M8-Focus on focussing

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

{snipped}

 

"Except I do those kind of shots all the time with both a D3 and the M8. And I don't miss them when I use the M8 due to focus. " (Bit of a put me down to my over-sensitive mind). But we're yet to see one of them, here. Where are they Jamie ? Show a single, preferably more, examples like the above from your 'all-the-time' archive.

 

{snipped}

 

Rolo--my abject apologies. I'm not trying to tweak you in the slightest. Truly.

 

I think there's been a misunderstanding here, and I'm going to clear it up.

 

I'm happy to post stuff for you, but my whole point was that you can't get those shots with a M (but not due to the inability to focus). I even conceded that the longer lenses you would need with the M would be very difficult indeed.

 

I said I take them with a D3 and an M8 but you're misinterpreting me, and once more I apologise. I can post all kinds of 5d, D3 and 1ds2 shots from ceremonies using between 100 and 200mm lenses...

 

Or I can post M closer-ups taken quickly (we all know we can't get that close with an M--that was my main point)? and to tell the truth I have done so over the years right here.

 

But to make myself clear, I *don't* use an M8 for the kind of hands close up you have here precisely because I can't get reach. I try not to cross the field of view of the congregation when I'm shooting a wedding. Yeah, that makes it tough and I'm usually skulking in the sides or hidden at the front.

 

Again, I'm terribly sorry to have tweaked you even slightly.

 

(I also don't like posting images here because when I do, to illustrate technical points, I 1) annoy the mods and 2) get critiques back on quality. I'm as sensitive as anyone else--maybe moreso these days )

Edited August 20, 2009 by Jamie Roberts

[Jamie Roberts]

Ok, here goes.

 

Mods, forgive me please

 

Rolo--forgive me please

 

Here are some M8 shots all focused very quickly. You'll have to take my word for it that I wasn't hanging around with my M8 on a tripod, a measuring stick, and an assistant.

 

I also tried to make it clear in the post that I don't use my M8 for long reach or macro ceremony shots because of reach--but not focus.

 

That means I should be able to take quick, but always in focus, shots during a wedding with the M8 while I'm quickly moving around without worrying about focus.

 

Right? That's the point here... and that's my only point. If folks don't understand that, or don't trust me, that's their thing. If folks don't like my stuff (or the various levels of proof quality here)--that's their thing too.

 

I'm only posting these to show that the M8 can be very quickly focused under typical wedding pressure, and I move around like a bunny during the wedding (except when the priest has told me not too). We all good on that? Ok.... here goes nothing.

 

First some wides... relatively easy, because DOF will cover you. But they're still focused

 

24mm Elmarit at 2.8: shooting fish in a barrel:

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!

 

28 'cron at f2 and 1/20s by candlelight. As usual, I'm standing off to the side. Getting harder to do for light, but still easy for focus. One of my favourite lenses:

 

28 'cron f2 at a December wedding (dark). At f2, I'm at the front, literally peeking out from behind a Christmas prop, focusing, shooting, and hiding again (very much like Rolo's method)

 

 

 

Here's the 35 Lux closer in, at f3,2 mind you, but no-one said you couldn't stop down Lightning quick to focus because it has the focus tab, and there was no way to pre-focus this shot beyond what I thought they were going to do.

 

More in a second...

[Advertisement]

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

[Jamie Roberts]

Ok, onto the 50s and longer:

 

Some Nocti shots all between 1 and 1.6. It's hard to focus quickly, but not impossible. Again, no posing allowed:

 

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!

 

 

 

 

[Rolo]

Rolo--my abject apologies. I'm not trying to tweak you in the slightest. Truly.

 

I think there's been a misunderstanding here, and I'm going to clear it up.

 

Again, I'm terribly sorry to have tweaked you even slightly.

