I thought I was getting the hang of the rangefinder but ...

[FlickM]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 I just picked up an old 9cm/90mm Elmar f4. Oh, boy, am I having difficulty focusing it! These shots around the house, of a friend and of my Valentines flowers, are all between f8-f11, so it's not as if I was using the lens wide open. These are the best of the several I took, and they are not pin sharp. I've applied a touch of focus, clarity and texture in Lightroom to help.  The rest were varying degrees of lack of focus. I do need a stronger degree of diopter adjustment than the +2 I've got (I'm in the process of getting contact lenses), but even so I can focus the 40mm Voigtlander fine. Yes, I know the Elmar is a much longer focal length with shallower DOF, but I just couldn't see the patch properly to get it in focus. I think it's me, not the lens, as the couple of properly focused areas I managed are really sharp. As for the contortions I performed to focus portrait orientation: it was like the dance of doom I perform wriggling into my sports bra before going for a run - till it finally occurred to me to turn the camera the other way up, the non elbow sticky up way, that is much more stable but that hardly anyone ever does, so then I wasn't groping up near the front of the lens and blocking my own view -

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 February 14, 2024 by FlickM

[Advertisement]

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

[Herr Barnack]

Not sharp?  Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. 

In #1, individual hair strands are sharp.  #2 seems a whiff less sharp, but still sharp enough to make a print from.  Same with #3. 

We are looking at these images on a screen with limited resolution as permitted by this website and still these look acceptably sharp to my eye. 

With a 90mm lens, you will get focus fall off, particularly at close range, even at f/8 and f/11.  With a wide angle lens, you would have a lot more depth of field up close, but a 90mm will not produce that same DoF.

Edited February 14, 2024 by Herr Barnack

[FlickM]

1 minute ago, Herr Barnack said:

Not sharp?  Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. 

In #1, individual hair strands are sharp.  #2 seems a whiff less sharp, but still sharp enough to make a print from.  Same with #3. 

We are looking at these images on a screen with limited resolution as permitted by this website and still these look acceptably sharp to my eye. 

Oh, thanks. These were the best of the bunch. I failed to get the other 15 or so shots in focus, sometimes failing badly. These needed some help to sharpen up - more than i would normally give. I just can't seem to line the two patches up with this lens -

[strangeboy]

Diopter: this is crucial, and something you should most definitely revisit once you've got your new contacts.

Movement: longer lenses are more susceptible to movement. The act of pressing the shutter button or even breathing can cause you to lose focus. My normal behavior for critical focus is: inhale, focus, shoot, exhale.

Blank Rangefinder Patch: this is most likely caused by something like your finger or strap blocking the smaller window near the shutter button. The rangefinder patch isn't electronically controlled, turning the camera on and off has no effect. 

Hope this helps.

[rogxwhit]

If the rangefinder blanks out then you've probably got your finger blocking its window on the front of the camera ...

[FlickM]

21 minutes ago, Herr Barnack said:

With a 90mm lens, you will get focus fall off, particularly at close range, even at f/8 and f/11.  With a wide angle lens, you would have a lot more depth of field up close, but a 90mm will not produce that same DoF.

Of course, I know that, I've had a portrait lens with every camera I've owned. The post wasn't about DOF but more my inability to see what I'm lining up with the rangefinder

[FlickM]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Just now, rogxwhit said:

If the rangefinder blanks out then you've probably got your finger blocking its window on the front of the camera ...

LOL, you might see my nifty edit - I realised that was what was happening. Duh ... I thought i was being very careful. So much to remember with the M. I do love my 262 though

[FlickM]

4 minutes ago, strangeboy said:

Diopter: this is crucial, and something you should most definitely revisit once you've got your new contacts.

Movement: longer lenses are more susceptible to movement. The act of pressing the shutter button or even breathing can cause you to lose focus. My normal behavior for critical focus is: inhale, focus, shoot, exhale.

Blank Rangefinder Patch: this is most likely caused by something like your finger or strap blocking the smaller window near the shutter button. The rangefinder patch isn't electronically controlled, turning the camera on and off has no effect. 

Hope this helps.

Thank you for your very helpful answer 🙂 Yes, beginning to realise that re diopter. I do know about camera movement with long lenses, I've been using them for years: it isn't that, I just can't see the patches properly to line them up, but I can with the other lens. Some of the shots I took were way off focus. And you're quite right about the little window, I realised and quickly edited, but not fast enough for a couple of you, so now I'm deeply embarrassed. What an idiot 🤦‍♀️

[strangeboy]

5 minutes ago, FlickM said:

Thank you for your very helpful answer 🙂 Yes, beginning to realise that re diopter. I do know about camera movement with long lenses, I've been using them for years: it isn't that, I just can't see the patches properly to line them up, but I can with the other lens. Some of the shots I took were way off focus. And you're quite right about the little window, I realised and quickly edited, but not fast enough for a couple of you, so now I'm deeply embarrassed. What an idiot 🤦‍♀️

Well, full disclosure: When I got my first rangefinder (Leica M-E), I spent about an hour on the lakefront, making photographs... with the lens cap still on 😬. You're gonna be fine!

