Q2 distance scale - useful?

[Casey Jefferson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

OK, first thing first, I spent two days searching forums about this very topic and I find it inconclusive.

First problem is on my lens the DOF marking is slightly off to the right, and when I use focus peaking at infinity the infinity mark actually line up with the white dots with peak sharpness, so a bummer that I couldn't use the actual infinity marking (admittedly only on rare occasions, though). I searched tons of photos from reviews and used sales, and it seems like a very common problem which people just don't notice or didn't think of it as problem.

I'm curious should I even rely on it? Is everyone's distance marking been accurate? I only came up with mixed reviews, some said it's accurate and some said otherwise. I'm supposed the AF should do most of the work, and peaking/magnifying comes second when that fail). I can only imagine that even Leica thought there are variable factors render the scales less reliable, hence leaving it that way.

[Advertisement]

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

[jaapv]

The lens markings should be correct, you have grounds for complaint, but Is there any reason to zone focus on an AF camera? That technique was (is) used on manual focus cameras at times that the user was (is) unable to focus quickly enough. 
I think these EVF distance scales are next to useless anyway. 

[Casey Jefferson]

14 minutes ago, jaapv said:

The lens markings should be correct, you have grounds for complaint, but Is there any reason to zone focus on an AF camera? That technique was (is) used on manual focus cameras at times that the user was (is) unable to focus quickly enough. 
I think these EVF distance scales are next to useless anyway. 

Admittedly it's 99% OCD (about things that's supposed to be functional even if I don't use) and 1% "what if I need it". 😂 As much as I wanted to learn zone focusing, I sucked at it big time.

However unlike my M lens, where the actual infinity focus point is slightly before the mark, since the Q2 marking is dead on I can use it as in preset and forget, but now it's slightly off so it can't be used reliably, gotta use the peaking/magnification similar to using the RF when the scene is tricky to focus (again, on rare occasion).

I guess the misalignment isn't something people concerned about, I'll just live with it and enjoy the camera.🤣

[jaapv]

Actually with an M lens, infinity is supposed to be spot-on. 

[snooper]

37 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Actually with an M lens, infinity is supposed to be spot-on. 

...depending on temperature. This is why there is a micro millimeter extra when you turn the focus ring towards infinite, was I told.

Edited March 26, 2023 by snooper

[Casey Jefferson]

43 minutes ago, jaapv said:

Actually with an M lens, infinity is supposed to be spot-on. 

Official Leica calibrated lenses that I tried, both body and lens, are calibrated that way. Rarely I come across a lens that line up distance object in RF and on infinity mark.

But again, it's official Leica calibration. I usually able to pick a lens up, mount and shoot, what do I know 🤷🏻‍♂️

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 It is rather normal that it does not coincide. I find the focus best with the lens at the stop. You can easily adjust to coincidence by the roller wheel. 

[trickness]

Just my experience and use case, which looks like it may be different than yours: when I street shoot with my Q2M I ONLY range focus, at f/8 usually, and set my range between 5 feet and just under infinity. I don't expect it to be precise, but that setting gives me enough latitude to get decent sharpness without thinking about it - I set shutter to 1/500 and use auto ISO if I'm going in and out of shadows. I NEVER use focus peaking as it is always wrong. 

What kind of shooting are you doing?

 

[Casey Jefferson]

28 minutes ago, jaapv said:

 It is rather normal that it does not coincide. I find the focus best with the lens at the stop. You can easily adjust to coincidence by the roller wheel. 

Even if it didn't coincide I find the focus to be accurate so I left it that way, and I do sometimes shoot night city scape wide open so I just use the RF to align with the lights or buildings just in case it's not quite infinity.

11 minutes ago, trickness said:

Just my experience and use case, which looks like it may be different than yours: when I street shoot with my Q2M I ONLY range focus, at f/8 usually, and set my range between 5 feet and just under infinity. I don't expect it to be precise, but that setting gives me enough latitude to get decent sharpness without thinking about it - I set shutter to 1/500 and use auto ISO if I'm going in and out of shadows. I NEVER use focus peaking as it is always wrong. 

What kind of shooting are you doing?

 

I do mostly travel photography, (including street) and occasional street stuffs around the neighbourhood. I like that with zone/hyperfocal I can focus on composition very quickly and people usually don't think much about someone raising the camera in a mere second and put it down, especially without "aiming" at something that obviously trying to focus on something. Just...I usually don't go too near to the subject and always end up not covering the frame deep enough. Still learning! 😂   

By the way with my M-P240 I can't seems to get a good exposure, always under a lot either full manual exposure or auto ISO due to metering, I'm confident the Q2 will at least give me a good exposure with auto ISO with the matrix metering. And I definitely want to learn it again.

Edited March 26, 2023 by Casey Jefferson

[Casey Jefferson]

Some updates, I used tape ruler to measure the distance, surprised to see the DOF middle line coincide with 3ft, 6ft, and 1m (my tape ruler is about 1.5m) when the focus peaking more or less at its fullest, which I think it's pretty darn accurate, with some margin of error as the sensor plane marking is absent. Just curious why the infinity isn't aligned but then it's largely in line with my 35mm Summicron ASPH V1, which the sharpest point is slighly before infinity. Weird...

Not that it matter, the focus throw compared to modern M lens is way too short to do muscle memory anyway. I'll try setting to hyperfocal with deep DOF when the scene is pretty chaotic and see what happen.

[Casey Jefferson]

1 hour ago, Casey Jefferson said:

Some updates, I used tape ruler to measure the distance, surprised to see the DOF middle line coincide with 3ft, 6ft, and 1m (my tape ruler is about 1.5m) when the focus peaking more or less at its fullest, which I think it's pretty darn accurate, with some margin of error as the sensor plane marking is absent. Just curious why the infinity isn't aligned but then it's largely in line with my 35mm Summicron ASPH V1, which the sharpest point is slighly before infinity. Weird...

Not that it matter, the focus throw compared to modern M lens is way too short to do muscle memory anyway. I'll try setting to hyperfocal with deep DOF when the scene is pretty chaotic and see what happen.

Addendum: for 6ft I made a marking and extend the distance with another ruler, may not be the most accurate but seems accurate enough for references.

[Casey Jefferson]

A quick update, setting the focus to 2m, f8, I'm turning this camera into point and shoot in a crowded street. Never been able to achieve the same result with my 35mm summicron, everything is in focus and sharp! I'm officially converted to 28mm shooter!

Do I want more bokeh, sure! But it's always the compromise, but in short 28 f1.7 proven to be much more useful than I thought with slight compromise on the bokeh, it's so addictive and I'm shooting way more than I was on 35mm, with way more keepers!