raid
Dad Photographer
I was able to focus accurately with a M240 in LiveView even though the lens needs lots of shimming. You get what you see.
Got a great deal on a Zeiss C Sonnar ... struggling with focus shift
- Thread starter PhotoGog
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 72
- Views 4K
I was able to focus accurately with a M240 in LiveView even though the lens needs lots of shimming. You get what you see.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
I would guess I have a 1.5 optimised version given the guy I bought the lens from said he bought it new recently (which seems believable given the condition of the lens, box, hood, etc). I am not expecting Planar-like sharpness, just acceptable sharpness. I am torn reading all your helpful responses: half of me wants to be patient and learn to work with the shift given the special rendering of this lens; the other half says it is all too hard and I could sell it and buy a mint Planar ZM that will just work every time and still make a tidy profit. Actually, the one factor in addition to the shift that might swing me is the 0.9m MFD. This is a real limitation for my kind of use of the lens, much more than I thought it might be before shooting those three rolls of Ektar. I found myself taking two steps back every time I composed a portrait to find focus (and then the shift gave me OOF anyway)! You can all probably tell from my tone I am leaning towards listing it on eBay given they have a free listing promo at the mo. I can only afford to have one 50mm in my Leica kit and this does not seem versatile enough for my needs. And when I want beautiful Bokeh for portraits I always have my Pentax 67 105/2.4 (and back problems)! Yeah, the more I think about it the more I think I will pick up a Planar and maybe a Jupiter-8 when I want to fool around with temperamental sonnars.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
P
PhotoGog
Guest
Scrambler
Well-known
Did you do 1.5 tests like the 2.8 ones you have posted? Is it a 1.5 optimised lens?
And what kind of photos are you planning on using it for?
If I had one I would want a 1.5 optimised, because if you want sharp then get something else and if you want smooth OOF ("bokeh") then use wide open. So for me performance at 2 to 4 is meaningless.
Best of luck, but then with a good price you win either way.
Edit: had looked at photos and missed the text.
And what kind of photos are you planning on using it for?
If I had one I would want a 1.5 optimised, because if you want sharp then get something else and if you want smooth OOF ("bokeh") then use wide open. So for me performance at 2 to 4 is meaningless.
Best of luck, but then with a good price you win either way.
Edit: had looked at photos and missed the text.
Scrambler
Well-known
I'm a lover of Sonnars and have owned a few, including a 1930s uncoated f1.5 and a J8, and thats not including my favourite portrait lens, a Nikkor 85/2. But I also have a Canon 50/1.4 that is sharp and predictable throughout apertures. If I want sharp simple photos it goes on. If I want pretty and harder to do I go Sonnar. If I was preparing for portrait work it would be all Sonnars. What do you want tack sharp for with portraits?
I would consider a supplementary planar-style lens but consider a lower pricepoint. An older Canon or a newer Voigtlander will possibly do the job. You have MF if you want to read pixie writing on objects so you don't need on over-sharp 50mm. You won't get the pixie dust with a planar though. Use the Sonnar wide open and see how that goes.
I would consider a supplementary planar-style lens but consider a lower pricepoint. An older Canon or a newer Voigtlander will possibly do the job. You have MF if you want to read pixie writing on objects so you don't need on over-sharp 50mm. You won't get the pixie dust with a planar though. Use the Sonnar wide open and see how that goes.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I generally use mine this way also ... the deterent being the blackout and slow refresh of the EVF.
This was my impatient selfie test. Shot at f/2.8 focused on my eye but as you can see the focus appears closer on the strap/lug of the M6.
Focus should have been spot on here. I don't think this amount of error is just the lens. My guess is the M6 is also a contributing factor in the front focusing. How is the RF adjustment on your M6? Do you have any other lenses you can test on it?
If that was the case, you would have gotten back focusing in the above shot at f2.8, not front focusing.
Platinum RF
Well-known
I hope someone bring a EVF M camera on the market at reasonable price, WYSIWYG, then the focus shift or a mechanic rangefinder error will be ironed out. The Leica M- both digital and film focus mechanism is out of dated.
Scrambler
Well-known
Off topic, but the Sony A7 family does this. At a reasonable price: try getting any M-mount RF for the price of an A7. Get an A7ii plus AF adapter for Leica and have the previously impossible: an AF using your manual Leica lenses. This setup will correctly focus a Sonnar C. Get both for less than any digital Leica of any age.
But miss all the fun 🙂
P
PhotoGog
Guest
That is a good point. This is a recently acquired M6 after all and I have not used any other lens it. I have my CV 35/2.5 coming back from a friend in a few weeks so I can test the RF alignment on that. If it is out I will have to get a CLA which is an expensive proposition being based in Australia. The patch flares quite a bit (I have owned an M2 and M6TTL, the latter supposed to be the same optics as the M6 classic but I had no flare). After giving the M system a rest for a while I am no recalling just how expensive it can be to address problems. The Nikon FE, on the other hand, just works. But ... boring. Will have to test focus against my CV soon and assess the situation then. Thanks.
