0.5m minimum focus. What do you do?

[CameraQuest]

I'm really annoyed by the 0.5m min focus.
The RF disconnects and you are left to guess if your image is still in focus or not.
I would love to buy some of the new VC offering (nokton 1.2), but this issue stops me from doing so.
Any elegant solution?

Something like 90% (95%?) of all the Leica M rangefinder cameras out there do not focus closer than 1 meter. Yet you will find many many threads at RFF praising lenses that focus to .7 meter and NEVER complaining about the disconnect between .7 and 1 meter on the earlier cameras.

Luckily your rangefinder viewfinder has a special indicator when you focus closer than your RF does - the RF patch STOPS moving.

Knowing that, I've never had any problems or confusion in shooting the limits of the close focus on a RF camera. Its a simple as paying attention to what you are shooting.

Stephen

 

[sanmich]

Something like 90% (95%?) of all the Leica rangefinder cameras out there do not focus closer than 1 meter. Yet you will find many many threads at RFF praising lenses that focus to .7 meter and NEVER complaining about the disconnect between .7 and 1 meter on the earlier cameras.

Luckily your rangefinder viewfinder has a special indicator when you focus closer than your RF does - the RF patch STOPS moving.

Knowing that, I've never had any problems or confusion in shooting the limits of the close focus on a RF camera. Its a simple as paying attention to what you are shooting.

Stephen

Stephen,

95%?
Any M camera since the M2 focuses down to 0.7m, and most M3s have been modified to do so. I think the digital M's too, the Konica RF, Zeiss Ikon...
Nobody complains about the lens disconnecting from the camera because... they don't. 0.7m is the gold standard in the M mount realm.
As someone remarked, when the min focus was 0.5 on a 25mm, that was ok, and you could range focusing because the DOF was there to help you.
But on a 35mm 1.2?
And I humbly disagree about the RF stopping moving being a reliable mean to spot when the cam is disengaging.
When I want to shoot really close, I run the lens to its closest distance and then move forward/backward until I'm in focus. loosing connection under .7 makes things really uneasy.
I would even say that the 0.7 distance becomes hardly usable, because you would inevitably try to be slightly in the range to be sure you do have connection. so I could work reliably at 0.8, 0.75 maybe?

But the most annoying is that it could have been so simple for CV to design something to solve the problem. even a small click, a-la snapshot skopar would have done the job. or a screw that you choose to put or remove, and blocks the movement. I don't know, but I'm pretty sure this could have been avoided.
I even think that CV should offer TWO versions of the lens: 0.7 or 0.5 limit, for two different family of tools: Rangefinders, and Live-view.

 

[Nigel Meaby]

Completely agree with you, Michael....I have a 35 1.2II and its a PITA 😀

 

[f16sunshine]

I'm not even sure .7 is really all that useful to be honest. Although I like to have it available.

When I got the M nokton 50mm f1.5 I was stoked with the close focus over the LTM version.
After trying it for a few rolls I realized I never really was in closer than 1m !
Those few times I wanted to get in close I wanted to get in very close and an RF was not the tool.

Cosina/Zeiss to their credit is likely including the longer/closer helicoids for users of Mirror-less cameras.
This is a legitimate application for these lenses even though it's a bit of a enigma for RF users at times (it's not often an issue right?).

 

[froyd]

Something like 90% (95%?) of all the Leica M rangefinder cameras out there do not focus closer than 1 meter.

That truly surprises me. I thought all Leica Ms after the M3 had focusing and parallax adjustment down to 0.7m.

EDIT:Sorry, just saw #26 above

 

[aeturnum]

I've used lenses that focus past where my RF can focus. You just stop turning the focus when the window stops moving. You're already looking at the RF window while you focus. It's never seemed like a problem to stop focusing when I realize the RF isn't following anymore. Just focus back to find the "edge."

 

[Tom A]

I simply measure of 0.5 meters on the strap - put some gaffers tape on it and use that as a "marker" for the 0.5m distance. Don't need it that often with film cameras (and parallax gets a bit screwed up). However. it is nice have the option.
Where it comes in handy is on my Sony A7. I use the VM-E close focus adapter with the various lenses - and suddenly your 0.5m becomes 0.3 m and no parallax problem. Again, not a frequent used feature - but nice to have when you need it.

 

[kbg32]

Keith, I fear you misunderstood my question. 🙂

Michael, I absolutely understood your question. Really, I am quite aware of the limitations of minimum focusing distances. I just learned to work around it. Knowing what my equipment will and will not do, and accepting the limitation. I use and adore my 50/1.5 Nokton. One lens I wish I never got rid of for the reason of close focus, was the Dual Range Summicron.

