Easiest to focus SLR?

A

analogpics

Well-known
Local time
10:25 PM
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
249
Hey all, i've been cleaning up around my place and finding some manual SLRs that have been gathering dust. I shot some test rolls around the apt to see how they fared and realizing that i'm just not great at nailing focus with most of them (mostly a rangefinder shooter for this reason).

However, two cameras stood out that were much easier to focus accurately. The Minolta X700, with the Contax 139Q coming in second. The Olympus OM4t wasn't too bad either after i installed a microprism only screen. The original screen that it came with is insanely bright, but doesn't have much contrast so focus doesn't really snap, which is something i experienced years back after getting an acute matte screen installed on a rolleiflex.

So, i was curious if you guys know anything comparable to the X700 for ease/accuracy of focusing. Even the microprism "pops" a lot more than any other SLR i own.

The other SLRs i tested were:

Nikon FE2
Nikon FM2
Pentax Super A
Pentax ME Super
Contax RTS
Yashica FX3
Canon A1

Anyways, i love the X700, but the build quality does leave a bit to be desired. Right now other options i'm considering:

Nikon FM3a- friend said the VF is easier to use than the FE2/FM2
Pentax LX- Heard the VF is great and there are a lot of options for different focus screens
Contax 159mm or Aria- though i'd prefer a manual film advance

Any info much appreciated, cheers!


Edit: Forgot to add, i'm curious about the Leica R system too as i know they worked with Minolta for a while.
 
If you still have the Olympus lenses, a OM1 or OM2 have slightly brighter viewfinder due to the lack of secondary mirror in them.
I agree, the x-700 has a great viewfinder, I loved mine. The Nikon F4 has a very nice and bright viewfinder and the benefit of AF if you want.
 
Simple question, not so easy to answer. For me the easiest to focus is the Pentax P3n. Because it has a split image focusing screen. But even with that I still make focusing errors. My next easiest is my Pentax Spotmatic.

Really if you want ease of focus get a rangefinder like a Leica M series.
 
I agree with your notion that brightness may go to the detriment of contrast, an thus ease of focusing. My positive example: Spotmatic. Very easy, very precise. Contrasty, but not the brightest. If you have low contrast in the VF, it can also be due to fog on the bottom of the prism, XD7/11 tend to have that IME, maybe other Minoltas as well?
Are you sure it's not your eyes? Do you need glasses?
 
Of your list I have an XD7 and an X500 with acute matte screens. Both are super-bright and at f1.7 they are as bright as the Pentax LX I own with a 50mm f1.2. The latter is bright but I find I've missed focus every time I've used the lens at f1.2. I admit to being a bit older! I've also got the FM2n which is good, but at f1.4 I miss focus more than I should.

However, the one camera that is absolutely streets ahead, to the point where I tried one for the first time I had to buy one, is the Leicaflex SL2. Every part of the screen tells you when you are in focus, and at f1.4 I've never had an issue. Better in many ways than the original or brightscreens I have on my Rolleiflex TLRs, and they have the advantage of 6cm square screen and a loupe!

The XD7 is well made, certainly better than the X series, so I wouldn't rule that out. The Leica Rs (I have the R4S and the R7) are just as good as the Minoltas, the R8 is better still, but the SL2 beats all into a cocked hat. NB - I found using an f3.5 35-70 zoom on the XD7 frustrating as the screen is then quite a lot darker and my focus was missed more often. Yet with an F4 Elmar 180mm on my R8 or SL2 I've never missed focus.
 
@analogpics

A lot of it is going to depend on the lenses you use and the amount of available light. A slow lens in bad light is always going to be hard to focus - the focusing aids will fail and you'll be relying on the matte screen.
On the other hand a fast 50 in good light is going to be relatively easy to focus.

If your shooting in low light with slow lenses you may want to consider a rangefinder as @charjohncarter says. Doesn't have to be a Leica.

Or alternatively use an AF SLR. You don't have to use AF lenses if you don't want to, something like the Nikon F4 works well with manual focus and focus confirmation lights.
 
Nikon F2 and Nikon F6

Nikon F2 and Nikon F6

Of the many SLRs I have owned and/or used, the best focusing are the Nikon F2 (with H2 focusing screen) and the Nikon F6. The H2 focusing screen is suitable for most lenses (unlike H1 for wideangles or H3 for long telephotos). What is pretty unique about the H series screens is that the entire screen area is covered with microprisms for focusing, unlike the typical focusing screens where the microprism is limited only to a spot in the center. This eliminates the need to focus and recompose, which can introduce focusing errors when shooting wide open with fast aperture lenses. The H2 screen also snaps decisively into focus.

Among the SLRs with more conventional focusing screens, I like the F6. Great viewfinder that snaps very well into focus. Of any AF SLR or DSLR, the F6 clearly has the best manual focusing, with its huge prism. It is the easiest focusing SLR that offers AF and among the best manual focusing SLRs ever made.

