Adjusting for lens position while photographing

[Ulophot]

Years ago as a professional, I carried an SLR, sometimes two, with various primes, and my M4, which had a 50 and a 35. I used the M4 mostly in quiet journalistic situations and in my 14 years of photographing for a local ballet school and company.


After an obligatory break from photography for more than a dozen years, I returned several years ago, non-professionally, primarily to larger formats. But I have been considering my M4 again recently, which now also has a 90. It's been so long, I don't recall how often I made the adjustment for the 1.5" lateral and vertical lens displacement. I am wondering how automatically those who use rangefinders extensively in active work today do and would be interested in your thoughts.

 

[Ronald M]

If I am interpreting correctly, all the frame lines move to the lower right as the lens is focused closer.

This movement will frame the subject, but from the point of camera viewfinder. This is normally sufficient, however if it is necessary to “perfectly” line up two objects, I would focus and note the distance, refocus to infinity, then move the camera right and lower, then refocus.

Best you accomplish this with tripod column change and micro focus rails used left/right. This is a kludge I have never done in 50 years.

Suggest you use a visoflex or SLR.

Also remember the frame lines show proper size angle of view at only one distance, usually 3 or 6 feet. Exact viewing is domain of SLR with 100 viewfinder ( which means a pro model like Nikon F) or the visoflex.

 

[Rob-F]

If I am interpreting correctly, all the frame lines move to the lower right as the lens is focused closer.

This movement will frame the subject, but from the point of camera viewfinder. This is normally sufficient, however if it is necessary to “perfectly” line up two objects, I would focus and note the distance, refocus to infinity, then move the camera right and lower, then refocus.

Yes, M models have automatic parallax compensation. But if you want to put the lens in the same spot where the finder window was, you need to move the lens/camera upward and to the left.

 

[retinax]

The problem with automatically parallax correcting frame lines like on an M is that they obviously correct for the distance you focus on, but misdirect you for the background if there is one and focus is closer. I find this harder to wrap my head around than correcting myself for the foreground and seeing the background correctly framed in the finder. So I prefer non corrected framelines. Ronald is of course right that when framing precision matters a lot, an SLR is the right tool, but we're here because we enjoyed rangefinders for various reasons...

 

[Ulophot]

Thanks. I wouldn't give up my M4 for anything, which is why it was my Nikon gear I sold when I needed money. I added the 90mm last year to fill out my capabilities for candid work, which is partly what got me thinking about the lens displacement issue more than the 50 and 35 ever had.



For SLR needs I have a 645, and my 4x5 is straightforward upside-down viewing on the ground glass. My photo of Fred Wills (somewhere here, and on my Flickr page) was made with the M4 and 50 -- a quiet, close-in setting perfect for the soft shutter sound of the Leica.

 

[Ulophot]

Although I am not Cartier-Bresson's greatest fan, I have been studying him recently to understand him better as an influence. The evidence in many of his photographs suggests a keen awareness of the viewfinder-lens displacement issue -- there are too many exquisitely fine compositional alignments to suggest otherwise, it seems to me. Given his shooting approach, and the evidence that some images were shot with the camera away from the eye, there are understandably many images without this, but it's hard to imagine that he did not learn to automatically compensate when he had time and means to do so.

 

[Beemermark]

While the M line adjusts corrects for parallax, the frame lines themselves are not that accurate. The frame lines (which are constant) show more or less coverage depending on the distance. For the M4 I think the frame lines are accurate at 1 meter, towards infinity the show about 15% less. The M7 is accurate (I think) at .7 meters. This inaccuracy is true for all rangefinders.

Bottom line, Rangefinders are for quick shooting of fluid subjects. If you want to get on film what you see, then buy a SLR.

 

[Godfrey]

Years ago as a professional, I carried an SLR, sometimes two, with various primes, and my M4, which had a 50 and a 35. I used the M4 mostly in quiet journalistic situations and in my 14 years of photographing for a local ballet school and company.

After an obligatory break from photography for more than a dozen years, I returned several years ago, non-professionally, primarily to larger formats. But I have been considering my M4 again recently, which now also has a 90. It's been so long, I don't recall how often I made the adjustment for the 1.5" lateral and vertical lens displacement. I am wondering how automatically those who use rangefinders extensively in active work today do and would be interested in your thoughts.

You might be spending a little too much time working with the precision of large format groundglass and SLR viewfinders. With any camera that has a separate optical tunnel viewfinder, parallax is an issue in certain circumstances...

The M series cameras have parallax correction coupled to the focus setting so by and large the viewfinder frame lines are fairly precise—nothing like the ground glass or a 100% coverage SLR viewfinder, of course, but precise enough for most circumstances. I'm sure HCB never sat around measuring the offset.

What happens over time and shooting is that you learn to adjust how you frame based on knowing what the lens sees above and beyond simply what the frame lines show. I have to do the same with my Hasselblad SWC and 907x cameras when I use the optical viewfinder. Within a dozen shots or so, I know precisely what the lens sees and rarely even think about offsets, etc. I just point the camera knowing what the lens is going to see based on experience.

So, my advice is to not think about it so much. Just go out and make some photos, practice working with exposures until the precision is right where you want it. It'll come to you very quickly within a couple of rolls of film. 🙂

G

 

[Filter Factor]

HCB also shot wider than what's been seen in his published works. He was a master in the art of cropping.