Manual focus without focusing aids

[JoshuaR]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

One thing I've really enjoyed about the SL2-S since picking it up has been using my 50 Summilux ASPH. When I shoot it wide open, I can get perfect focus almost all the time, without peaking and without magnification. I can just see exactly where the focus will fall right in the EVF. I'm not a fan of how autofocus puts HUD-like overlays over the image in the viewfinder, so the fact that I can shoot the 50 Lux this way has been a real boon. It's vastly increased my enjoyment of both the camera and the lens; I now have the 50 Lux almost permanently mounted on the camera.

Unfortunately, I can't do the same with my wider lenses. I own a 28 Cron, a 28 Elmarit, and a 35 Steel Rim Reissue. With these lenses, I have to use magnification to verify focus. With the 28 Cron, at f/2, I can almost go by eye alone, but my accuracy isn't bulletproof. With the 28 Elmarit, the plane of focus isn't defined clearly enough in the EVF. And with the 35 Steel Rim, I suspect that the lens is too soft at f/1.4 and f/2 for the exact location of the focus point to be visible without magnification. With these lenses, I'm actually much more effective with a rangefinder.

All of this is a long way of asking: Are there other 35mm or 28mm lenses that are so sharp wide open that, despite being wide, they'd be easy to focus without aids in the SL2-S EVF? I'm thinking about lenses like the 35 FLE or 28 Lux or 24 Lux. I'd love to have a wide lens to pair with the 50 Lux ASPH on this camera, that would let me shoot with a totally uncluttered viewfinder.

[Jean-Michel]

It is already rather good that you are able to focus correctly with your 50 mm lens. At the focal length the size of the image in the viewfinder is about the same as the size of the image with the naked eye (much ado thees days about why 42or 43 mm is the 'normal' focal length). With the aperture open to f/1.4 on your 50 mm Summilux the depth of field is small enough that you fairly easily find and focus on the desired focus plane. Focusing with your aperture closed-down, or using a slower lens such as a Summicron or Elmarit is more difficult since the depth of field will be a bit wider and finding the exact plane of focus that much more difficult, or impossible.

With wider lenses, the objects in the viewfinder are smaller and smaller compared with your naked eye. This makes finding the exact plane of focus evermore difficult.

Pre auto-everything, SLR screens had all sorts of devices to assist with focussing: split image, micro prisms, fresnel, and such. With twin-lens reflex and medium format slrs, you got, at the very least, a flip-on magnifying loupe, or an accessory finder with an enlarged image; for large format, you often used a ground-glass loupe to check on focus. With some large format cameras, think Linhof or Graflex, you had the luxury of a separate rangefinder to set focus.

I compared focusing my Tri-Elmar (WATE) with my SL2 and my M-P(240). Best for me is to use the lens on the M-P : either zone focus or rangefinder focus and view the image in the EVF2.

I sounds like you have a M camera. Just use that.

As for the magnification aid, it is perhaps distracting, but it works. And you can set your viewfinder to not show stuff you do not want to see.

 

[Biotar]

Are you only committed to M and Leica?

[JoshuaR]

@Jean-Michel and @Biotar, thanks for your responses! I've used those great focus aids on my SLRs, but now I'm committed fully to the M system and Leica generally—I don't really want to add a new system.

For the reasons that Jean-Michel outlines, I'm guessing that I'm bumping up against the limits of perspective. I guess what I'm wondering is if a super-sharp, wide-open wide angle lens might let me focus easily in the EVF. Like a 28 f/1.4. It's the kind of thing I might have to go to a camera store to check out for myself....

[250swb]

It is the speed of the lens that makes wider lenses harder to focus with anything other than a rangefinder or with digital magnification. With an f/1.4 lens the edge or object you are focusing on is either in or out of focus, there is no leeway because the DOF is so shallow and the image is bright. But with a slower lens the DOF wide open may be fairly wide so you have a harder time determining the exact focus point, additionally with traditional SLR's the image is also less bright because the lens is slower, and some loose a lot of light through the focusing screen and the more expensive cameras tend have brighter focusing screens. The M rangefinder isn't affected by DOF, so slower lenses are like faster lenses either in or out of focus and it's easy to determine. I've never tried it but could you assign a function button to increase the gain of the viewfinder and brighten what you are focusing on?

[Biotar]

I only asked because the Voigtlaender 1.2/35 (II) focuses similarly well for me. I don't have an FLE. I think a Zeiss 1.4/35 would be just as suitable.

[Jeff S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can’t help with your specific question, as I keep my M lenses (28/35/50) on my M bodies, using RF without issue. One thing I like about using an SL lens on my SL2 (other than lens size) is that I set it so that a turn of the focus ring automatically brings up magnification, but a slight press of the shutter release instantly brings back full view. Seamless and quick enough for my SL shooting needs.

Jeff

[JoshuaR]

1 hour ago, Biotar said:

I only asked because the Voigtlaender 1.2/35 (II) focuses similarly well for me. I don't have an FLE. I think a Zeiss 1.4/35 would be just as suitable.

Thanks for this—it's definitely helpful. I've been thinking about trying the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2. If I can get the focus working the way I want it, it could be my version of the Q3 43.....

[hansvons]

On 10/16/2024 at 3:33 AM, JoshuaRothman said:

Unfortunately, I can't do the same with my wider lenses. I own a 28 Cron, a 28 Elmarit, and a 35 Steel Rim Reissue. With these lenses, I have to use magnification to verify focus.

Basically, you ran into the eternal SLR vs. RF discussion. RF shines below 50mm while SLR and focusing screen start to outperform RF at 50mm and above. 

On a side note, I find any M lens at 35mm and shorter to perform better on M bodies in terms of vignetting and corner smear despite the "M optimised" sensors of the SL line. But I agree on how nicely a 50mm M works on the SLs, focusing and image quality don't leave anything to be desired.

