RF Focusing Speed

[SodaAnt]

I’m considering an RF camera, probably a Leica M3 or M4, for street photography. I’ve never used an RF camera and am wondering how its focusing speed compares with a manual focus SLR. In street photography, focusing speed is often the difference between getting a photo or missing it, so how does an RF compare with an SLR in this regard?

 

[BrianShaw]

It could depend on the individual. Some claim a RF is faster. Not for me, though, as a SLR is faster to focus. (Unless it’s a Hasselblad, of course, and then focusing is always slower.) But in reality I probably miss the same number of “decisive moments “ with either focusing system.

Rangefinder cameras certainly have their place and you should try one!

 

[MattKing]

If it were me, I'd find something cheaper to try out first - to see if a rangefinder suits.
It is a really different experience.
When I switch back and forth, it always takes some adjusting.

 

[xkaes]

Once you get used to it -- it's differ-ent, but not diffi-cult -- you might not have a preference. I know I don't.

And if your SLRs have a split-rangefinder in the middle of the focusing screen, you may have been using one all along. I use mine all the time as a final check, especially in difficult situations -- narrow DOF, etc.

 

[Sirius Glass]

RF focusing is not as fast as the newer SLR AF cameras and lenses.

 

[Don_ih]

A lot of people rely on zone focusing for street photography. But generally, keep the focus set to around 8 feet and you can quickly twist it a bit to get correct focus. The exact wrong thing to do with a Leica is have the lens set at the infinity lock - that will make focusing slower than an slr.

 

[cliveh]

I would say the speed of focusing between a SLR and a rangefinder is about the same. But with a Barnak Leica with a screw thread lens it is slightly faster, as you have the lug on the lens, which allows faster rotation of the focus than griping the diameter of an SLR lens.

 

[xkaes]

There are several fixed lens rangefinder cameras that have a "paddle" on the bottom of the lens for fast, easy focusing -- quickly moved by your finger. Here's the one on the Minolta 7SII:

 

[Pieter12]

It depends on the subject and the brightness of the scene. But zone-focusing is really the best method for street photography. I like a 35mm lens stopped down to f8 or 5.6, focused at about 9ft. Fast film is your friend.

 

[rcphoto]

I used a Canonet QL17 GIII for a few years as my daily carry camera. It used the paddle style focus listed above and I thought it was very quick focusing (for a m/f camera).

 

[Craig]

A lot depends on the camera, but the big advantage of an SLR is the entire screen is the focusing area, rather than the small rangefinder patch in the centre of the viewfinder.

Of course, a good modern AF SLR is faster than any rangefinder.

 

[Sirius Glass]

A lot depends on the camera, but the big advantage of an SLR is the entire screen is the focusing area, rather than the small rangefinder patch in the centre of the viewfinder.

Of course, a good modern AF SLR is faster than any rangefinder.

SLRs are What You See Is What You Get [WYSIWYG] either wide open or stopped down. No bad surprises.

 

[xkaes]

Of course, a good modern AF SLR is faster than any rangefinder.

No argument there, but accurate? That depends. And for "street" photography, I want something inconspicuous -- small and light, and with a fast lens. That's not the definition of an AF SLR. My Minolta Maxxum 5 is amazingly small and light, but still not as inconspicuous as my black Minolta 7SII or G2.

And I also always carry a submini -- 16mm or Minox, with a "spy" finder, of course.

 

[logan2z]

But zone-focusing is really the best method for street photography. I like a 35mm lens stopped down to f8 or 5.6, focused at about 9ft. Fast film is your friend.

+1. Stopped down and with a relatively wide angle lens, you can zone focus and use the camera like a point and shoot.

 

[Craig]

And for "street" photography, I want something inconspicuous -- small and light,

These days that's a phone. Nobody would give you a second glace if you used a phone to take pictures of anything.

 

[logan2z]

These days that's a phone. Nobody would give you a second glace if you used a phone to take pictures of anything.

It also depends where you're doing it. If you're in a big city like New York or San Francisco where there are always zillions of tourists milling around taking photos, then nobody pays attention to you no matter what you're shooting with (ok, maybe if you set up an 8x10 camera on the street they might ) Pre-pandemic I spent a lot of time in San Francisco doing street photography with a Leica and it didn't seem like anyone was really aware of me.

