M11 focus accuracy? Your experience.

[dritz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How do you experience focus accuracy at 60MP?  I currently use an SL2 and focus is a snap.  I used to have an M10 and found no difficulty focusing at 24MP.  But 60MP?

Thanks.

[James J]

No issues, even at 0.95 on the 50mm noctilux 

[bkphoto]

It’s no different. There’s just more detail in the image.

[elmars]

The accuracy of the rangefinder is the same for the M11 as for the M10. It is absolutely sufficient. Sharp is sharp, whether at 24 MP or 60 MP. With an open Noctilux, there can of course be blurry images. However, this is not due to the rangefinder, but to the man or woman behind it. The focus zone is so small that even small movements of the photographer or the object are enough to blur the image. In addition, not everyone gets along with the rangefinder equally well.

[M11 for me]

You have to consider another physical point:

You have to look at the 2 images (24 or 60Mpix) at the same size. It would be wrong to look at both images at 100% in Lightroom when it is about comparing sharpness. 

[Cattoo]

Try using a much faster shutter speed.

What everyone has been saying about there being no difference is true, but micro blurs (if that’s a term) are much more apparent when you pixel peep at 60mp. You just can’t zoom in that far with 24mp so it’s not so obvious, 

Like you I found it a bit challenging at first, then I doubled my shutter speed, and now everything is razor sharp. Try 4x focal length. 
Not everyone will need to do this of course. Some have steadier hands. But it helps those of us who don’t. 

[chris7273]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

if you look at your photos the way they are meant to be looked at, I mean "no pixel peeping", you should be fine 🙂 

 

[jdlaing]

Rangefinder focus is deadly accurate. The photographer focus accuracy, on the other hand, not so much in some cases. Megapixel count has nothing to do with it. If you think you must shoot everything wide open you may get undesirable results sometimes.

[rich_]

The RF has been at least as accurate as my previous M10. No real difference to my MP either although that's harder to compare with the film being a bit more forgiving. 

[Kiwimac]

Any errors are mine, not the fault of the camera resolution. 

[Cattoo]

23 hours ago, chris7273 said:

if you look at your photos the way they are meant to be looked at, I mean "no pixel peeping", you should be fine 🙂 

 

 

Not necessarily. That depends on what you mean by pixel peep. Camera shake will be far more apparent with 60mp zoomed to 100 percent than with 24mp.  You can adjust your shutter speed to minimize the shake.
Diffraction also is a factor at high f-stops. 

[Luke_Miller]

On 8/9/2023 at 1:35 AM, elmars said:

 The focus zone is so small that even small movements of the photographer or the object are enough to blur the image.

I think this is a point that is often overlooked.  In my case, no matter how still I try to be, with very fast lenses wide open I can have enough body motion to move the plane of focus off the intended point.  When photographing a static subject at very large apertures with my autofocus cameras I will often use continuous autofocus to correct for my movement.

[DadDadDaddyo]

It's very good to see the consistency of answers being given here in reply to the original question. The community is correct. 

In the field (maybe even the street, though depends on requirements) I've found reason lately to renew my friendship with a fine, venerable old companion and helper: my Manfrotto Monopod. 

By itself it can provide enough of a fixed point to reduce focus errors introduced by swaying. Add a little down force and it's a point of solid stability. Add your two legs, lean into it a little (with it leaning back a little) and it's almost the third leg of an ad hoc tripod. 

Not saying it solves all our challenges, but in the field, for landscape, it's a huge help. 

Use it as a walking stick between shots!

[Photoworks]

it sounds like a few of us should stop drinking for a more stable life.

[Kiwimac]

I’ve found that switching to f2 rather than f1.4 results in better consistency with little regret at not having f1.4 bokeh in the vast majority of images. 

[DadDadDaddyo]

7 hours ago, Photoworks said:

it sounds like a few of us should stop drinking for a more stable life.

Way ahead of you. Stopped in 1986! 8^p 

[Photoworks]

2 hours ago, DadDadDaddyo said:

Way ahead of you. Stopped in 1986! 8^p 

Are now all your image with a straight horizon? For me, it is challenging LOL, but in focus at 0.95

[Guest]

I have the SL2 and M11. The focus peaking on the SL2 seems ideal, and I even bought the visoflex 2 for that reason, being I use the M11 when shooting weddings, and it comes in handy for certain shots. However, I found that I focused much faster, and more accurately, when just using the rangefinder. Images are consistently extremely sharp at f/1.4 when shooting that way. With peaking in the visoflex, I would find that too many images were just slightly off. That said, even when off just a little, the contrasts produced by Leica lenses makes images appear quite sharp when not zoomed in at 100% Since I always reduce images before delivery, even the ones that do come out just a bit off, look very sharp and detailed. I have always been the only one to ever know the truth lol.

[Guest]

29 minutes ago, Al Brown said:

NEVER trust and rely on focus peaking. It is just a contrast based approximation with no real-time value.

I've been using focus peaking on the SL2 for quite some time. Works perfectly, and I completely trust the combination of it and my experience. I consistently nail focus using it on that system in the fast-paced wedding photography world, as many others also do. However, I wouldn't trust it in the visoflex on the M11. Especially since the rangefinder is much more accurate.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear