be much more noticeable.

If you look you will notice the frame lines move as you turn the focus ring of the lens.

A rangefinder is never going to be exact as an SLR or 'live view' EVF will be, but it's a case of becoming familiar with the camera so that it's not a problem in practice.

[Advertisement]

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

[hirohhhh]

1 minute ago, earleygallery said:

The viewfinder is corrected for parralax at the closer distance because any error would be much more noticeable.

If you look you will notice the frame lines move as you turn the focus ring of the lens.

A rangefinder is never going to be exact as an SLR or 'live view' EVF will be, but it's a case of becoming familiar with the camera so that it's not a problem in practice.

Yeah I noticed that the frame lines are moving, but I thought that the correction that is referred in the user manual means that the end photo will be the same as I see it through viewfinder (even though I know it's not).

I'll have to make some tests so I know how to manually compensate for it.

[28framelines]

4 minutes ago, hirohhhh said:

Yeah I noticed that the frame lines are moving, but I thought that the correction that is referred in the user manual means that the end photo will be the same as I see it through viewfinder (even though I know it's not).

I'll have to make some tests so I know how to manually compensate for it.

I think it also depends on the focal length how dramatic the difference between the framelines and the final image are. While it should be calibrated well enough to showcase the parallax regardless of focal length, it may be more noticeable on some over others. What focal length are you noticing it on?

[earleygallery]

13 minutes ago, hirohhhh said:

Yeah I noticed that the frame lines are moving, but I thought that the correction that is referred in the user manual means that the end photo will be the same as I see it through viewfinder (even though I know it's not).

I'll have to make some tests so I know how to manually compensate for it.

It should be accurate enough - maybe do some tests and check. I've always shot 'loose' with the rangefinders, by which I mean I don't purposely frame too tight, as I might with an SLR, but it's never been an issue for me.

Different with my lllf which has a fixed viewfinder and you do need to compensate if shooting close up, which is by judgement!

[Mute-on]

2 hours ago, earleygallery said:

It should be accurate enough - maybe do some tests and check. I've always shot 'loose' with the rangefinders, by which I mean I don't purposely frame too tight, as I might with an SLR, but it's never been an issue for me.

Different with my lllf which has a fixed viewfinder and you do need to compensate if shooting close up, which is by judgement!

The point about shooting ‘loose’, which I interpret to mean ‘allow more space for your intended framing within the framelines’ is entirely correct. 
I also notice that it is important to actually pay attention to what the framelines are framing, and not allow your view to ‘ignore’ the framelines since you can see outside them.  That is, you do need to get into a rangefinder mindset, not an SLR mindset when framing an image.
Sometimes I can’t recall adjusting for the frameline positioning when framing an image, particularly using a wide lens that shows frameline close to the edge of the viewfinder (28 and 35). Shoot ‘loose’ and it is of less consequence, regardless. 

[spydrxx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

AND often when viewing thru the viewfinder if one's eyes aren't properly centered, it throw what is seen thru the viewfinder off, leading the photographer to  believe he/she is capturing more than they are.  I've learned over the years to give a margin of error.

[Michael Geschlecht]

Hello hirohhhh,

Other points to consider are:

The scene inside the frame lines of the lens in use, NOT the entire image in the range/viewfinder window, shows you AT LEAST what is captured by the film/sensor ONLY WHEN THE LENS IS FOCUSED ON THE SCENE TO BE CAPTURED. And, this only occurs when the lens is focused at its CLOSEST focusing distance. At longer distances, when the lens is focused on the scene to be captured: The scene captured contains MORE of the scene from outside of the frame lines: Than what is seen inside the frame lines.  On all sides.

If you change the focus of the lens, after you place the scene inside the appropriate frame: The scene captured may be somewhat different than what you first framed. If you frame the image AFTER you focus on the scene: The scene captured will be more like what you originally framed. If the scene focused on is further away, the image will include more material around the edges of what you framed than it will if the scene focused on is nearer.

All "M" models, whether film or digital, do pretty much what I have just written above. Which means that they ALL capture the scene that you are framing ONLY IF the scene is focused before it is framed. All "M" models capture AT LEAST what is inside the frame lines of the scene that the lens is focused on. Regardless of the distance the lens is focused on.  Some "M" models include more additional image captured than some other "M" models do.

None of what is written here keeps a person from framing thru the range/viewfinder window before focusing to compose or to look for a photo. Just remember to focus & then to frame again before taking the photo.

Hopefully this is helpful.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited January 27, 2023 by Michael Geschlecht

[Al Brown]

- Parallax correction gains importance with focal length.
- Parallax compensation need is most pronounced at closer distance
- Leica's OVF is "1960's style" accurate with parallax, not ultra precise but good enough
- Parallax needs a focus to be relevant as mentioned above

 

[hirohhhh]

Thanks all for the useful advices. As I said, I didn't do any experiments specifically on this, I just found out that some of my photos are a bit off and not what was my intention when framing. It's most visible if I'm framing close the edge of the subject and then I found later that the edge is visible in the photo.

