Testing out M11

[osroubek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Renting the M11. Looking for a lighter kit since the SL2 has started to challenge me due to mainly health issues. I had owned the M6 TTL, M8 and m240 in the past but switched to the SL2. The SL2 is a fine camera especially for portrait. This was taken with the Elmarit 28 mm. I also have an older Summilux 50 mm so I thought the M11 may be a better choice over the Q3, which I've been on a waiting list since May!

 

 

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!

[M11 for me]

Great image. 

I envy you for your Elmarit. I love very compact lenses.

[Advertisement]

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

[osroubek]

Thank you! One of my concerns is how reliable are zone and hyperfocal focusing. In theory it makes sense but I'm not really sure the end result is as good as it can be instead of just selectively focusing on the area of concern. 

[pcgarner]

Lovely grays and blues. And nicely framed.

[jaapv]

20 minutes ago, osroubek said:

Thank you! One of my concerns is how reliable are zone and hyperfocal focusing. In theory it makes sense but I'm not really sure the end result is as good as it can be instead of just selectively focusing on the area of concern. 

Zone and hyperfocal focusing are imprecise and unreliable by nature and do not depend on the camera but on the guesstimating ability and the unsharpness tolerance of the user. 

[ianforber]

1 hour ago, osroubek said:

Thank you! One of my concerns is how reliable are zone and hyperfocal focusing. In theory it makes sense but I'm not really sure the end result is as good as it can be instead of just selectively focusing on the area of concern. 

I think the trick is not to pixel peep. I almost always zone focus for street photography and am often disappointed at the softness of the image. Then I remember that I’ve zoomed in to 200% and if I just step back, it looks fine. 

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, osroubek said:

One of my concerns is how reliable are zone and hyperfocal focusing. In theory it makes sense but I'm not really sure the end result is as good as it can be instead of just selectively focusing on the area of concern

Why would you want to zone focus for landscapes, and other situations where you have enough time? Focusing 28mm  lenses with the M11 range finder will be more accurate than with any SLR, DSLR or mirrorless. Place the focus exactly where you want it by aligning the focus patch, and you are more accurate than visible with 10x magnification on the SL2.

With the 50mm, the reflex systems get better, but still in low light and with small apertures the RF has advantages.

Hyperfocal focusing and zone focusing to optimize DOF can be done with the markings on the lenses. Just use the lines that belong to the aperture used +2 stops on the M11. e.g. to judge DOF of F8, use the lines of F4. Or you can always use LV as you would on the SL2.

So in most situations the RF is an advantage for focusing. Even for moving objects, I prefer to pre focus i.s.o. zone focusing. Once focused either walk within the distance that you pre-focused on, or let the object move in that range. You could argue that RF is slower than a fast AF system, but this way it can be faster than AF.

And yes it is not as good as fast AF and tracking for sports and fast moving objects when their trajectories can not be predicted. Only in that case and as sort of a last resort you could shoot at F16 or with very wide DOF or hyper focal.

Edited December 4, 2023 by dpitt

[osroubek]

Thank you for your helpful reply!