EVF False Positives

[smuseby]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With an M11-P and a 21mm Elmarit with its large depth of field, I used the focus aid without any thought about maybe the focus was off.

What I learned is that the EVF & focus aid cannot be used in very high contrast situations as the red focus indicator is always apparent, regardless of the focus. The red in-focus indicator does vary in its intensity, giving a rough indication of in-focus, but the range finder is much more accurate.

Continuing to suffer from Nikon DSLR withdrawal.

[adan]

Yep - a 20/21mm (first focal length I've bought in every camera system I've owned since 1977) is the acid test for fast manual focusing with an EVF.

[jaapv]

I know the effect In the past a Sony NEX managed to turn a herd of Zebras into a complete red-out. 
Does the menu allow you to set the level of peaking?  The trick with focus peaking is to realize that it more or less indicates DOF so you must “walk” it to put you subject in the middle. 

[M11 for me]

Maybe its better using the OVF instead of EVF (back screen or Visoflex2) and focus peaking.

I like my Visoflex2 but I do never use it for focussing.

[lct]

Peaking can be used as a complement to focus magnification. Works fine at any focal length, at least for me.

[SrMi]

7 hours ago, smuseby said:

With an M11-P and a 21mm Elmarit with its large depth of field, I used the focus aid without any thought about maybe the focus was off.

What I learned is that the EVF & focus aid cannot be used in very high contrast situations as the red focus indicator is always apparent, regardless of the focus. The red in-focus indicator does vary in its intensity, giving a rough indication of in-focus, but the range finder is much more accurate.

Continuing to suffer from Nikon DSLR withdrawal.

Many, including me, find it impractical to use EVF to focus very wide-angle lenses (wider than 35mm?). Instead, we focus with the rangefinder and frame with EVFD/LCD.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No problem to focus WA and even UWA lenses with focus magnification and focus peaking. Easy and accurate. Just a snap at 15mm with Visoflex 2 below.
M11, CV 15/4.5 v2, f/4.5
M11, CV 15/4.5 v2, f/4.5, crop

[lct]

Another snap with Visoflex 2 on moving subject. Face is blurred for privacy sorry.

M11, Summicron 35/2 v1, f/2.8.

Edited April 1 by lct

[raizans]

Horses for courses. Rangefinders have always been better for manually focusing superwides quickly and accurately. SLRs had to add autofocus to overcome the limitations of TTL viewing.

[pgk]

12 hours ago, smuseby said:

..... but the range finder is much more accurate.

Continuing to suffer from Nikon DSLR withdrawal.

One of the strengths of a rangefinder is its ability to focus wide-angle lenses accurately because the focus mechanism does not rely on viewing through the lens as do both EVF and DSLRs. It is that simple. 

[la1402]

4 minutes ago, pgk said:

One of the strengths of a rangefinder is its ability to focus wide-angle lenses accurately because the focus mechanism does not rely on viewing through the lens as do both EVF and DSLRs. It is that simple. 

If your "wide" angle it is not wider than 28mm. You can of course still focus but need to guess the composition. I think the real advantages of a rangefinder can be found only in a fairly limited focal range. My favorite lens setup for travel is 21/35/90 mm. And both at 21mm and 90mm i find the RF system to be at a disadvantage (Composition at 21mm, tiny frame at 90mm). 

[pgk]

49 minutes ago, la1402 said:

If your "wide" angle it is not wider than 28mm. You can of course still focus but need to guess the composition. I think the real advantages of a rangefinder can be found only in a fairly limited focal range. My favorite lens setup for travel is 21/35/90 mm. And both at 21mm and 90mm i find the RF system to be at a disadvantage (Composition at 21mm, tiny frame at 90mm). 

Oddly enough that's my go to set too (75 or 90 though). Perhaps I'm odd but I find composition through the auxiliary finder to be fine at 21. I'm quicker on focus and framing than I am with my 20/1.8/Sony A7II which I ted to have to shift the focus point around with then often check it by zooming in, then frame. Despite all the modern tech in the Sony it hasn't actually improved precision photography as much as we often think. Its incredibly useful for some other applications though.

[SrMi]

2 hours ago, la1402 said:

If your "wide" angle it is not wider than 28mm. You can of course still focus but need to guess the composition. I think the real advantages of a rangefinder can be found only in a fairly limited focal range. My favorite lens setup for travel is 21/35/90 mm. And both at 21mm and 90mm i find the RF system to be at a disadvantage (Composition at 21mm, tiny frame at 90mm). 

M cameras have been successfully used with add on viewfinders, be it OVFs or EVFs.

Edited April 1 by SrMi

[Smogg]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Oddly enough that's my go to set too (75 or 90 though). Perhaps I'm odd but I find composition through the auxiliary finder to be fine at 21. I'm quicker on focus and framing than I am with my 20/1.8/Sony A7II which I ted to have to shift the focus point around with then often check it by zooming in, then frame. Despite all the modern tech in the Sony it hasn't actually improved precision photography as much as we often think. Its incredibly useful for some other applications though.

I don't know of any autofocus camera that I can shoot with faster than the M11. While focusing, I'm simultaneously constructing a composition in my head, taking advantage of the fact that I can see the space beyond the frame.

[roma]

5 hours ago, Smogg said:

I don't know of any autofocus camera that I can shoot with faster than the M11. While focusing, I'm simultaneously constructing a composition in my head, taking advantage of the fact that I can see the space beyond the frame.

Yes, yes….and the beauty is that I’ve now done the same thing with M3, M4-P, M-6ttl, M7, M-240, M-10, and a few other Ms in between. It’s so second nature now, that it’s part of my dreams/nightmares 🙂. 

[dante]

I was at a Leica workshop in San Francisco about a decade ago, and I was puzzled about why the older folks in the group were all shooting with the new Q or EVFs. Eyesight, they said.

This was somewhat foreign to my much younger eyes.

But as time goes on, you see the issue with digital Ms (and it is essentially unique to them) - it is difficult and annoying to switch between the optical viewfinder (which is fine with anyone's long vision) to the rear LCD (for which you might need reading glasses). Even with only +1.0 reading glasses, it is irritating.

Based on my own experience, the draw of an EVF M may not be so much the shooting as the fact that you can change settings and review photos in an EVF using your long vision, which means no use of progressive eyeglass lenses or shuffling reading glasses.

I think people are too busy fighting about how they are good at some technique or the other shooting pictures and the ideology of Leica M as it might be affected by EVF use -- and not paying attention to the idea that for some camera functions, an EVF might make users less grouchy.

[Stevejack]

At those focal lengths, stopped down, the distance scale on the lens is your best bet if you're moving fast or just the rangefinder focus patch if you have more time.
You really don't need to be too accurate at 21mm, even with a 28mm I'm usually just at closest focus, mid way, or at the infinity hard stop depending on where my subject is. It's infinitely faster than trying to use a focus-by-wire lens manually and I find it much more reliable than most autofocus systems when stopped down. 

When I'm wide open at f/1.4 on my 28mm I use the rangefinder, or sometimes the visoflex (zoomed in). 

[raizans]

Thanks for noting an oft overlooked accessibility issue.