Rangefinder focusing techniques

[timothychanzl]

Hello guys,

I just got myself a Bessa R and yes I love its bright viewfinder. However, no matter how hard i try to convince myself, I find that the 'focusing spot' is a tad too small. I find I can focus much faster with my friend's Canonet. In low light, it indeed takes a bit of time to focus.

Anyone care to share the techniques you employ to speed up focusing.

Anyone knows whether the 'focusing spot' is bigger or better in the R2/R2A ?

Tim

 

[fuwen]

I have a R2 equivalent and am also not convince on ease of focusing under low light. However, if u are comparing with SLR with wide angle lens focusing under low light can be almost impossible.

 

[meeky]

I got a Ricoh 500G....

very difficult to focus in low light!

 

[Macky]

I think that rangefinders are not easy to focus period. Low light or otherwise. Of course more difficult when light is sparse. You really need a LOT of practise. Coming from a SLR, it really takes some getting used to. A tiny rectangle in the middle of the viewfinder can't beat the entire ground glass focussing screen of a SLR.

You can try zone focussing. Easier in the day because you can use a small hole for an aperture. Near impossible at night because you'll probably be opening up the aperture to its widest making your focussing zone really tiny!

I think the term rangefinder is quite misleading. I mean, from the name, you'd half expect the camera to find the range to your subject for you. But to be an effective rangefinder user, you practically need to be a "rangefinder" yourself!! You need to be a good judge of distance from your camera to the subject, then quickly dial it into the focussing ring of the lens. After that bringing the camera up to your face for framing and perhaps some slight adjustments of focus, then taking the shot. All this happens very quickly. Rangefinders are used a lot in street photography (at least the 35mm variety). This is not the contemplative type of photography but the split second camera-up-to-your-face-and-click kinda photography. So being able to do all that in this type of camera really demands loads of practise! In reality, a SLR can be used much quicker in a less practised photographer.

But all that said, I find that using RFs is quite a different experience to a SLR. I have 2 myself and use it from time to time. Usually carry one with my SLR. Difficult to describe the difference. Yes, it has a larger and brighter viewfinder, less intrusive, super quiet, etc... but its not those reasons. Its just different. And its a nice difference!!

 

[student]

You can try zone focussing. Easier in the day because you can use a small hole for an aperture. Near impossible at night because you'll probably be opening up the aperture to its widest making your focussing zone really tiny!

I can understand most of what you wrote.

But I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here!

 

[patch17]

what i normally do pick out an edge on the subject and focus on that. looking through the RF's viewfinder, you'll see two images, actual and ghost. once you've lined up both images, i.e. you only see one image, your subject is in focus.

there's a little focusing spot in the middle of the image when you look through the viewfinder, (normally it's yellow, better contrast) place that on an edge of the subject, adjust your focusing ring until actual and ghost images line up, then recompose your shot, then shoot. with practice, you can focus quite quickly. I actually find focusing an RF in low light situations easier than an slr.

 

[Macky]

I can understand most of what you wrote.

But I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about here!

If you look at a lens, usually near the lens mount, you'll see markings which correspond to the f stops of that lens. So you might see markings for example, 2.8 on both sides of a central dot, then 4, then maybe 8, 11, 16 etc. These numbers have lines which end up on a marking next to the focussing ring.

So, for example, if you turn your focussing ring such that the distance markings on the focussing ring of 3 to 5 meters lies between the f4 markings we talked about earlier, then what it means is, if your lens is set at f4, everything from 3 to 5 meters will be reasonably sharp.

Again if you look at the lens, you'll notice that the f16 markings are very far apart and the f2.8 markings are very close together. What this means is that if you estimate the distance to your subject to be 2 meters and you're out by a meter, if you are using f2.8, your subject might be outside of the f2.8 zone and therefore be blur. However if you're using f16, your subject will likely be within the zone and be sharp.

I'm sorry for being long winded. For this, its easier to show than to describe in words.

 

[greg]

If you look at a lens, usually near the lens mount, you'll see markings which correspond to the f stops of that lens. So you might see markings for example, 2.8 on both sides of a central dot, then 4, then maybe 8, 11, 16 etc. These numbers have lines which end up on a marking next to the focussing ring.

