jimbobuk
Established
I received an old Leitz 90mm F4 lens yesterday that i plan to use on my bessa r3a which has framelines for it.. I'm assuming the rangefinder base length is about the same between this and the R-D1.. it looks the same distance at a glance.
Anyways i tested focusing it on my R-D1 where pics are free and had varying sucesses.. beyond 2m or so focusing was a bit hit and miss in strange ways.. tending towards back focusing when i was trying to line up the image. Real long distances (20m or so) also seemed simlarly patchy as far as focusing where i wanted to. This is all at F4 .. decreasing the aperture starts to make it reasonably sharp where you are trying to focus but its obvious that failing to at F4 only means i'm relying on the region of acceptable sharpness to get the area in focus.
Is this about right for the R-D1 or should it be able to focus more accurately.. I'll try refitting it and see if the screw mount wasn't letting it work correctly.. its strange though closer distances always seemed to focus quite well. Needless to say i've never noticed any problem with any other (easier to focus) lenses i've tried on my R-D1 so far. (35, 40, and 50mm lenses)
Cheers
Jim
Anyways i tested focusing it on my R-D1 where pics are free and had varying sucesses.. beyond 2m or so focusing was a bit hit and miss in strange ways.. tending towards back focusing when i was trying to line up the image. Real long distances (20m or so) also seemed simlarly patchy as far as focusing where i wanted to. This is all at F4 .. decreasing the aperture starts to make it reasonably sharp where you are trying to focus but its obvious that failing to at F4 only means i'm relying on the region of acceptable sharpness to get the area in focus.
Is this about right for the R-D1 or should it be able to focus more accurately.. I'll try refitting it and see if the screw mount wasn't letting it work correctly.. its strange though closer distances always seemed to focus quite well. Needless to say i've never noticed any problem with any other (easier to focus) lenses i've tried on my R-D1 so far. (35, 40, and 50mm lenses)
Cheers
Jim
rvaubel
Well-known
I have the collapsible version of the 90mm/f4. I don't have any problem with focusing at all. In fact , the Elmar is one of my favorite lenses on the R-D1. Keep in mind that the 90mm is a pretty long lens(135mm equiv) on the Epson but if the rangefinder is working correctly F4 shouldnt really be a problem.
That being said, my particular camera has been extensively tested and has no rangefinder problems at all. I've used f1.4's that have DOF's of less than a 1" at 3 0r 4 ft with good results.
If you have the collapisble, it will close focus. Do a little bit of systematic testing @ F4 on a newspaper sloping away at an angle at a distance of 5' or so. Then take some infinity pictures. Everything should be fine.
Rex
That being said, my particular camera has been extensively tested and has no rangefinder problems at all. I've used f1.4's that have DOF's of less than a 1" at 3 0r 4 ft with good results.
If you have the collapisble, it will close focus. Do a little bit of systematic testing @ F4 on a newspaper sloping away at an angle at a distance of 5' or so. Then take some infinity pictures. Everything should be fine.
Rex
Mark Norton
Well-known
How do you frame a shot without a viewfinder frame, an aux finder or good judgment? I've just done some tests with my 90mm f2.8 Elmarit and it's fine.
rvaubel
Well-known
Without an auxilary finder, it takes some practice but can be done. Remember the 50mm frameline is actually 75mm equivalent. So if you use the center portion(25% by area) you can do it. Parrellax is the bigger problem.
However, mostly I use a 90mm CV aux finder. It has some parellax marks inside the framelines that roughly approximates the 135mm FOV. It works pretty well but I'm trying to find a proper 135mm finder.
Jimbobuk, I assume your 90mm Elmar IS rangefinder coupled. Their is a thread going on now about some pre 50's models that where not. I was not aware.
Rex
However, mostly I use a 90mm CV aux finder. It has some parellax marks inside the framelines that roughly approximates the 135mm FOV. It works pretty well but I'm trying to find a proper 135mm finder.
Jimbobuk, I assume your 90mm Elmar IS rangefinder coupled. Their is a thread going on now about some pre 50's models that where not. I was not aware.
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
Thanks guys...
It must be rangefinder coupled as the focusing image is being moved whilst i focus on the lens. I'm wondering if its offset by an amount.. its definitely out once you get beyond a certain distance.. shorter than that i'm able to get it closer.
The R-D1 is fine i think, its able to focus my nokton 1.4 40mm with no noticable problems.
Its a very old lens .. 193xs i think.. I don't know if i'll ever pluck up the courage to try it on my R3a potentially wasting film.. I'll try some alternative LTM->M adapters, i've heard of some having problems with them.
I'll talk to the seller of the lens too.
Cheers
Jim
It must be rangefinder coupled as the focusing image is being moved whilst i focus on the lens. I'm wondering if its offset by an amount.. its definitely out once you get beyond a certain distance.. shorter than that i'm able to get it closer.
The R-D1 is fine i think, its able to focus my nokton 1.4 40mm with no noticable problems.
