Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
p.1823 #1Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
genji wrote:
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.orgMitch, by zone focusing I meant that, rather than using the rangefinder to achieve accurate focus on a subject, one uses depth of field to achieve a “zone” of acceptable focus. I’m sure you’re familiar with the technique, perhaps under a different name.
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking...Show more →
+1 to Allen as being a strong advocate for Zone Focusing.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less important. It does likely mean you'll have more in acceptable focus and maybe even seem as a higher keeper rate for doing so.
Instead of having more "wiggle room" with f/11, I'm working at using f4.5 where I've got less wiggle room. That does a couple things ... it makes me be more conscious of having to develop my ability to gauge distance. Ultimately, I think that is the key to using Zone Focusing most effectively. Of course, with f/4.5 the DOF range is smaller. So, to contend with that, I've got TWO setpoints in my mind that cover two different ranges (three with infinity).
Zone One: 1-2 body lengths. I can imagine how far away something is if I "stretch out" to touch it ... and about double that.
Zone Two: 1-2 car lengths. Starts around 12 feet - 30 feet
Zone Three: Hyperfocal Infinity, starts around 15-20 (lens dependent, of course).
Other times, maybe I split the diff between One and Two. Just depends on my assessment of my relationship to my environment. But, my main point is that you may want to have a couple different zones at your pre-determined ranges, rather than trying to have one zone to cover more with more DOF at f/11. This or that, vs all. Reminds me a bit of the movie Top Gun, where the scene is switching from missiles to guns ... just recognize when to toggle between range one vs. range two.
I think part of the key to judging distance is to have something pre-established in mental reference. I also use the width of a car lane as a mental reference, for example. If I'm shooting across a two-laner, vs. a four laner ... well, you get the gist.
Depending on my traveling distance from things, I set it for one of the Zones. Then, as things (or you) move into that zone, you're there. When I transition into a different shooting environment, then I reposition the lens to the different zone. Zone Two is my "ready position" (tennis term), for me. On the fly adjustments (shorter / closer) can be made to either side from there to either Zone 1 or Hyper Zone. Then, back to Zone 2 to resume the "ready position". In that regard, it isn't a question of how far is it ... just is it closer or farther. You might also check with Allen about his "Peace Sign" perspective.
Back to shooting at f/4.5 ...
When I used to practice billiards, I would go find a snooker table. Those tiny little pockets with those dastardly rounded edges made for a terrible billiards shooting experience. BUT, when I returned to shooting on a regular billiards tables, the pockets seemed so much larger. And, when I went from a snooker table to a shorter table, it also was another level in how much easier it was.
By shooting at f/4.5, I'm forcing my eye / brain to recognize and grow with a tighter tolerance, than if I'm shooting at f/8 or f/11. That's not to say I don't or won't shoot at f/8 or f/11 for any number of reasons. BUT, as a SKILL BUILDING effort, I wouldn't hang out at f/11 too much ... or you're eye / brain distance judging abilities will soften, rather than sharpen. Kind of a "wax on, wax off" thing. That's not to suggest miss an important capture with f4.5 instead of f/11, ... but, for skill building exercises, I think pushing yourself is more beneficial (long term) to developing that distance judging thing into an autonomy ... aim small, miss small.
I'm sure others have good stuff for how to approach things, as well. But, that's where my head is on it, atm.
OTOH, if f/11 works for ya ... "f/11 and be there".
Mitch Alland wrote
Jonathan - This is the tonality that I really like in B&W! BTW, in zone focusing you mean that you took a Zone V reading of the pavement, or a Zone VI reading of your palm, or something more complicated than that?____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking...Show more →
+1 to Allen as being a strong advocate for Zone Focusing.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less important. It does likely mean you'll have more in acceptable focus and maybe even seem as a higher keeper rate for doing so.
Instead of having more "wiggle room" with f/11, I'm working at using f4.5 where I've got less wiggle room. That does a couple things ... it makes me be more conscious of having to develop my ability to gauge distance. Ultimately, I think that is the key to using Zone Focusing most effectively. Of course, with f/4.5 the DOF range is smaller. So, to contend with that, I've got TWO setpoints in my mind that cover two different ranges (three with infinity).