 

(I also don't like posting images here because when I do, to illustrate technical points, I 1) annoy the mods and 2) get critiques back on quality. I'm as sensitive as anyone else--maybe moreso these days )

 

 

Thank you Jamie. Misunderstandings are so easy on the web and I've done a few myself. If we stay polite in all this the Mods will stand off.

 

All I am sincerely trying to understand is why we, as experienced wedding photographers have contradictory views on this subject of low light, hand held capture on a pressured assignment. I definitely don't want to be proved right, I actually want the opposite and to discard the DSLR. In good light no problems at all.

 

So, now we appear to agree on the shallow DoF ring shot, where do you regard the M to be substantially preferable, in low light and/or moving situations, to a Pro DSLR ?

 

That's all and illustrated if you will.

 

Ha. We were both typing at the same time. :-)

[Jamie Roberts]

K, now longer than 50mm...

 

This is a mix of 75 Lux and 90 pre-asph shots. Again, they're wide open, and I'm moving around quickly (trying not to be seen) in each of these shots.

 

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!

 

 

...and a couple more Nocti proofs...

 

 

 

 

So Rolo--to me there's definitely a *reach* problem--I'm not going to do macro shots and I'm not getting near a 135; but for me focus isn't the issue.

 

I like the M8 for a typical M perspective, which is wider for sure. I'd love to get rid of my dSLR too, but I can't (yet)

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

 

So, now we appear to agree on the shallow DoF ring shot, where do you regard the M to be substantially preferable, in low light and/or moving situations, to a Pro DSLR ?

 

{snipped}

 

 

In truth, I use the m8 a lot where I want to be very discrete, and when the AF gives out on my dSLR But that's another kettle of fish...

 

I'm kind of hoping the M9 has some better longer-reach focus options. Like focus confirmation

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Problem with good photogs i always want the camera they use but when i get the latter my pics still look crappy. Perhaps it comes from me after all. Kudos Jamie.

[adli]

I think I have to go home and work on my focusing skills...

[Rolo]

Ok, here goes.

 

Mods, forgive me please

 

Rolo--forgive me please

 

Respect Jamie.

 

It's good to see some very nice work from you, no doubting what these represent - quality shots. Thanks for persevering with it.

 

Your images do show what I think is the unique character of the Leica M and lenses. Nice colouring and very pleasant bokeh. It's always a joy to see it coming together.

 

I was pushing the ring shot because it's demanding in terms of depth of field and light level, I do it regularly because others here don't. Although it always makes the album it can be replaced with a full length shot of the event.

 

I dug out some I shot with a 50mm Elmar-M at 1/20s wide open, but the hit rate dropped to 40%. ....... end.

 

I've mentioned several times that I'd love focus confirmation. If they could link an LED to RF patch contrast, that would be very valuable, but no expectations there.

 

Two, 18 mpix M9's with improved viewfinders and accurate frame-lines, one at x0.85 and the other at x0.72 and that's all I'll need, forever.

 

Good to be 'on terms'.

 

I'll call for that beer when I'm passing.

[Jamie Roberts]

Thanks guys, I appreciate the kind "in-focus" comments. Rolo's right, it's always tough to put the stuff out there .

 

I have to say, too, that lately I've been using the M8 wider for longer (as in sticking to a 28 or 24 for a lot of the time), and the D3 for in-close stuff, and I find them pretty complementary...

 

If you want to see a very long set of M8 and D3 proofs from a single (long) wedding (and a couple of dupes from this thread, but not that many), you can see them here...

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/93121-complete-wedding-proofs-p1-m8-d3.html

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/93442-complete-wedding-proofs-part-2-m8.html#post990748

[Jamie Roberts]

{snipped}

Two, 18 mpix M9's with improved viewfinders and accurate frame-lines, one at x0.85 and the other at x0.72 and that's all I'll need, forever.

 

Good to be 'on terms'.

 

I'll call for that beer when I'm passing.

 

Rolo--thanks for all of that

 

I'd love a couple of M9s like that, and the beer is cold and waiting for you!