Its a very old lens .. 193xs i think.. I don't know if i'll ever pluck up the courage to try it on my R3a potentially wasting film.. I'll try some alternative LTM->M adapters, i've heard of some having problems with them.
I'll talk to the seller of the lens too.
Cheers
Jim
lightwriter
Established
I have the 90mm collapsible elmar as well and have no real issues. It works really well on the R-D1.
edlaurpic
Established
Those of you will collapsible 90 elmars, are they the recent macro elmar? If so, how well does it work up close?
sf
Veteran
90mm seems a bit long for the RD-1 baselength. That might be why. Especially if you're shooting at close distances and open apertures.
rvaubel
Well-known
My collapsible Elmar is not the macro just the "plain" Elmar. Its the chrome version, sr.#1262xxx which puts it around 1954. Even though its not the macro, it close focuses to 1 meter which is pretty close for a telephoto. I use this lens a lot more than I thought I would as I too, thought off 135mm(equiv) as being pretty long for a rangefinder.
Because it is a little soft, it makes an excellent outdoor portrait lens. Has a nice glow and great bokeh. I end up using the 50mm framelines, very losely, most of the time and this works.
Collapsed, its about the same size as a 50mm sumilux which is cool for unobstrusive street photoghraphy. No one would suspect that your nailin' em with such a diminutive little rig.
Highly recommended. $300-400 for a ex+ copy at a store near you.
Rex
Because it is a little soft, it makes an excellent outdoor portrait lens. Has a nice glow and great bokeh. I end up using the 50mm framelines, very losely, most of the time and this works.
Collapsed, its about the same size as a 50mm sumilux which is cool for unobstrusive street photoghraphy. No one would suspect that your nailin' em with such a diminutive little rig.
Highly recommended. $300-400 for a ex+ copy at a store near you.
Rex
Flinor
Well-known
I have no problem with either a 90 ridgid Elmar or a 90 Rokkor. Wth both I use a Canon 135 finder and it works very well.
lightwriter
Established
edlaurpic said:
Mine is the new 90mm Macro Elmar which focuses down to .77m (1:6.7) without the eyes. With the eyes it focuses down to .5m (1:3). Eyes will not work on the R-D1, of course. It is very accurate with my R-D1 although precision does suffer a little - it being an f4 makes it not as noticeable.
Last edited:
rvaubel
Well-known
lightwriter
Are you the one who has backlash in the focuser?
Rex
Are you the one who has backlash in the focuser?
Rex
edlaurpic
Established
THe 90 that I am using right now is the f/2.8 tele elmarit (it's a late serial #, made by Leitz in Canada,, and it focuses to 1 meter. It is very compact and light compared to the current 2.8 elmarit and it focuses right on the money even at 1 meter. I am not sure the more compact collapsible 90 macro elmar f/4 would be worth geting for me, as I would give up a stop. It might be worth getting for the digital M, however, as I would imagine that the "eye" attachment would work on it.
LCT
ex-newbie
edlaurpic said:
The RF baselength is too short for a 90mm lens to be focussed accurately at f/2.8 normally.
None of mines, including the Canadian 'thin' Tele-Elmarit, can do it actually.
All my pics are not blurred of course but my success rate is quite low at any apertures wider than f/4 or f/3.5 generally.
May i ask you if your RF alignment is better at short distance or at the infinity?
Best,
LCT
edlaurpic
Established
My impression is that what you say about a 90 f/2.8 should normally be the case, but for whatever reason, my experience with this particular 90 f/2.8 tele elmarit is that it focuses as well on the R-D1S as any lens I have and this was also true of a prior R-d1 that I had. As to whether the lens is better at closer distances than for objects further away, I don't actually know, as most of the time my subjects are people or objects at distances of less than 20 feet.
... and before anyone asiks, no, the lens is not for sale.
... and before anyone asiks, no, the lens is not for sale.
jimbobuk
Established
I've not had chance to test it that much today but i'm struggling most at 2m -20m distances.. at closer distances it doesn't seem too bad, which seems to go against the trend.
rvaubel
Well-known
All my lenses focus fine on my R-D1. With faster lenses and longer focal lengths the % of keepers goes down of course, but it seems to me to be because of narrow DOF, not the lens or camera.
A lot of my close in pictures have DOF's of less than an inch. You got to expect a lot rejects.
Rex
A lot of my close in pictures have DOF's of less than an inch. You got to expect a lot rejects.
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
Just tried using another LTM -> M adapter.. no change.
Basically with a lampost about 20m away I have to move the focused image patch out of focus by enough so that you can almost clearly see two seperate vertical posts. Doing this the resultant image is sharp.
Closer up there is no problems that are THAT noticable, you'd expect it to be more obvious close up wouldn't you?
Basically with a lampost about 20m away I have to move the focused image patch out of focus by enough so that you can almost clearly see two seperate vertical posts. Doing this the resultant image is sharp.
Closer up there is no problems that are THAT noticable, you'd expect it to be more obvious close up wouldn't you?
rvaubel
Well-known
Jimbobuk,
Are you sure your rangefinder is not set to near focus properly but needs to be adjusted for infinity? You need to find out because thats an adjustment that DAG can do but I have never heard of anyone on the forum doing it.