From your responses, it could be that my eye was not perfectly centered, or that I changed the focus after composing.

I'll pay more attention next time and I hope it should be good enough.

[250swb]

@hirohhhh you will never frame as accurately with a rangefinder camera as with a digital camera or an SLR with 100% coverage. One thing you can do is to look at how other photographers who use a rangefinder compose the scene and there will be nothing vital to the image exactly at the edge of the frame unless it has been cropped more closely afterwards. But at the same time you will become more familiar with how your camera and lenses work and get to know instinctively how precisely you can frame important things on the edge of the frame.

Start by assuming the inside edge of the viewfinder frames are the limit for general work, experience will allow you to adjust this tolerance later. As you move closer in for a full frame portrait for example begin to bracket your composition by making more than one exposure and varying the composition a little bit for each one to be sure at least one will be correct. As has been noted the framelines will move to help you, but eye position at closer focusing distances becomes more and more important and it needs to be centred over the viewfinder, but again this is something you will learn, start by looking at how much black you can see around the edges of the frame, it needs to be even all around and then your eye will be centred.

Edited January 27, 2023 by 250swb

[williamj]

Another thing you may notice, which I found as a longtime SLR user, is that occasionally the horizon line will be tilted. Of course, this may not apply to you. With an SLR you have a clear box around the image but with the M viewfinder the little guides that show the framing are harder to use to ensure that your horizon is properly horizontal. I'm still getting the occasional photograph that is slightly tilted off axis.

[hirohhhh]

3 minutes ago, 250swb said:

@hirohhhh you will never frame as accurately with a rangefinder camera as with a digital camera or an SLR with 100% coverage. One thing you can do is to look at how other photographers who use a rangefinder compose the scene and there will be nothing vital to the image exactly at the edge of the frame unless it has been cropped more closely afterwards. But at the same time you will become more familiar with how your camera and lenses work and become to know instinctively how precisely you can frame important things on the edge of the frame.

Start by assuming the inside edge of the viewfinder frames are the limit for general work, experience will allow you to adjust this tolerance later. As you move closer in for a full frame portrait for example begin to bracket your composition by making more than one exposure and varying the composition a little bit for each one to be sure at least one will be correct. As has been noted the framelines will move to help you, but eye position at closer focusing distances becomes more and more important and it needs to be centred over the viewfinder, but again this is something you will learn, start by looking at how much black you can see around the edges of the frame, it needs to be even all around and then your eye will be centred.

Most of my shots with M cameras are street/candid/kids/etc, which are fairly loose shots, as someone calls it. There are situations when I see something that I want to be dead center and I just wanted to learn how to hit it every time. For example, if the little patch is at the center of the subject, is it really gonna be in the center in the final photo.

Or even better example: imagine I want to frame a window, all straight lines leaving 5% space around it. Let's say I use a tripod and I make sure to frame it that way perfectly. Is it going to be as such in the photo, or one side will be wider, or narrower then others just because of the parallax.

I'm just thinking aloud, I'm going to test this anyway

[hirohhhh]

5 minutes ago, williamj said:

Another thing you may notice, which I found as a longtime SLR user, is that occasionally the horizon line will be tilted. Of course, this may not apply to you. With an SLR you have a clear box around the image but with the M viewfinder the little guides that show the framing are harder to use to ensure that your horizon is properly horizontal. I'm still getting the occasional photograph that is slightly tilted off axis.

Yeap, and in most cases I tend to love it. But again, there are rare cases when I want it straight.

I was the SL user since it was released in 2015, and then I purchased M10R, but I tend to use screen more often, like a real amateur that I am  It was easier to me. God gave us screen so why not use it  So I never developed the skill for rangefinders, but with the MP I'm forced to.

Edited January 27, 2023 by hirohhhh

[250swb]

1 minute ago, hirohhhh said:

 

Or even better example: imagine I want to frame a window, all straight lines leaving 5% space around it. Let's say I use a tripod and I make sure to frame it that way perfectly. Is it going to be as such in the photo, or one side will be wider, or narrower then others just because of the parallax.

 

Don't confuse viewfinder parallax with lens distortion which you won't see at all, but anyway precise jobs like that aren't really what a rangefinder film camera is good at. But if necessary bracket your framing, expose a few images varying the composition so one will be correct. There is a reason that photojournalists back-in-the-day would carry a Leica M for general shots and a Nikon SLR for tele lenses or precise framing.

