At what age did you start to have trouble focusing?

[dmr]

I just passed the big six-o a few years ago (I am still in denial!) and I consider myself lucky that I have not been a victim of presbyopia, so far, at least. I've been nearsighted for many decades and wear glasses for driving and distance but I still have excellent reading, computer, and close-up vision. I've never done contacts.

I've found that I can focus both the SLR and rangefinders reasonably accurate with or without glasses. I've never had a need for those correction eyepieces that some people swear by.

 

[sepiareverb]

My focusing problem began on the first day of school.

Hah! Me too.

With the cameras I only noticed it when I got my first Rollei at age 48 or so. Couldn't focus without the pop up magnifier or my reading glasses on.

No trouble with the RF cameras.

I've always used a loupe with the 810.

I'm now 54.

 

[barnwulf]

I have never given this much thought but, I started to wear glasses when I was 5 years old and I have been shooting photos since 1959 at around age 20. I managed somehow and don't recall ever being concerned about it. Around 2003 I bought a Pentax 67 and I had some trouble and just used correctional diopters in the viewfinder and got by with that just fine. Now I have corrected plastic lenses in my eyes since my cataract removel so I don't need to wear glasses and I can get along fine with my Leicas and of course AF is no problem. - jim

 

[Out to Lunch]

My focusing problem began on the first day of school.

You're not the only one...

 

[Mark C]

So is the problem that you can't see to line up the rangefinder, or that you do and the pictures are out of focus? M camera rangefinders need to be adjusted fairly precisely for lens like that, and the lens has to be right too. Either way that is a challenging fl/aperture to focus accurately.

 

[John Bragg]

Since 50,I have problems seeing the settings on the camera in bad light, but focussing is no problem. I think adjustable dioptric correction helps and I have this on Nikon F5 and F100, but I have no issues with my Leica M6 or Olympus OM1n as both are very precise in operation.

 

[lxmike]

My eyesight started to 'go' when l got into my 40's, now I am in my 50's l need all the help l can get and often rely on depth of field and luck

 

[jim0266]

Literally the morning I turned 40 farsightedness kicked in. At 50 I have have no problems focusing an SLR or rangefinder. To use my Rolleiflex TLR I have to use my computer/reading glasses.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Hah! Me too.

With the cameras I only noticed it when I got my first Rollei at age 48 or so. Couldn't focus without the pop up magnifier or my reading glasses on.

No trouble with the RF cameras.

I've always used a loupe with the 810.

I'm now 54.

I had a similar experience. Had a Rollei years ago which I had no problem focusing. Sold it. And didn't get another one for about ten years. When I got the latest one, even with the pop-up magnifier, things were still blurry. Thought it was the camera. Put on my reading glasses, with the pop-up, and suddenly everything is sharp.

Wish there were some type of diopter for the Rollei, because I don't like shooting with my reading glasses on.

 

[greyelm]

I am approaching 70 and I've never had problems focussing, this is probably because I was a microbiologist for 44yr and used a microscope daily. As a microscopist focussing almost becomes something that is done instinctively and the same technique of focussing is the same with a camera. The technique is to focus in and out a few times quickly and with practice the brain instinctively recognises the in-focus point.

For the 'middle aged' whose eyes have deteriorated don't give up hope, at my current age I am lucky in that my eyesight has improved over time from mixed long sight/short sight to only needing glasses for reading.

 

[Pete B]

I'm 32 years old and yesterday I discovered that I could not accurately focus the 75/1.8 Heliar wide open (on an M 262). I am not a glasses wearer, and have never had vision problems! This makes me wonder if I should ever even bother buying a 50/1.4 over a 50/2. Or perhaps there is simply a Contax G2 in my future. (scary!) 😱

It sounds to me that the lens might not be calibrated to your M. When I got my M I went through all my lenses to see which focused correctly. A couple wouldn't. I sent my Noctilux away for calibration and it was perfect after calibration.
My 90 Elmar also doesn't focus correctly but I don't use it much so can't justify having it calibrated. I've learned that, when focusing close, I just have to offset the rangefinder images a touch and this gives me perfect focus.
My previous 50 Summicron didn't focus properly so I swapped it for another owned by a Sony user who didn't need it to be rangefinder calibrated. My 50 is perfect now.
There's a good chance the problem is not your eyes but a need for calibration of your Voigtlander. You'll probably find a recent 50 Summilux focusses fine. Mine does, as do my many other Leica lenses, some of which date from the 50s.
Pete

 

[zuiko85]

At 45, give or take, I started to need reading glasses. Otherwise I've always been near sighted with about -2.75 in the right and -1.5 in the left. Now at 67 I just use wide angle lenses and scale focus and small apertures. That is the right way to use a RF isn't it.

 

[Roger Hicks]

I am approaching 70 and I've never had problems focussing, this is probably because I was a microbiologist for 44yr and used a microscope daily. As a microscopist focussing almost becomes something that is done instinctively and the same technique of focussing is the same with a camera. The technique is to focus in and out a few times quickly and with practice the brain instinctively recognises the in-focus point.

For the 'middle aged' whose eyes have deteriorated don't give up hope, at my current age I am lucky in that my eyesight has improved over time from mixed long sight/short sight to only needing glasses for reading.

This is it. It's not so much eyesight as technique. Though with Evil SLRs, some screens are a lot easier than others.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

At 45, give or take, I started to need reading glasses. Otherwise I've always been near sighted with about -2.75 in the right and -1.5 in the left. Now at 67 I just use wide angle lenses and scale focus and small apertures. That is the right way to use a RF isn't it.

Nah. Buy an Alpa 12-series. Scale focus only!

Cheers,

R.

 

[sepiareverb]

...Wish there were some type of diopter for the Rollei, because I don't like shooting with my reading glasses on.

Yeah, the tangle of glasses on a cord and camera strap is a real buzz kill. Added to my greying hair and general look of befuddled annoyance I rarely get the lusting glances I used to...

... For the 'middle aged' whose eyes have deteriorated don't give up hope, at my current age I am lucky in that my eyesight has improved over time from mixed long sight/short sight to only needing glasses for reading.

Already been through that. I used to need glasses for driving only, long distance stuff. In my late 30s my eyesight shifted so that I could see both distance and close fine, then needed glasses for up close only, but sadly I am now getting a narrower and narrower range of unassisted vision. I don't wear glasses much, not for walking around and not for at the computer, and only for delicate tasks in the kitchen such as peeling garlic or dicing (I want to keep my fingers). But for reading a book/newspaper/iPhone or driving I am behind the frames.

 

[Richard G]

1. Is it difficulty deciding on the focus? Consider checking vertical alignment of the RF. If this is even a little bit out then there is no satisfying snap into focus.
2. As advised above, is it the experience taking the photograph, or the results you get? RF again, or lens.
I've always had glasses and not having much trouble at 56.

 

[seakayaker1]

At what age did you start to have trouble focusing?

.......At what age did you start to have trouble focusing?

When I first noticed girls ........ I got distracted for quite a while.


As far as focusing the camera, I will be 65 this month and still OK but not as good/quick as I used to be in certain lighting situations. Some day it will be autofocus for sure but not ready to pass on the M's and other manual focus cameras just yet.

 

[kpembo]

I had an interesting experience with my changing eyesight recently. I had my annual eye exam and was given a new prescription. I had to leave my glasses with the store, so I used the new sample contact lenses they gave me. The left eye prescription was too weak in my opinion. However, I noticed I could see the RF patch in my Canon 7 RF much better with my left eye than my right. I suspect this would be similar to using a +1 diopter. I had used the camera extensively about seven years ago, and never had a problem. Recently, I thought the camera needed repair since it did not look clear and focused to me. I actually had DAG CLA the camera. He said it looked typical for a Canon 7RF. My guess is that my eyesight changed and I could no longer cover the range of focusing my eyes that I could handle just a few years ago. I'm 55. My eyesight first changed at about 48.

 

[summar]

It's interesting (or not) that the degree of middle-age sight relates to the brightness of available light. In full sunlight I can read a newspaper without reading glasses -- the pupil stops down, so to speak, and I get greater depth of field. In a darkroom lit with a safelight I need powerful reading glasses

 

[Darthfeeble]

I found out something that surprised me when I decided to go to contacts. I tried the monovision thing where one is the reader and one is the looker. Had the reader in my right eye so I'd be able to see the patch in the VF. It doesn't work that way, the patch is a mirror and required that I have the distance vision contact to be able to see it clearly. Also I was surprise in that the distance Rx in contacts allows me to see better close up than the distance one in my glasses. Makes wearing the damn things a little more tolerable.