Scrambler
Well-known
PM me if you are in SEQ, and you can try vs my Epson and the Canon lens. There are decent cells of RFers in Sydney and Melbourne and some scattered elsewhere.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
Got a great deal on a Zeiss C Sonnar ... struggling with focus shift
One of the just a bit too soft frames for my liking. Maybe shot at f2, can not remember. I was absolutely sure to nail the patch focus on the eyes. I have decided to hold off any rash decision to flip the C Sonnar and investigate the apertures vs focus of my copy in a regulated test (tripod, slide rule). And also test the RF alignment of my M6 with another lens as recommended here, given it is a new body for me. Seems worth waiting given the great deal I got for boxed lens plus hood (around US$500). Now I understand why so many shooters far more experienced than I have struggled with this lens also. And yet ... beautiful when focus is nailed wide open.
colker
Well-known
It ´s called a rangefinder forum. We are outdated.
Outdated is fun. It´s good. It makes great pictures.
We calibrate lens and cameras. We love it.
We nail focus.
colker
Well-known
One of the just a bit too soft frames for my liking. Maybe shot at f2, can not remember. I was absolutely sure to nail the patch focus on the eyes. I have decided to hold off any rash decision to flip the C Sonnar and investigate the apertures vs focus of my copy in a regulated test (tripod, slide rule). And also test the RF alignment of my M6 with another lens as recommended here, given it is a new body for me. Seems worth waiting given the great deal I got for boxed lens plus hood (around US$500). Now I understand why so many shooters far more experienced than I have struggled with this lens also. And yet ... beautiful when focus is nailed wide open.
Beautifull picture.
Calibrate your camera and lens.
Learn your way around focus shift.. this picture is worth a thousand threads.
colker
Well-known
mcfingon
Western Australia
That photo looks front-focused by about a meter. I suspect the M6 RF may need tuning. I'll post a pic of where my 1986 M6 focus ended up after I set it focus accurately for my Sonnar. I had a ZM Planar as well as the ZM Sonnar but liked the character of the Sonnar much more, so I sold the Planar.One of the just a bit too soft frames for my liking. Maybe shot at f2, can not remember. I was absolutely sure to nail the patch focus on the eyes. I have decided to hold off any rash decision to flip the C Sonnar and investigate the apertures vs focus of my copy in a regulated test (tripod, slide rule). And also test the RF alignment of my M6 with another lens as recommended here, given it is a new body for me. Seems worth waiting given the great deal I got for boxed lens plus hood (around US$500). Now I understand why so many shooters far more experienced than I have struggled with this lens also. And yet ... beautiful when focus is nailed wide open.
John Mc
mcfingon
Western Australia
Here's my M6 RF adjust settings. All five of my M-series lenses were rear-focusing until I set the close-up focus arm to the correct point for this particular camera body.
John Mc
John Mc
P
PhotoGog
Guest
This is very useful. Thank you. I think I will have to save some cash (and sell off some gear) to send the M6 to Youxin Ye. I want to get the MP finder upgrade with multi coated windows anyway since this particular M6 flares so badly. This will cost quite a bit with shipping from Sydney but I am prepared to persevere with dealing with this issue so that I can spend many years happily shooting with the C Sonnar on this body and just forget about more gear acquisition for a long while! That is the theory at least.
P
PhotoGog
Guest
Got a great deal on a Zeiss C Sonnar ... struggling with focus shift
Forgot to add that my incentive to figure out the C Sonnar use is that in my M system hiatus last year I shot mostly a F2AS with Zeiss 50/1.4 ZF.2 but found the Planar renderings vanilla. Nothing wrong, but nothing magical, unless the light made it so anyway. Which is true of all lenses of course but the C Sonnar makes even pedestrian assemblages or still life objects sing. And the portraits of course.
As I say this I just recalled my short stint with the CV 50/3.5 Heliar that I fooled around with back when I had my M2 three years ago. Amazing optics but horrible ergonomics for casual shooting. Still regret selling it however. I do not wish to repeat that seller remorse with the C Sonnar through my own temperamental impatience. To be continued. Somehow I always bleed money with the bloody M system.
Forgot to add that my incentive to figure out the C Sonnar use is that in my M system hiatus last year I shot mostly a F2AS with Zeiss 50/1.4 ZF.2 but found the Planar renderings vanilla. Nothing wrong, but nothing magical, unless the light made it so anyway. Which is true of all lenses of course but the C Sonnar makes even pedestrian assemblages or still life objects sing. And the portraits of course.
As I say this I just recalled my short stint with the CV 50/3.5 Heliar that I fooled around with back when I had my M2 three years ago. Amazing optics but horrible ergonomics for casual shooting. Still regret selling it however. I do not wish to repeat that seller remorse with the C Sonnar through my own temperamental impatience. To be continued. Somehow I always bleed money with the bloody M system.
Similar threads