[hirohhhh]

13 minutes ago, 250swb said:

Don't confuse viewfinder parallax with lens distortion which you won't see at all, but anyway precise jobs like that aren't really what a rangefinder film camera is good at. But if necessary bracket your framing, expose a few images varying the composition so one will be correct. There is a reason that photojournalists back-in-the-day would carry a Leica M for general shots and a Nikon SLR for tele lenses or precise framing.

Yeah, this is not what I usually shot, but would be interesting to see how precise it would be. Thanks!

[TomB_tx]

Even with parallax compensation for framing (which is very good in Leica Ms) there is still parallax because the eye's viewpoint is offset from the lens. If there is a foreground object your eye can see around it slightly differently than the lens does, so your eye may see a background detail that the lens doesn't, & vice-versa. Through-the-lens viewing is the only way to avoid this, unless you are good at shifting the camera to a "preview" position where your eye is at the same position the lens will be when you take the picture.

[Martin T-M]

23 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

MP is my first film rangefinder and since the first roll I noticed the parallax effect. It didn't bother me much since I don't shoot anything that such accuracy would be critical. Now I wanted to test it a little bit more and figure out how exactly parallax works, which side of the frame is cut and how much, so I can, when I need it, compensate it manually. But then I found this in the user manual:

The LEICA MP’s bright-line view- and rangefinder is not only a very high-quality, large, brilliant, and bright viewfinder, it is also a highly accurate rangefinder coupled to the lens.
The size of the bright-line frames corresponds to an image size of 23 x 35mm (slide format) at the shortest setting distance for each focal length. At longer distances, the camera records more of the subject than shown within the frames.
The bright-line frames are linked to the focusing mechanism so that parallax – the misalignment between the lens and the viewfinder axes – is automatically compensated and the image within the bright-line frames and the recorded picture are identically centered throughout the entire distance setting range from 0.7 m to ∞.

So I'm wondering what I'm missing here? I'm almost sure that the parallax exists on my MP. What I see through the viewfinder is not always what I get on the film. I didn't do any proper test for this specifically, but I noticed that some of my images are bit off sometimes, and I'm sure I framed them properly when I shot them.

Or did I?

"At longer distances, the camera records more of the subject than shown within the frames"

 

Got it?

 

[Michael Geschlecht]

19 hours ago, hirohhhh said:

Most of my shots with M cameras are street/candid/kids/etc, which are fairly loose shots, as someone calls it. There are situations when I see something that I want to be dead center and I just wanted to learn how to hit it every time. For example, if the little patch is at the center of the subject, is it really gonna be in the center in the final photo.

Or even better example: imagine I want to frame a window, all straight lines leaving 5% space around it. Let's say I use a tripod and I make sure to frame it that way perfectly. Is it going to be as such in the photo, or one side will be wider, or narrower then others just because of the parallax.

I'm just thinking aloud, I'm going to test this anyway

Hello hirohhhh,

If both the movable & the stationary rangefinder patches align with each other precisely (This is the Leica Forum.) and they are directly superimposed on the subject, at the center of the subject: Then, the subject captured will be in the center of the image. Left to right & top to bottom.

Parallax & parallel lines are not the same.

Parallax is a term which describes the difference in the image viewed thru the range/viewfinder system & the image captured on the film/sensor thru the lens. This difference occurs because the range/viewfinder system sees the subject from 1 place while the lens is capturing a slightly different image of the subject from a slightly different place & perspective. The closer the subject is to the lens: The more pronounced/noticeable the parallax is. Meaning: When a person is photographing a mountain which is far away: There is not much apparent parallax. When the subject is 1.5 meters/5 feet away: Parallax is more noticeable.

There are a number of issues with parallel lines:

Parallel lines/Parallelism is an issue that effects everyone capturing/copying an image of something where a part of the parallel lines are further from the viewing position than another part of the parallel lines are. The painter/photographer/etc. sees the closer portion as wider apart. And, the further away portion as closer together.

In a scene where the parallel lines are viewed as parallel when looking at the scene without the camera/lens: If a photographer does not keep the camera/lens on a tripod/solid surface with the frame lines in the viewfinder parallel to the parallel lines in the scene: Up & Down. Left & Right. Or a Combination of any or all: The parallel lines in the scene will NOT be captured accurately in the captured image.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited January 28, 2023 by Michael Geschlecht

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Anbaric]

On 1/27/2023 at 8:14 AM, hirohhhh said:

I was the SL user since it was released in 2015, and then I purchased M10R, but I tend to use screen more often, like a real amateur that I am  It was easier to me. God gave us screen so why not use it  So I never developed the skill for rangefinders, but with the MP I'm forced to.

I would experiment with the M10R's viewfinder first, where you can make some direct comparisons with the screen. The finders aren't identical between the cameras, of course, but you should see much the same effect as you do with the MP.