[Leica] Re: focusing the 75/1.4 & new lenses

[Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com>]

Hmmmm... I have a Classic M6 and a 75/1.4 . I routinely shoot close-ups at
f/1.4 . Portraits of people's faces in meetings, etc. It seems like the
lens focuses exactly where I focus. I never get photographs focused other
than exactly where I focused. I understand the theory behind the RF base
and I read Erwin's report. But regardless of all of that... I cannot
comprehend having a focusing problem. I completely understand DOF and how
to apply it, even at f/1.4 and 3 or 4 feet. What I want in focus, is
"always" in focus.

I'm baffled by your post on focusing???

And most of us understand the relevance of Erwin's sharpness posts. We
understand that in order to actually obtain the "extra" qualities that the
newest lenses offer, we "must" use all of the techniques, well known to
photographers, for exploiting these qualities. Mainly a tripod, slow or
very slow film, cable release, no wind, still subject, correct exposure,
correct processing, etc, etc, etc... Even Erwin himself eluded to this in
his posts. This is very well understood. It's not rocket science! It is
simply basic knowledge.

So there is no mystery here either.

Your ranting has a depressed tone about it. What am I missing? Nothing
you've said seems relevant??? Except "don't modify your 75/1.4". 

:)

Jim


At 07:28 PM 2/15/99 -0600, you wrote:
>God-don't modify a 75mm lens!!! for ANY reason!!!....besides, 
>you'd have to ADD to the tab, not subtract from it!!!
>
>Unfortunately, the only camera that MAY accurately focus this 
>lens is the M6HM....the M3 ain't got no frame, the M4P/M6 .72 
>can't focus the damn thing reliably (the 90 f2 is REALLY stretching 
>it--it works MOST of the time if the body is in PERFECT adjustment..
>>MAYBE< the HM can do it....I have neither body nor lens to try....
>
>Here goes flame bait.....MOST of Erwin's admittedly superlative 
>testing is PHOTOGRAPHICALLY useless.....there's NO photographic
>difference between ANY Leica lenses made in the last 30 years...
>bear with me.....what I mean is on REAL film (>ISO100, preferably 
>400 for handheld work) at reasonable shutter speeds, HANDHELD, 
>there is no visible difference. Period.  It's like the folks that 
>can hear differences in line cords on audio amps...bullshit.
>
>The MOST significant revelation Erwin has put forth to the Leica 
>photographers was his calculation of the max focal length/aperture 
>that the RFDRs >should< be able to focus....this offered scientific 
>proof of the accepted photographic wisdom for 40 years....longer
>than 90mm/2.8 or faster, the SLR wins......The 75 1.4 HAS to be 
>worse than the 90 f2....in this regard....of course, anyone
>photographing for years already knows that focusing ANY 135 lens, 
>at max aperture, on ANY M camera, at distances shorter than 
>30-40 ft. is a crap shoot...and the 90 f2 gets iffy under 10 ft.
>Erwin's calculations (which I lost) confirm this empirical 
>knowledge.....not even Leica could have predicted a 75 1.4 on an 
>M2 equivalent RFDR in l999..... the M3, barely, IF the 
>infinity and near-focus compensation is PERFECTLY adjusted...
>The fastest lenses reccomended for the "M2" (M6) RFDR were 
>the 50 1.5 and the 90 f2 (new the year of the M2s introduction....
>Of course, the 35 f2, introduced the same year, was and is no 
>problem on any M, same with the 35 1.4, due to shorter FL.
>
>I love fast lenses...I already have a new version 90 f2, 
>hope to upgrade my 50 to a 1.4 soon....but that's it for me....
>I can't see a 75 1.4 that I can't focus at the distances I 
>like to shoot such a lens (< 10ft, at times)
>
>Now how 'bout a new M6 1.2x - ? at the normal price?  for the 
>50/75/90/135 ?  now THERE's a second M6 body worth owning!!
>Keep your M6/std for 28/35/50 !! how 'bout it?
>
>Walt
>
>On
>Mon, 15
>Feb 1999, Robert G. Stevens wrote:
>
>> Ray:
>> 
>> You can get up the 90mm lines by modifying one of the bayonet tabs on the
>> 75mm.  It is the width of these that set the frame lines.  Comparing my 75
>> to the 90mm, the tab to the right of the red dot while the lens is facing
>> down is shorter on the 90mm.  I guess all you have to do is file a bit off
>> the 75's tab  to make your 90mm frame come up.  this may not be the answer
>> you wanted though since it involves modifying the lens mount on your 75mm.
>> Maybe Walt can confirm this.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Robert
>> 
>>  At 08:30 AM 2/16/99 +0800, you wrote:
>>  too many times in the heat of shooting frame my subject beyond the 75mm
>> >parameter.  The 90mm solution works for me.  I wish there is a way for
my 75
>> >Summilux to automatically activate the 90mm frame.
>> >
>> >Ray
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> 
>> 
>