You said you had the 40mm/f1.4 Nokton. Thats a pretty good lens for the test. Needless to say all testing should be done @ f1.4. I tested 3 different R-D1's using this procedure.
1) Near focus test(3 ft)- Focus on a mark made on a newspaper sloping away from the camera at about a 30 degree angle. Do this a number of times to check the consistancy of the results. The depth of field is only about an inch so only a few lines of text will be in focus in front of the mark and behind the mark. If the range of critical focus isnt equal, your camera needs adjusting.
2) Infinity focus - Then simply set the camera for infinity and shoot(again @ f1.4). Compare the results with the critically sharp focus areas from test 1. They should be the same.
If everything is OK then your 90mm is the problem. If not, I would suggest DAG as adjusting yourself to infinity won't work.
Rex
Are you sure your rangefinder is not set to near focus properly but needs to be adjusted for infinity? You need to find out because thats an adjustment that DAG can do but I have never heard of anyone on the forum doing it.
You said you had the 40mm/f1.4 Nokton. Thats a pretty good lens for the test. Needless to say all testing should be done @ f1.4. I tested 3 different R-D1's using this procedure.
1) Near focus test(3 ft)- Focus on a mark made on a newspaper sloping away from the camera at about a 30 degree angle. Do this a number of times to check the consistancy of the results. The depth of field is only about an inch so only a few lines of text will be in focus in front of the mark and behind the mark. If the range of critical focus isnt equal, your camera needs adjusting.
2) Infinity focus - Then simply set the camera for infinity and shoot(again @ f1.4). Compare the results with the critically sharp focus areas from test 1. They should be the same.
If everything is OK then your 90mm is the problem. If not, I would suggest DAG as adjusting yourself to infinity won't work.
Rex
jimbobuk
Established
I have tried focusing with the 1.4 lens to the same lamp post from the same position and its fine (viewed on the screen of the R-D1.. the point is its easily noticable how out of focus the 90mm is on the R-D1)
I conducted focus tests for my Canon 350D which has a problem with one of my sigma lenses. Firstly the sharpness isn't equally split by the point of focus is it? I thought i'd read somewhere that there is more sharpness further away from the plane of sharpness than there is in front of it. Does the 30 degree angle work with perspective to make you expect to see roughly the same number of rows of text sharp.
How can i conduct the infinity focus test, you say compare with the results of 1) but i'm assuming you dont mean infinitely focused on the same newspaper do you? By setting it to inifinity what do you mean.. moving the focus wheel till its on infinity, or using the rangefinder on a very distant object 100m ++ and comparing sharpness. Possibly doing some with small apertures to make sure the sharpness doesn't increase THAT much at the area that should be infinity (obviously the lens will be a bit sharper throughout, but i mean to look to be sure the increased DOF doesn't make what should be infinity appear to be more sharper (ie. it wasn't previously focused at infinity.
As for DAG I live in the UK so I am unlikely to send my R-D1 internationally to be serviced. I don't think there is a problem with the camera as its fine with most other use i've given it. I will try these tests if you could ellaborate some more.
I'm on a definite camera drought at the moment so can't afford to buy another 90mm lens, i wonder if anyone in the UK would feel like letting me borrow one that seems to focus well for them so i can be sure my R-D1 CAN work with the longer focal lengths well.
Finally its unlikely i'll use these lengths that much, so if its only going to affect them then its not even going to be that bad, would be nice to know i could though if i wanted to.
Cheers
I conducted focus tests for my Canon 350D which has a problem with one of my sigma lenses. Firstly the sharpness isn't equally split by the point of focus is it? I thought i'd read somewhere that there is more sharpness further away from the plane of sharpness than there is in front of it. Does the 30 degree angle work with perspective to make you expect to see roughly the same number of rows of text sharp.
How can i conduct the infinity focus test, you say compare with the results of 1) but i'm assuming you dont mean infinitely focused on the same newspaper do you? By setting it to inifinity what do you mean.. moving the focus wheel till its on infinity, or using the rangefinder on a very distant object 100m ++ and comparing sharpness. Possibly doing some with small apertures to make sure the sharpness doesn't increase THAT much at the area that should be infinity (obviously the lens will be a bit sharper throughout, but i mean to look to be sure the increased DOF doesn't make what should be infinity appear to be more sharper (ie. it wasn't previously focused at infinity.
As for DAG I live in the UK so I am unlikely to send my R-D1 internationally to be serviced. I don't think there is a problem with the camera as its fine with most other use i've given it. I will try these tests if you could ellaborate some more.
I'm on a definite camera drought at the moment so can't afford to buy another 90mm lens, i wonder if anyone in the UK would feel like letting me borrow one that seems to focus well for them so i can be sure my R-D1 CAN work with the longer focal lengths well.
Finally its unlikely i'll use these lengths that much, so if its only going to affect them then its not even going to be that bad, would be nice to know i could though if i wanted to.
Cheers