Zone One: 1-2 body lengths. I can imagine how far away something is if I "stretch out" to touch it ... and about double that.
Zone Two: 1-2 car lengths. Starts around 12 feet - 30 feet
Zone Three: Hyperfocal Infinity, starts around 15-20 (lens dependent, of course).
Other times, maybe I split the diff between One and Two. Just depends on my assessment of my relationship to my environment. But, my main point is that you may want to have a couple different zones at your pre-determined ranges, rather than trying to have one zone to cover more with more DOF at f/11. This or that, vs all. Reminds me a bit of the movie Top Gun, where the scene is switching from missiles to guns ... just recognize when to toggle between range one vs. range two.
I think part of the key to judging distance is to have something pre-established in mental reference. I also use the width of a car lane as a mental reference, for example. If I'm shooting across a two-laner, vs. a four laner ... well, you get the gist.
Depending on my traveling distance from things, I set it for one of the Zones. Then, as things (or you) move into that zone, you're there. When I transition into a different shooting environment, then I reposition the lens to the different zone. Zone Two is my "ready position" (tennis term), for me. On the fly adjustments (shorter / closer) can be made to either side from there to either Zone 1 or Hyper Zone. Then, back to Zone 2 to resume the "ready position". In that regard, it isn't a question of how far is it ... just is it closer or farther. You might also check with Allen about his "Peace Sign" perspective.
Back to shooting at f/4.5 ...
When I used to practice billiards, I would go find a snooker table. Those tiny little pockets with those dastardly rounded edges made for a terrible billiards shooting experience. BUT, when I returned to shooting on a regular billiards tables, the pockets seemed so much larger. And, when I went from a snooker table to a shorter table, it also was another level in how much easier it was.
By shooting at f/4.5, I'm forcing my eye / brain to recognize and grow with a tighter tolerance, than if I'm shooting at f/8 or f/11. That's not to say I don't or won't shoot at f/8 or f/11 for any number of reasons. BUT, as a SKILL BUILDING effort, I wouldn't hang out at f/11 too much ... or you're eye / brain distance judging abilities will soften, rather than sharpen. Kind of a "wax on, wax off" thing. That's not to suggest miss an important capture with f4.5 instead of f/11, ... but, for skill building exercises, I think pushing yourself is more beneficial (long term) to developing that distance judging thing into an autonomy ... aim small, miss small.
I'm sure others have good stuff for how to approach things, as well. But, that's where my head is on it, atm.
OTOH, if f/11 works for ya ... "f/11 and be there".
Aug 07, 2021 at 07:58 AM
p.1823 #2Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I will also use different zone focusing techniques for different focal lenghts.
Aug 07, 2021 at 09:17 AM
p.1823 #3Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
M6 + ZM 35/2.8 C-Biogon + Tri-X 400
 |
||
 |
||
|
Aug 07, 2021 at 10:15 AM
p.1823 #4Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Kent looks like you are getting along just fine with the new camera. Keep up the good work brother. Looking forward to seeing more photographs.
Good to see you posting in this thread. It is my favorite thread on the world wide web. Thanks to Fred for giving it a place to be and to all these wonderful photographers that participate.
Good to see you posting in this thread. It is my favorite thread on the world wide web. Thanks to Fred for giving it a place to be and to all these wonderful photographers that participate.
Aug 07, 2021 at 10:36 AM
p.1823 #5Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Indian Beach, NC. Marina
M240 & CV 28 f2 Ultron I'm loving this setup...
M240 & CV 28 f2 Ultron I'm loving this setup...
Aug 07, 2021 at 10:46 AM
p.1823 #6Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
genji wrote:
My first attempts at zone focusing, dedicated to Allen (@airfrogusmc) whose posts encouraged me to give it a try. I have a lot to learn!
https://d1u92k3d1w68j5.cloudfront.net/photos/social-landscape/jd-20210805-163047-0560-m10pa-copy02-w1200bc.jpg
https://d1u92k3d1w68j5.cloudfront.net/photos/social-landscape/jd-20210806-142011-0623-m10pa-copy02-w1200bc.jpg
Looks like you are doing just fine. And I got it from others like Winogrand and Meyerowitz. Keep up the good work. I miss more than once in a while. Always user error. I just forget to look down to make sure I didn't bump the lens out of position ha ha
You all inspire me...
