Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/04/12

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] DOF of 80/1.4 at 1.4 slimmer than 50mm at 1.4?
From: benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney)
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:32:47 +0930
References: <BLU0-SMTP63FFBE73F8419F8D7EEA128CA80@phx.gbl> <C9C90568.D216%mark@rabinergroup.com> <BANLkTin1=bou3XDpDviKAsVQs4UnqRCnhQ@mail.gmail.com> <03d601cbf921$c0a2e8d0$41e8ba70$@earthlink.net>

In my case the cameras are fine - with the F100 even the electronic
focus confirmation is very accurate.  Often during that shoot a slight
movement by me or the model was enough to move focus to somewhere I
didn't want it to be.  A lot of those shots are at 1/60 too; it wasn't
bright and I lost some shots to shake.

The main problem with the R5 is the viewfinder, which while nice, just
isn't as bright or as snappy as the best SLRs (in my experience the
Leicaflex SL and SL2 are the best Leicas, getting a 10 from me, with
some of the Contax SLRs just as good, but with everything else
somewhere behind, including the R8/9 (gets 8.5-9 from me), but the R5
is a lot less easy to use (gets 7-7.5) than the R8/9.  The Nikon FA I
also used in that shoot is about on par with the R5.

Marty


On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Frank Filippone <red735i at earthlink.net> 
wrote:
> Consider that the correct focus is a FLAT PLANE... faces aren't. ?If the
> face is even slightly turned away from the camera, for an 85mm F1.4 lens
> used at F1.4, one eye will be sharp, the other out of focus. ?There is
> basically no ( I could go look it up, but you get the meaning) DOF.
> Only if the eyes are precisely square to the camera do you get both eyes
> sharp.
>
> In these shots, the body is twisted (she is facing to our right, but the
> head is turned to be about square to the camera). ?It is pretty possible
> that the line ( or rather plane) of her eyes is not square to the camera,
> thus making one eye in focus and the other not.
>
> I would send the camera in for a calibration, just to be sure, but I doubt
> there is going to be any changes. ?The film plane of the camera would have
> had to move relative to the lens mount.
>
> Check to see if the springy plate behind the camera still moves flexibly,
> and that the screws around the lens mount on the camera are all tight ( I
> tightened someones' ?mount screws last week...).
>
> Frank Filippone
> Red735i at earthlink.net
>
>
> ?there are plenty of frames on the 5 or so rolls I shot of Rachel that day
> where the focus isn't right. ?I used f1.4
>
> ?Marty
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


In reply to: Message from vick.ko at sympatico.ca (Vick Ko) ([Leica] DOF of 80/1.4 at 1.4 slimmer than 50mm at 1.4?)
Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] DOF of 80/1.4 at 1.4 slimmer than 50mm at 1.4?)
Message from benedenia at gmail.com (Marty Deveney) ([Leica] DOF of 80/1.4 at 1.4 slimmer than 50mm at 1.4?)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] DOF of 80/1.4 at 1.4 slimmer than 50mm at 1.4?)