[FlickM]

2 minutes ago, strangeboy said:

Well, full disclosure: When I got my first rangefinder (Leica M-E), I spent about an hour on the lakefront, making photographs... with the lens cap still on 😬. You're gonna be fine!

That really made me chuckle. I haven't done that yet, but mostly because of avid reading and youtube watching on M cameras, where it's mentioned several times.  And thanks again 😊

[FlickM]

6 minutes ago, strangeboy said:

Well, full disclosure: When I got my first rangefinder (Leica M-E), I spent about an hour on the lakefront, making photographs... with the lens cap still on 😬. You're gonna be fine!

BTW I absolutely love the abstract work on your website - right up my street

[strangeboy]

4 minutes ago, FlickM said:

BTW I absolutely love the abstract work on your website - right up my street

❤️.

[earleygallery]

59 minutes ago, FlickM said:

Oh, thanks. These were the best of the bunch. I failed to get the other 15 or so shots in focus, sometimes failing badly. These needed some help to sharpen up - more than i would normally give. I just can't seem to line the two patches up with this lens -

The rangefinder is a mechanical device, the lens itself doesn't change anything so the patch will look identical whatever lens you fit (assuming it's a rangefinder coupled lens and there isn't a fault with it).

The photos posted look OK to me. The 9cm Elmar is a favorite of mine, and sharp as one would expect any lens of that vintage to be.

I think you just need more practice lining up the rangefinder - it sometimes helps to tilt the camera so that lines may be more obvious.

[FlickM]

8 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

The rangefinder is a mechanical device, the lens itself doesn't change anything so the patch will look identical whatever lens you fit (assuming it's a rangefinder coupled lens and there isn't a fault with it).

The photos posted look OK to me. The 9cm Elmar is a favorite of mine, and sharp as one would expect any lens of that vintage to be.

I think you just need more practice lining up the rangefinder - it sometimes helps to tilt the camera so that lines may be more obvious.

Thank you. I must keep at it. I hope the lens is ok - I just got it today. I can’t account for why I can focus the Voigtlander but not this lens. The rangefinder images seem more blurred somehow. I will try tilting the lens as you suggest. I also wonder if I’m a whisper too close as the lens is longer. 

[IkarusJohn]

41 minutes ago, FlickM said:

I just can't see the patches properly to line them up

I may be misunderstanding you, but there is only one patch … it’s the duplicate image inside the patch that’s the issue.  I don’t mean to split hairs, but I wonder if you’re looking for the wrong things?

Aligning the images can be a challenge in some circumstances.  You probably know this already, but finding a strong vertical makes focusing easier.  Just be aware that M cameras tend to result in centrally placed subjects.  If you wish to focus on your subject, then recompose with the focused subject off-centre, you will need to adjust your focus as the plane of best focus will have moved behind your subject.

I suspect you know this already.

Practice is the answer - start with the focus tab (does the lens have a tab?) at infinity, so you’re starting from a consistent place, and get used to the feel of how far you need to move the tab for a given distance, then look for a clear vertial line, or near vertical line, you can align in the patch.  Good light helps.

[earleygallery]

24 minutes ago, FlickM said:

Thank you. I must keep at it. I hope the lens is ok - I just got it today. I can’t account for why I can focus the Voigtlander but not this lens. The rangefinder images seem more blurred somehow. I will try tilting the lens as you suggest. I also wonder if I’m a whisper too close as the lens is longer. 

As I said the rangefinder images can't be any different between those lenses, so it may be something to do with how you're holding the camera when using this lens? Tilting the camera can sometimes help depending what you're focussing on. I think it's just a case of practice. 

[FlickM]

20 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I may be misunderstanding you, but there is only one patch … it’s the duplicate image inside the patch that’s the issue.  I don’t mean to split hairs, but I wonder if you’re looking for the wrong things?

Aligning the images can be a challenge in some circumstances.  You probably know this already, but finding a strong vertical makes focusing easier.  Just be aware that M cameras tend to result in centrally placed subjects.  If you wish to focus on your subject, then recompose with the focused subject off-centre, you will need to adjust your focus as the plane of best focus will have moved behind your subject.

I suspect you know this already.

Practice is the answer - start with the focus tab (does the lens have a tab?) at infinity, so you’re starting from a consistent place, and get used to the feel of how far you need to move the tab for a given distance, then look for a clear vertial line, or near vertical line, you can align in the patch.  Good light helps.

