espressogeek
Well-known
I have the 90mm Elmarit-c . I'm still not to sure on the performance of this thing. I need to spend some more time with it. I would like to have a lens a stop or two faster for those moments when nothing else will do. Has anyone shot a significant number of the canon 85/2 or 85/1.9 lenses on this camera? I'm on the hunt for a konica 90/2.8 but just in case i want to consider the canons.
LCT
ex-newbie
Due to the short baselength of the rangefinder those lenses will be hard to focus at wider apertures than f/4 without the 1.3x magnifier.
With the latter, f/2.8 should be OK but hardly wider AFAIK.
Never tried the magnifier myself though.
With the latter, f/2.8 should be OK but hardly wider AFAIK.
Never tried the magnifier myself though.
espressogeek
Well-known
I would be willing to give a magnifier a whirl if i can focus reliably at 2.8 . I typically wouldn't be using it up close to something to hopefully a little slop could be tolerated.
mountainrivera
Established
I had a 90mm 2.0 asph but had to sell it. Really did not focus wider than 4.0 with any consistancy. Try one before you buy if you can.
jlw
Rangefinder camera pedant
I have a 100mm f/2 Canon that I use on my R-D 1 for lecture-podium shots and the like (see attached example.) My success rate is pretty good at distances of about 10 meters and up; at closer distances, it gets riskier the closer you go, although I'll almost always try it if there's a chance of getting a good shot.
As others have said, the R-D 1's short RF base makes it very challenging to get good focusing accuracy with longer focal lengths at wide apertures -- but an eyepiece magnifier helps, and so does using the split-image focusing technique. (To do this, you find a hard vertical line in the subject and focus by lining up the split in the line at the edge of the rangefinder patch; the eye does this more accurately than it aligns two coincident images as in normal rangefinder focusing.)
In the example picture (of a guest lecturer on Impressionism) I used the split-image technique to focus on the frame of his eyeglasses. I was shooting with the 100mm lens at f/2 at a range of about 12 meters, and in the second image (a pixel-for-pixel crop from the first one) you can see that even at this long distance DOF was pretty limited -- the far side of his face is a bit softer than the near side. Still, most of my pictures of the lecture were pretty well-focused. Of course, it's harder if you're dealing with a more mobile subject!
As others have said, the R-D 1's short RF base makes it very challenging to get good focusing accuracy with longer focal lengths at wide apertures -- but an eyepiece magnifier helps, and so does using the split-image focusing technique. (To do this, you find a hard vertical line in the subject and focus by lining up the split in the line at the edge of the rangefinder patch; the eye does this more accurately than it aligns two coincident images as in normal rangefinder focusing.)
In the example picture (of a guest lecturer on Impressionism) I used the split-image technique to focus on the frame of his eyeglasses. I was shooting with the 100mm lens at f/2 at a range of about 12 meters, and in the second image (a pixel-for-pixel crop from the first one) you can see that even at this long distance DOF was pretty limited -- the far side of his face is a bit softer than the near side. Still, most of my pictures of the lecture were pretty well-focused. Of course, it's harder if you're dealing with a more mobile subject!
Attachments
espressogeek
Well-known
Well I snagged the canon 85/2. I wil see how it does around 2.8. I am shocked at how much the hexanons have went up! I seem to remember them around the three to four hundred dollar mark and now they are 600 +! I might spring for one anyway but I want to see how the canon does first.
ZorkiKat
ЗоркийК&
espressogeek said:
The Canon 2/85 should work fine. I've done a few aimless shots with an old Serernar 2/85 with the R-D1s and the focusing is on the dot, even at f/2. Just couldn't use it seriously, due to the lack of a decent 135 VF to view for it.
Jay
Tuolumne
Veteran
I shoot alot of theater photography on my R-D1 with a 90mm F2 Leica lens. Works great wide open, which is just about the only way I use it. I can even hand-hold it down to 1/15th of a second on my R-d1 if I attach the CamerQuest rubber handle to the lens tripod thread. Here is an example:
T.
T.
Attachments
ferider
Veteran
mountainrivera said:
It's in good use now, though, Mike
Back to topic: on the Bessa R2 I was able to consistently focus 90/2.8, also close-up. 85-90/2 always gave me problems up to a few meters distance.
I played with Robert's RD1 last week, using my 85/2 Nikkor, and it was impossible to focus wide open, close up.
Roland.
Last edited:
jim_buchanan
Established
Well, take it from someone that has wrestled with close focusing the R-D1, with 3 or 4 top off adjustments to my credit. You have got to get acceptable close focusing on the R-D1, before you can attempt an effective focus technique with a 90mm.
The current 90mm Elmarit is a benchmark lens that can be found for reasonable prices and mine is a pleasure to focus and focuses consistantly at all distances, now.
Judge of framing is required, however.
The 135mm is another story...
The current 90mm Elmarit is a benchmark lens that can be found for reasonable prices and mine is a pleasure to focus and focuses consistantly at all distances, now.
Judge of framing is required, however.
The 135mm is another story...
thegadsby
RD-1 M6 M4-P Hexar RF M2
I ahve a 92 f 2.8 Hexanon its a real gem of a lens as its so small
My 90 f 2.0 summicron is good but its such a great lump of brass and glass
My 90 f 2.0 summicron is good but its such a great lump of brass and glass
espressogeek
Well-known
You guys are right the focus of an 85/2 on this thing is all over the place. I think this shot was around f2.8 and i missed it. But I actually like the way it turned out.