So, for example, if you turn your focussing ring such that the distance markings on the focussing ring of 3 to 5 meters lies between the f4 markings we talked about earlier, then what it means is, if your lens is set at f4, everything from 3 to 5 meters will be reasonably sharp.

Again if you look at the lens, you'll notice that the f16 markings are very far apart and the f2.8 markings are very close together. What this means is that if you estimate the distance to your subject to be 2 meters and you're out by a meter, if you are using f2.8, your subject might be outside of the f2.8 zone and therefore be blur. However if you're using f16, your subject will likely be within the zone and be sharp.

I'm sorry for being long winded. For this, its easier to show than to describe in words.

.. in simple words, a photog uses DOF info (derived with the methods described by macky) to place its objects in the focused range (zone), it does seem tricky to describe in words..

 

[timothychanzl]

Wonderful discussion here.

I think it would be better if the focusing spot is much bigger, and is yellow like in the Canonet i mentioned.

The long time taken is not due to the rangefinder method but rather the rangefinding spot being too small i guess.

The photographer definately needs to pre-judge focus distance and exposure, taking into consideration the DOF markings as well. Its part of the rangefinder experience I guess.

For the compact size, light weight, quiet shutter, excellent lenses available and the fact that it is very much less intrusive, I still love rangefinders.

Hold up an SLR to your face, people will be conscious.
Hold up a rangefinder, they react less.

 

[juggler]

Here's something simple to DIY to improve the viewfinder patch if it is a little dim.
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-165.html

 

[timothychanzl]

Amazing ! Kick Ass ! Will try. Its precisely what I need.

Thanks juggler !

 

[Macky]

Amazing ! Kick Ass ! Will try. Its precisely what I need.

Let us all know if it works!!

 

[juggler]

Let us all know if it works!!

I have used this method on on some of my older RF (Canonets, Leica IIIc) and it helped improved the focusing.

 

[timothychanzl]

It works ! Bloody amazing. I dare say it improves focusing speed by 50%. Problem now is getting my black tape small enough and at the precise position.

 

[derekphan]

One more question on rangefinder. I have a Bessa R and the 90mm APO Lanthar. The frame for 90mm lens is kind of small and framing is a pain. Is there any way to improve the framing with the 90mm lens? Thanks a lot

 

[clubgrit]

Thanks for the link ! I am so used to a huge viewfinder, looking through a rangefinder's is tough (at least for now) ... this tweak helps.

Here's something simple to DIY to improve the viewfinder patch if it is a little dim.
http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-165.html

 

[Bobinde]

One more question on rangefinder. I have a Bessa R and the 90mm APO Lanthar. The frame for 90mm lens is kind of small and framing is a pain. Is there any way to improve the framing with the 90mm lens? Thanks a lot

I tend to get confused with too many frame lines but I found a tip on Rick Oleson's pages really helpful. I have made masks based on his drawings for 2 of my Zorki 4s and dedicated one body each to the Jupiter 11 135 mm and Jupiter 9 85mm. I also "tuned" the rangefinder for each lens. For me, the mask, although rather small, is much more helpful than bright frame lines. It just takes some getting used to.

BTW, he also gives a formula for determining the mask size.

Works for me.

Here's te URL:

http://rick_oleson.tripod.com/index-26.html[/URL]
(hope this works!)

Bob

 

[haagen_dazs]

i have used the R before.
Now using the R3A.
the RF patch is the same size (so that probably answers your original question )

 

[haagen_dazs]

One more question on rangefinder. I have a Bessa R and the 90mm APO Lanthar. The frame for 90mm lens is kind of small and framing is a pain. Is there any way to improve the framing with the 90mm lens? Thanks a lot

hey derek
you might want to check to see if your photos come out sharp
i have a friend who had issues with a 90mm lens on a bessa body. (actually on a rd1, but they are all based off the bessa body structure)
the base length is not long enough to accurately focus a 90mm lens.
eventually he sold off his 90 lens
he had alot of problems getting properly focused images.

 

[clubgrit]

Thanks for the link. I also ordered a similar one from eBay, but only 1.25x (magnifier). The one from your link looks more interesting due to the diopter adjustments.