You're right, you have misunderstood me. My fault for not explaining myself clearly. Yes, I do know everything you've said. No this lens doesn't have a tab. I'm used to putting my Voigtlander at infinity after every shot, as it's quicker to focus from there. I just can't seem to line up the ghost images with the Elmar, though admittedly the subjects I did today were very organic, not geometric. I have little to no trouble with the 40mm Voitlander in most light - a bit more challenging in dim light - but with the Elmar it seems a lot less defined

[FlickM]

10 minutes ago, earleygallery said:

As I said the rangefinder images can't be any different between those lenses, so it may be something to do with how you're holding the camera when using this lens? Tilting the camera can sometimes help depending what you're focussing on. I think it's just a case of practice. 

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with how I'm holding the camera. It's very forward heavy with the Elmar. Thank you for pointing that out. Back to practising. Hopefully it will make a difference when I get contacts, supposing they suit me and i can tolerate them. 

Edited February 14, 2024 by FlickM

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Pyrogallol]

Can you show us a picture of your lens, so that we can see just how “old” it is, from the 1930’s to the 1960’s. Your pictures look fine to me, but an old Elmar will not have the same look as a modern multicoated lens. Focussing might have something to do with the  smoothness of the focussing or the distance you have to turn the focussing relative to the focussing range.

Edited February 14, 2024 by Pyrogallol

[dpitt]

6 hours ago, Herr Barnack said:

Not sharp?  Sorry, but I'm not seeing it. 

In #1, individual hair strands are sharp.  #2 seems a whiff less sharp, but still sharp enough to make a print from.  Same with #3. 

We are looking at these images on a screen with limited resolution as permitted by this website and still these look acceptably sharp to my eye. 

With a 90mm lens, you will get focus fall off, particularly at close range, even at f/8 and f/11.  With a wide angle lens, you would have a lot more depth of field up close, but a 90mm will not produce that same DoF.

Indeed, these are fine, maybe because of good PP. You should maybe have shown us the bad ones

5 hours ago, strangeboy said:

Well, full disclosure: When I got my first rangefinder (Leica M-E), I spent about an hour on the lakefront, making photographs... with the lens cap still on 😬. You're gonna be fine!

Been there done that, and there is more fun!
Try using a collapsible lens. This takes it to an other level...
Lens cap off, but forget to extend the lens... nice blurry photo's all the way.
Or the lens not fully extended and locked properly in position,  first shots are fine and they get more blurry with each shot.

4 hours ago, FlickM said:

You're right, you have misunderstood me. My fault for not explaining myself clearly. Yes, I do know everything you've said. No this lens doesn't have a tab. I'm used to putting my Voigtlander at infinity after every shot, as it's quicker to focus from there. I just can't seem to line up the ghost images with the Elmar, though admittedly the subjects I did today were very organic, not geometric. I have little to no trouble with the 40mm Voitlander in most light - a bit more challenging in dim light - but with the Elmar it seems a lot less defined

Maybe it is the portrait position, often used more for portraits... I sometimes focus in landscape and then turn the camera in portrait to shoot. Take care not to move your head too much, with a 90mm you only have a few cm at best, wide open.
In fact, moving your head can be easier to critically focus at close distance than turning the focus ring.

Also, lining up the gost images is not always the most accurate, and can sometimes be confusing with repeating patterns.
What works best for me is a nice vertical contrast line going through the patch when in landscape. Of course in portrait mode you need a horizontal line...
It can be an edge of a building, a post, an eyelid...

OTOH, it can just be your eyesight. I did not realize the moment where I could not see the patch clear enough. Just came back one day with a lot of unusual focusing issues. Then I realized that I had to upgrade my reading glasses since I last used my M9. My reading glasses are worthless for the focusing patch because they only work up to 70cm for me. The patch sits at 2m, always, no matter what distance you focus on.

Maybe you have some form of astigmatism, like me, and a diopter correction can not fully fix that. I do not bother with that,  I just use glasses that are sharp at 2m distance for me. That is an unusual distance to tweak glasses for, so your optician might frown if you ask for that... But when I found the correct glasses to use, my focusing was better than ever again..
 

4 hours ago, FlickM said:

I think you may have hit the nail on the head with how I'm holding the camera. It's very forward heavy with the Elmar. Thank you for pointing that out. Back to practising. Hopefully it will make a difference when I get contacts, supposing they suit me and i can tolerate them. 

Try testing your Elmar on a tripod on a stactic subject to make sure it is working properly, maybe a CLA is in order. Make sure it is screwed in tight, because the Elmars have heads that can be detached for use with the visoflex. I suppose your technique is good enough to hold the lens with your focusing hand when shooting.

Edited February 14, 2024 by dpitt