[Photoworks]

I use the Noctilux 0.95 on the SL2 and it is amazingly wide open to focus.

I have found that longer lenses are easy to focus.

Some lenses are a challenge because they don't have enough contrast wide open, the the old 35 is probably very hard.

the 28 Lux is a great lens, and I do portraits video open and I don't need to magnify it. but if you are shooting the subject much further away it is hard to see what is in focus.

I think the resolution of the EVF is a challenging issue, It is even harder on the SL3 because even magnified the pixel looks less sharp.

[Stuart Richardson]

On 10/16/2024 at 1:33 AM, JoshuaRothman said:

One thing I've really enjoyed about the SL2-S since picking it up has been using my 50 Summilux ASPH. When I shoot it wide open, I can get perfect focus almost all the time, without peaking and without magnification. I can just see exactly where the focus will fall right in the EVF. I'm not a fan of how autofocus puts HUD-like overlays over the image in the viewfinder, so the fact that I can shoot the 50 Lux this way has been a real boon. It's vastly increased my enjoyment of both the camera and the lens; I now have the 50 Lux almost permanently mounted on the camera.

Unfortunately, I can't do the same with my wider lenses. I own a 28 Cron, a 28 Elmarit, and a 35 Steel Rim Reissue. With these lenses, I have to use magnification to verify focus. With the 28 Cron, at f/2, I can almost go by eye alone, but my accuracy isn't bulletproof. With the 28 Elmarit, the plane of focus isn't defined clearly enough in the EVF. And with the 35 Steel Rim, I suspect that the lens is too soft at f/1.4 and f/2 for the exact location of the focus point to be visible without magnification. With these lenses, I'm actually much more effective with a rangefinder.

All of this is a long way of asking: Are there other 35mm or 28mm lenses that are so sharp wide open that, despite being wide, they'd be easy to focus without aids in the SL2-S EVF? I'm thinking about lenses like the 35 FLE or 28 Lux or 24 Lux. I'd love to have a wide lens to pair with the 50 Lux ASPH on this camera, that would let me shoot with a totally uncluttered viewfinder.

If you choose "spot" as a focus point on autofocus, the only thing you see on the screen is a small cross that is not very distracting. If you use zone focus, you don't see anything at all until you half-press. If this is too much to bear, you are probably better just using an M camera. They will focus wide angle lenses more accurately than using an EVF with manual focus and no aids. But you will still have the rangefinder patch in the middle of the view. 

[Dr. G]

14 hours ago, hansvons said:

Basically, you ran into the eternal SLR vs. RF discussion. RF shines below 50mm while SLR and focusing screen start to outperform RF at 50mm and above. 

On a side note, I find any M lens at 35mm and shorter to perform better on M bodies in terms of vignetting and corner smear despite the "M optimised" sensors of the SL line. But I agree on how nicely a 50mm M works on the SLs, focusing and image quality don't leave anything to be desired.

I’m starting to love the 21 APO SL on the SL3 and think it would make a great travel companion to the Q3 43, but the size is less than ideal for a two body kit.  It has me thinking about the M11 and one of the 21mm offerings in M mount.  As you mentioned, critically focusing a 21 wide open manually is much easier than something longer than 50mm.  I’m just so used to the optical quality of the APO at this point that I’m not sure one of the M offerings would satisfy me.  First world problems, I know  

[Dr. G]

9 hours ago, Photoworks said:

I think the resolution of the EVF is a challenging issue, It is even harder on the SL3 because even magnified the pixel looks less sharp.

Maybe my memory is poor, but it seems like the image through the EVF was clearer on the SL2-S than it is on the SL3 when zooming in and manually focusing.  

Edited October 17, 2024 by Dr. G

[Photoworks]

2 hours ago, Dr. G said:

Maybe my memory is poor, but it seems like the image through the EVF was clearer on the SL2-S than it is on the SL3 when zooming in and manually focusing.  

yes, ii think it is just a firmware issue. the EVF is the same from SL2

[MFT-Lehrling]

Am 16.10.2024 um 03:33 schrieb JoshuaRothman:

I'm thinking about lenses like the 35 FLE or 28 Lux or 24 Lux.

Just tested it: 28 lux ist still possible. You have to have good eyes😜.

For 35 i would choose the Zeiss distagon 35 1.4 (m Mount) . I think it outperforms the fle in some regards, and for the sl body, the size is not an issue. I also got no troubles with this one. (tested it in the same setting as the 28 1.4)

The Problem is more, when your focus is at 3-7m, that you have an object that has some edges, to focus on. That is more crucial in my experience, also that the exposure still fits, while you have said "focus object" in the right Light for manual focus. I prefer to have constant exposure preview in live view the whole time, so maybe that is just my problem😅.

General speaking, you can easy get the manual focus Spot on, if the object ist clear and not too far with moderately sharp wide angle lenses. But that is the whole point of open wide angle... to still have some seperation. For me there is no point focusing some Thing that is 10m away with an 28 1.4. (at 1.4)

Wide angle and m Mount, with good f stop, is realy expensive...think more than once about this 😇.

 

[JoshuaR]

On 10/17/2024 at 2:47 AM, hansvons said:

Basically, you ran into the eternal SLR vs. RF discussion. RF shines below 50mm while SLR and focusing screen start to outperform RF at 50mm and above. 

This is a very helpful comment, and actually I've been turning it over in my head for a few days now. It makes me think a little differently about the Visoflex on a digital M. I was in a Leica store last week and tried the Visoflex 2 on an M11-D. The Visoflex EVF wasn't as nice as my SL2-S EVF—but it did have the effect, essentially, of tuning a rangefinder camera into an SLR camera instantly, by means of a pocketable accessory.