 

[CameraQuest]

Stephen,

95%?
Any M camera since the M2 focuses down to 0.7m, and most M3s have been modified to do so. I think the digital M's too, the Konica RF, Zeiss Ikon...
Nobody complains about the lens disconnecting from the camera because... they don't. 0.7m is the gold standard in the M mount realm.
As someone remarked, when the min focus was 0.5 on a 25mm, that was ok, and you could range focusing because the DOF was there to help you.
But on a 35mm 1.2?
And I humbly disagree about the RF stopping moving being a reliable mean to spot when the cam is disengaging.
When I want to shoot really close, I run the lens to its closest distance and then move forward/backward until I'm in focus. loosing connection under .7 makes things really uneasy.
I would even say that the 0.7 distance becomes hardly usable, because you would inevitably try to be slightly in the range to be sure you do have connection. so I could work reliably at 0.8, 0.75 maybe?

But the most annoying is that it could have been so simple for CV to design something to solve the problem. even a small click, a-la snapshot skopar would have done the job. or a screw that you choose to put or remove, and blocks the movement. I don't know, but I'm pretty sure this could have been avoided.
I even think that CV should offer TWO versions of the lens: 0.7 or 0.5 limit, for two different family of tools: Rangefinders, and Live-view.

Right you are on the M2. I was thinking the .7 started with the M6...oh well.

I doubt we will see different close up versions of the same CV lens. The RF disconnect on shooting closer than .7 has never been a bother to me. When the RF stops moving, I know to focus by other means.

The CV close up zone is a good reason to use live view on the M240 - both for accurate focusing and for accurate framing.

Stephen

 

[Scrambler]

If it bugs you that much, get a stop fitted at 0.7 and lose the last 20cm of focus. If you aren't going to use it anyway, why do you want a bump?

If you're a cheapskate, attach a couple of tactile markers on the outside to tell you you are at 0.7 by feel.

 

[jett]

I have an M3 and had lenses that focus down to 0.7m.

The fact that some lenses focus closer than my rangefinder has never bothered me because I just stop focusing after 1m.

 

[Lss]

It's a different way of working for sure. How I most often use close focus like is that I turn the lens to closest focus distance (0.7m or above) and then move the camera to achieve focus.

If I have some more depth of field to utilize I may simply lift the camera to my eye and shoot without the rangefinder: 0.7m is very conveniently an arm's length from that position and you therefore may have an "automatic focus confirmation". You need some depth of field to account for the approximation, forget making no mistakes in fast shooting at f/1.4.

 

[Jack Sparrow]

That is not really my question, although it opens new possibilities.
I don't want to take any picture under 0.7m (at least I didn't until you put that idea in my head 😀). I want the lens to show me that it's under 0.7 and the RF is dead.

Gotcha! Two ways; one is "by feel" as you can often feel the focus ring disengage a little and is easier to turn. The second, the RF patch stops moving.

 

[Pherdinand]

I enquired with several technicians about the feasibility of putting a focus stop in a ZM 25 Biogon, but all the technicians said there wasn't a reliable or simple way to install one.

Marty

can't you drill a hole and put a pin in, or something?

 

[sanmich]

Thanks for all the answers.
I think the solution might be in Post #19:
not filing but adding a clear bump to the cam at the rigtht point.
the RF patch would suddenly jerk in the wrong direction, indicating that you just lost focus.
If I do it high enough, and steep enough, (without actually knocking the roller) it could be an excellent solution. I don't have the lens yet, but if the cam is thin enough and there is enough clearance, a U shaped piece could be easily installed there. A 3D printer could allow for something really elegant, and reversible.

 

[Jack Sparrow]

Use a dot of Crazy Glue or nail polish. Probably easier.

 

[Freakscene]

can't you drill a hole and put a pin in, or something?

Apparently there isn't enough material. I asked, several times with different very good technicians.

Marty

 

[Godfrey]

I'm really annoyed by the 0.5m min focus.
The RF disconnects and you are left to guess if your image is still in focus or not.
I would love to buy some of the new VC offering (nokton 1.2), but this issue stops me from doing so.
Any elegant solution?

Seems an odd thing to get bent out of shape over. Just note when the focusing motion in the rangefinder patch stops moving and otherwise ignore it.

G

 

[wintoid]

TBH I feel exactly the same as sanmich. There's enough to think about when focusing with a rangefinder without having to try to work out whether you're at the end of the coupled range.

 

[WJJ3]

Thanks for all the answers.
I think the solution might be in Post #19:
not filing but adding a clear bump to the cam at the rigtht point.
the RF patch would suddenly jerk in the wrong direction, indicating that you just lost focus.
If I do it high enough, and steep enough, (without actually knocking the roller) it could be an excellent solution. I don't have the lens yet, but if the cam is thin enough and there is enough clearance, a U shaped piece could be easily installed there. A 3D printer could allow for something really elegant, and reversible.

This is an interesting conversation about lenses focusing closer than a camera's rangefinder can couple.
The 21mm Color-Skopar I own does this and I only saw it as a benefit since the the wide angle of view can be further exaggerated with closer focusing...

In regards to going to the extent of trying to install a bump on the lens' focusing cam so you can feel when your lens focuses past coupling range, I don't understand why loosing focus itself is not enough to indicate it?