DavidK
Member
Hi
I am new to this forum - hello everyone! I am also fairly new to the Bessa, although one of my first cameras (20-25 years ago) was a Konica Auto S3, which I still have and use. Well, until some muppet bashed it as part of a recent CLA, but that is a different story 🙁 . I bought an R2 and the CV 15/4.5 a year or so ago, mainly because I wanted an ultrawide for interior architectural shots in cramped places. Great little lens, although a challenge to my compositional skills! I also got the CV 75/2.5 Skopar at the same time, more as an experiment than anything else. Most recently I've bought the CV 35/1.7 Ultron, ostensibly because we were off to Lapland for Xmas this year and there was a chance (nil as it happened) of seeing the Northern Lights. Manual camera with fast 35mm lens sounded perfect for work at -20oC. Anyway, the "but darling seeing the aurora will be a once-in-a-lifetime chance and you will want some pictures, won't you?" was an effective excuse to give my wife as I brandished the VISA card 🙂
All three lenses are great. The 35/1.7 Ultron in particular is quite a revelation after years of zoom lenses on SLRs. However, I am still getting to grips with focussing compared to an SLR, and am not sure whether it is me, the camera, or simply too high expectations. The problem occurs with both the 75/2.5 and 35/1.7 when used close (~2m) and fully open. Both seem fine when stopped down (for obvious DOF reasons) and when set at infinity (for distant subjects, obviously!). However, for close things I often miss the critical focus. Wierdly, I inevitably end up with a shot where the plane of focus is 6" or so beyond what I thought I was focussing on.
Now if this was simply my sloppy technique I would have expected (wouldn't I?) an equal number of shots where the focus point was in front of the subject, as well as behind it, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I am being naive here?
I gather from reading threads on this forum that the hardest job with respect to focussing will be for something close with the lens wide open, and that at some point the baseline of the rangefinder will impose a design limit on the ability to focus accurately. Does anyone have a feel for what the limits are for these two lenses, especially when wide open, with respect to closest working distance that the R2 can reliably focus on? In other words, am I simply pushing the capabilities of the R2 design beyond its sensible limits for reproducible and reliable focussing?
As a final comment, I don't think I have a dodgy R2. The rangefinder images seem aligned when both lenses are set at infinity and I look at a telegraph pole on the horizon.
Any thoughts and advice gratefully received!
I am new to this forum - hello everyone! I am also fairly new to the Bessa, although one of my first cameras (20-25 years ago) was a Konica Auto S3, which I still have and use. Well, until some muppet bashed it as part of a recent CLA, but that is a different story 🙁 . I bought an R2 and the CV 15/4.5 a year or so ago, mainly because I wanted an ultrawide for interior architectural shots in cramped places. Great little lens, although a challenge to my compositional skills! I also got the CV 75/2.5 Skopar at the same time, more as an experiment than anything else. Most recently I've bought the CV 35/1.7 Ultron, ostensibly because we were off to Lapland for Xmas this year and there was a chance (nil as it happened) of seeing the Northern Lights. Manual camera with fast 35mm lens sounded perfect for work at -20oC. Anyway, the "but darling seeing the aurora will be a once-in-a-lifetime chance and you will want some pictures, won't you?" was an effective excuse to give my wife as I brandished the VISA card 🙂
All three lenses are great. The 35/1.7 Ultron in particular is quite a revelation after years of zoom lenses on SLRs. However, I am still getting to grips with focussing compared to an SLR, and am not sure whether it is me, the camera, or simply too high expectations. The problem occurs with both the 75/2.5 and 35/1.7 when used close (~2m) and fully open. Both seem fine when stopped down (for obvious DOF reasons) and when set at infinity (for distant subjects, obviously!). However, for close things I often miss the critical focus. Wierdly, I inevitably end up with a shot where the plane of focus is 6" or so beyond what I thought I was focussing on.
Now if this was simply my sloppy technique I would have expected (wouldn't I?) an equal number of shots where the focus point was in front of the subject, as well as behind it, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I am being naive here?
I gather from reading threads on this forum that the hardest job with respect to focussing will be for something close with the lens wide open, and that at some point the baseline of the rangefinder will impose a design limit on the ability to focus accurately. Does anyone have a feel for what the limits are for these two lenses, especially when wide open, with respect to closest working distance that the R2 can reliably focus on? In other words, am I simply pushing the capabilities of the R2 design beyond its sensible limits for reproducible and reliable focussing?
As a final comment, I don't think I have a dodgy R2. The rangefinder images seem aligned when both lenses are set at infinity and I look at a telegraph pole on the horizon.
Any thoughts and advice gratefully received!