I like the Olympus OM viewfinders for focusing, given the viewfinders are very large and quite bright. However, the focusing snap is not quite as good as the above-mentioned Nikons. With the optional and rare 2-series focusing screens, the viewfinder looks incredibly sharp and clear. However, this can make it a little tricky to determined exactly when critical focus is reached. The best way to do this is to quickly turn the focus ring back and forth in decreasing amounts about 2-3 times.

I also have the FM3a and FE2 (with optional K3 screen made for FM3a). The manual focusing with these is very good. The K3 screen is definitely better than the K2 screen that comes standard with FE2 and FM2. However, neither the FM3a or FE2 focus as easily as the aforementioned F2 and F6 either, and have smaller viewfinder magnifications and coverage (around 92-93%).
 
The Pentax ME Super is very easy to focus, very similar to the Olympus OM1. The old cold-war Contax D and the early Wirgin SLR cameras are surprisingly nice as well. But nothing beats the X700 with the plain screen, it is the only SLR that I can focus while not wearing my glasses.
 
Minolta X700/X570 weren't my favorite SLRs, but I agree they may be easiest to focus. Very bright, and very obvious contrast. There's also something about those MD lenses that adds to the ease.

I've gotten used to the split screen on my Pentax Super A and find it easier than any of the Olympus or Nikon bodies I have.
 
Q: Easiest to focus SLR?
A: One with AF. Canon AF EOS SLRs with focusing by eye are even more awesome.
 
I put a diagonal split microprism in my OM-4T bodies. Really helped me to nail focus. Loved my 4Ts; the metering system is by far the best I have used to date!
 
Ko.Fe. said:
Q: Easiest to focus SLR?
A: One with AF. Canon AF EOS SLRs with focusing by eye are even more awesome.
Click to expand...

Gosh...I have an Elan 7ne sitting around. Practically new. Maybe I should actually try it with the eye focus. Just never got around to ..the calibration. Most reviews of the "old" days and also modern reviews tend to think a gimmick and not all that reliable. Glad to hear someone who says its awesome.
 
Best focus for what I own is Minolta XD-11 and the Yashica FX Super 2000.
However, these days I mostly use cameras with auto focus. :D
 
Generally, there’s no such thing as a screen that is the best in all situations. Based on the cameras that I have, a bright screen is easier to focus in low light, while a darker, more contrasty screen is easier to focus in good light. But I can focus well with both given enough time and attention. A lot of it is practice and experience with a screen, being able to recognize when you’re in focus. It’s a matter of learning your needs and your gear, and making adjustments when problems come up.

Don’t forget that SLRs may not have correct body focus, and TLRs may not be calibrated right.
 
The point made earlier about eyesight is very relevant. You have to remember that your eye is focusing on the image on the screen, rather than the scene itself. If, like me, your close vision has deteriorated with age, it can be difficult to achieve focus without some correction.
Alex


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
dtcls100 said:
... What is pretty unique about the H series screens is that the entire screen area is covered with microprisms for focusing, unlike the typical focusing screens where the microprism is limited only to a spot in the center...
Click to expand...

Back in the 1980's I bought an H2 all-microprism screen for my new F3/T and it is a wonderful screen - anywhere on it you can see what is and isn't in precise focus. That is the only screen I use on that camera today.

I think it equals the excellent preciseness and snap of the microprism on my Pentax SP500 (essentially a Spotmatic) - though that's a center spot only.

I have two Leicaflex SL's and, while the viewfinder image is bright and seemingly expansive, I think the OM1, OM2 has it beat in those respects.

hap said:
Gosh...I have an Elan 7ne sitting around. Practically new. Maybe I should actually try it with the eye focus. Just never got around to ..the calibration. Most reviews of the "old" days and also modern reviews tend to think a gimmick and not all that reliable. Glad to hear someone who says its awesome.
Click to expand...

My 7NE eye-focus works perfectly if I'm not wearing glasses - even in low interior lighting at home. With glasses, it works well only in bright light. I calibrated mine for only the landscape orientation, though you can do both and you can calibrate it for other people.
 
hap said:
Gosh...I have an Elan 7ne sitting around. Practically new. Maybe I should actually try it with the eye focus. Just never got around to ..the calibration. Most reviews of the "old" days and also modern reviews tend to think a gimmick and not all that reliable. Glad to hear someone who says its awesome.
Click to expand...

I had top level EOS with AF focus arrays and it was working just fine.
And years later I switched to simple model with few AF points.
Also works.
But I guess calibration might be a challenge for some.

I'm finding these camera to be much easy, accurate and fast to focus comparing to any SLR with nothing but manual focus prisms.
But having not junk lens is important for it to work. I use L and UltraSonic series lenses. UltaSonic older EF lenses while not expensive are good lenses.

And if eye focus doesn't work for some reasons (I'm sweating, for example), switching to regular AF is quick and easy :).
 
Dralowid said:
Another vote for a Leicaflex SL/SL2. Not much point in going on about it, it needs to be seen in the flesh.
Click to expand...


+1 (yet another) on the SL2. Had way too much Nikon stuff when I got mine so I traded it for a 21/2.8 for my M6. If it wasn’t an MOT might have kept it. In hind sight should have.

I love the P screen in my F/F2 bodies, made it much easier. That style in Olympus I think was a #14.

B2
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom