Summarit lenses, part two by Erwin Puts is now up
- Thread starter johnastovall
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 33
- Views 3K
infocusf8@earthlink.
Established
Reasons?
Reasons?
Sitemistic I'm really curious as to what your reasons are that you consistantly appear on this site as a heckler of the M8. I didn't read that in the article at all. I know you are a Canon user from prior posts but what is it that you derive from coming on the M8 site to post negative, contradictory or misleading information about this camera? Please do tell.
Reasons?
Sitemistic I'm really curious as to what your reasons are that you consistantly appear on this site as a heckler of the M8. I didn't read that in the article at all. I know you are a Canon user from prior posts but what is it that you derive from coming on the M8 site to post negative, contradictory or misleading information about this camera? Please do tell.
Tuolumne
Veteran
"The sensor surface does not allow for any depth of focus..."
I read somewhere that this was an optical myth. Maybe it was here at RFF. Is it?
/T
I read somewhere that this was an optical myth. Maybe it was here at RFF. Is it?
/T
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
The article doesn't say that the M8 can't focus accurately. It says that with a .68 VF magnification and zero depth of focus allowed by the sensor surface the M8 is more difficult to to focus accurately with consistency than a film M.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Tuolumne
Veteran
sitemistic said:
Would this apply to the R-D1, too?
/T
J J Kapsberger
Well-known
sitemistic said:
True, true. It doesn't explicitly say that it is more difficult to focus. Admittedly I inferred that. But at the same time, it doesn't explicitly say that an M8 simply can't be brought into focus. I can't help but think that it can, but with no depth of focus allowed by the sensor, the lens has to be perfectly focused in order to have sharpness at the intended plane of focus, something which is possible to do on an M8 but very difficult. That's how I interpreted his words.
Now, of course there exist very sharp images taken with the M8. Even if the camera wasn't brought into critical focus at the intended plane of focus, the results were more than good enough.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
i'm getting tired of the arguments happening all over this site lately.
is the moon full? are you all drinking too much?
this is a photography forum not a bloody debate hall.
joe
is the moon full? are you all drinking too much?
this is a photography forum not a bloody debate hall.
joe
Tuolumne
Veteran
It's actually new moon tonight. Can't be a full moon problem.
/T
/T
Tuolumne
Veteran
Puts has been accused in the past of being both ignorant and of being a total film biggot. Put those two together and you have an M8 that can't be brought to focus.
/T
Disclaimer: I have no idea if Puts is ignorant. He does seem to be a film biggot from his writings.
/T
Disclaimer: I have no idea if Puts is ignorant. He does seem to be a film biggot from his writings.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
Tuolumne said:
All these "reviews" by non photographers should be taken with a grain of salt.
IMO
Tuolumne
Veteran
But Puts is THE MAN when it comes to Leicas. He has literally written the book - lots of them.
/T
/T
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
He's perfect for most Leica owners
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
Darren is correct. Puts doesn't say that an M8 can't be brought into focus; only that it is more difficult than a film M.
As to the suggestion that: "It is obvious from the photos posted on RFF with the M8 that it clearly is not hard to focus accurately. Lot's of folks are doing it everyday with wide open, wide aperture lenses."
I wouldn't dream of holding up a 700x400 pixel image on a computer screen as the paragon of the determination of sharp focus. One might as well use a Holga if that's how one judges sharpness.
So, cut the guy a bit of slack.
As to the suggestion that: "It is obvious from the photos posted on RFF with the M8 that it clearly is not hard to focus accurately. Lot's of folks are doing it everyday with wide open, wide aperture lenses."
I wouldn't dream of holding up a 700x400 pixel image on a computer screen as the paragon of the determination of sharp focus. One might as well use a Holga if that's how one judges sharpness.
So, cut the guy a bit of slack.
john_s
Well-known
Interestingly Erwin seems to be saying that the 50mm Summarit has, dare I say it, a focus shift between full aperture and f5.6.
I have the 75mm Summarit and I'm pleased to report that, at the level of sharpness that I need (400iso film and hand holding), there is no noticeable focus shift with aperture changes.
I have the 75mm Summarit and I'm pleased to report that, at the level of sharpness that I need (400iso film and hand holding), there is no noticeable focus shift with aperture changes.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Tuolumne said:
I can assure you he is not -Yes, he is critical and selective, but aren't we all?
And a lot of his articles come from the time that film was indeed superior.
He did not say the M8 cannot be brought to focus - he said it is more difficult for two reasons - the sensor is more precise than film and the viewfinder magnification is less, making focussing more exacting on the M8 -100% true. That is the reason Leica dropped the 135 framelines - focussing is, in their opinion, too diffficult
Add that to a lens with a short focussing throw and he has a valid point.
sitemistic said:
I'm one of those doing that,- well, it is LFI and LUF- nowadays, but I can assure you that it is a whole lot easier to do on a film M. It has improved my photography that I have to be significantly more precise with the M8 - but nothing beats my 1954 M3 for focussing....
The number of out-of-focus, back-focus and focus shift threads on LUF has multiplied -lenses that were fine for years on film have to be calibrated - a lot of folks are actually seeing what they have been doing unnoticed on film - others are finding out their eyes are not as good as they thought they were -others again have to travel the learning curve - all induced by this.
cmogi10 said:
Wisdom is owned by pros exclusively?😛
Last edited:
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I'm one of those doing that,- well, it is LFI and LUF- nowadays, but I can assure you that it is a whole lot easier to do on a film M. It has improved my photography that I have to be significantly more precise with the M8 - but nothing beats my 1954 M3 for focussing....sitemistic said:
The number of out-of-focus, back-focus and focus shift threads on LUF has multiplied -lenses that were fine for years on film have to be calibrated - a lot of folks are actually seeing what they have been doing unnoticed on film - others are finding out their eyes are not as good as they thought they were -others again have to travel the learning curve - all induced by this.
Last edited:
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Let's not lose the magic, as you pointed out, once one has travelled the road, photographic Nirvana is reached....
Avotius
Some guy
Seems that people have forgoten that you can take photos with an M8...just like with every other flat sensor surfaced dslr out there....
Ben Z
Veteran
Tuolumne said:
We've met and he is anything but ignorant.