 

[ic-racer]

Speed with manual focus is about having the lens already focused for an intended subject.

 

[xkaes]

In some situations, pre-focusing or hyperfocal focusing works great. But in a "dimly lit bar room", you need a wide aperture which rules these methods out. It also rules out a flash and most AF. Plus, there are lots of situations where you want a very narrow DOF to capture the subject by itself.

 

[Pieter12]

In some situations, pre-focusing or hyperfocal focusing works great. But in a "dimly lit bar room", you need a wide aperture which rules these methods out. It also rules out a flash and most AF. Plus, there are lots of situations where you want a very narrow DOF to capture the subject by itself.

Guesstimating works best in those situations. As I have said before, fast film is your friend. Neither an SLR nor a RF works well in a dimly lit scene.

 

[Jim Jones]

SLRs have an advantage over RF in focusing with long lenses. Otherwise, whatever one has the most experience with is probably the best.

 

[Steven Lee]

Critical focus is faster with an SLR, no doubt. For street photography, or something like kids running around, I resort to zone focusing with both. There's another focusing mode that's available on some rangefinders: if you have a lens with a focusing tab, you can train your muscle memory to focus using memorized positions of the tab for common focusing distances, which is almost instant. Basically, it's a more precise version of zone focusing. It takes some time to become good at it, and I can only do it with one of my lenses.

 

[mshchem]

Before you buy something you need to try a couple different models. I have to say clean newer Leica rangefinders are easy to focus on something that's not moving. M4 is such a pretty, easy to load camera. M6ttl. 85 is a favorite of mine.

 

[snusmumriken]

It must be said that some things are very difficult to focus with a rangefinder, furry animals being an example where a micro prism or ground glass is easier. Of course the solution is to focus on the eyes, but if it keeps moving its head you can get very frustrated. I guess if animals are important to you, you will be going down the AF digital route anyway.

If there are lots of vertical lines in the scene it can be difficult to recognise which ones to align, and that will slow you down. I find the best way round this is to focus those subjects with the camera held at 45 degrees, and eventually this has become an automatic action.

The best tip I picked up for speedy focussing (from the late Al Kaplan on another forum) is to habitually return your lens to infinity after each shot. Then you only ever need to focus in one direction, and you press the button as soon as the images come into alignment. I find this makes the rangefinder relatively quick. Most subjects are within the first few degrees of turn of the focus ring. By contrast, focusing with micro-prism or ground glass always seems to involve some to-and-fro.

Naturally you want to be able to use nice lenses at their full aperture. The precision of a rangefinder in that context is part of its attraction, isn’t it? I disagree with those who say it is difficult to focus in dimly lit interiors. If there’s enough light to get a photo, you will be able to focus.

Focus tabs are nice unless you often take photos in portrait format, when I find them confusing - the tab never seems to be where I expect it. You can buy after-market rubber tab rings to fit lenses. I have tried those and discarded them for the reason stated. I’m not consistent over which way up I hold the camera for portrait shots, anyway.

 

[xkaes]

Guesstimating works best in those situations. As I have said before, fast film is your friend. Neither an SLR nor a RF works well in a dimly lit scene.

Guesstimating distance when your DOF is mere inches is a fool's errand. I can use my rangefinders in the dark with my glasses off.

 

[BrianShaw]

…

The best tip I picked up for speedy focussing (from the late Al Kaplan on another forum) is to habitually return your lens to infinity after each shot. Then you only ever need to focus in one direction, and you press the button as soon as the images come into alignment. I find this makes the rangefinder relatively quick. Most subjects are within the first few degrees of turn of the focus ring. By contrast, focusing with micro-prism or ground glass always seems to involve some to-and-fro.

…

Kaplan… what a great memory! RIP, Al.

Another similar suggestion I saw in another forum’s discussion on a semi-related topic:

Leave 'em about two stops down from fully open, and with the focus set at a reasonable hyperfocal distance. That way, when you forget about them for 30 years and the basement floods and the lenses seize up from rust and corrosion, they are the most usable in their damaged state.