Been in a bit of a funk lately. Need to get out more to work through it .The good thing is this thread always makes me want to get out because of all the wonderful work. Keep rock'n everyone....
My first attempts at zone focusing, dedicated to Allen (@airfrogusmc) whose posts encouraged me to give it a try. I have a lot to learn!
https://d1u92k3d1w68j5.cloudfront.net/photos/social-landscape/jd-20210805-163047-0560-m10pa-copy02-w1200bc.jpg
https://d1u92k3d1w68j5.cloudfront.net/photos/social-landscape/jd-20210806-142011-0623-m10pa-copy02-w1200bc.jpg
Looks like you are doing just fine. And I got it from others like Winogrand and Meyerowitz. Keep up the good work. I miss more than once in a while. Always user error. I just forget to look down to make sure I didn't bump the lens out of position ha ha
You all inspire me...
Been in a bit of a funk lately. Need to get out more to work through it .The good thing is this thread always makes me want to get out because of all the wonderful work. Keep rock'n everyone....
Aug 07, 2021 at 12:13 PM
p.1823 #9Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
RustyBug wrote:
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.orgMitch, by zone focusing I meant that, rather than using the rangefinder to achieve accurate focus on a subject, one uses depth of field to achieve a “zone” of acceptable focus. I’m sure you’re familiar with the technique, perhaps under a different name.
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking closely at the pictures, I’d like them to be a little sharper so on my next outing I’ll lower the blur spot diameter to 20 microns, which means that I’ll need to stop down to f/11 to get roughly the same depth of field. Purists would be complaining about diffraction with these aperture values but I believe that the loss of sharpness caused by diffraction will be offset by the extra sharpness afforded by the narrower aperture. And not having to manually focus the Leica means that one can “focus” (heheh) solely on framing the picture.
Full disclosure: a couple of months ago I also started doing street photography with a Sony A7R4 and a 35/1.4 GM lens wide open, relying on Sony’s real time tracking AF. This is pretty much the polar opposite of zone focusing and produces a totally different kind of picture. I like both approaches but using the Leica is more challenging and thus more rewarding when one gets a pleasing result.+1 to Allen as being a strong advocate for Zone Focusing.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less...Show more →
Excellent post, very helpful. Thank you!
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet but my approach puts the emphasis on a particular subject distance whereas your system of Zones maps logically to what we’re trying to achieve: acceptable focus within a particular range. While I’m not too bad at estimating distances, it could certainly use some improvement. To that end I’ll take a laser measuring tool with me when I go out to photograph and devote some time to honing my skills. I’ve also realised that because I tend to photograph at close distances my Zone 2 would equate roughly to your Zone 1. Hopefully Allen will chip in to explain his Peace Sign perspective.
genji wrote
Mitch Alland wrote
Jonathan - This is the tonality that I really like in B&W! BTW, in zone focusing you mean that you took a Zone V reading of the pavement, or a Zone VI reading of your palm, or something more complicated than that?____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking closely at the pictures, I’d like them to be a little sharper so on my next outing I’ll lower the blur spot diameter to 20 microns, which means that I’ll need to stop down to f/11 to get roughly the same depth of field. Purists would be complaining about diffraction with these aperture values but I believe that the loss of sharpness caused by diffraction will be offset by the extra sharpness afforded by the narrower aperture. And not having to manually focus the Leica means that one can “focus” (heheh) solely on framing the picture.
Full disclosure: a couple of months ago I also started doing street photography with a Sony A7R4 and a 35/1.4 GM lens wide open, relying on Sony’s real time tracking AF. This is pretty much the polar opposite of zone focusing and produces a totally different kind of picture. I like both approaches but using the Leica is more challenging and thus more rewarding when one gets a pleasing result.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less...Show more →
Excellent post, very helpful. Thank you!
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet but my approach puts the emphasis on a particular subject distance whereas your system of Zones maps logically to what we’re trying to achieve: acceptable focus within a particular range. While I’m not too bad at estimating distances, it could certainly use some improvement. To that end I’ll take a laser measuring tool with me when I go out to photograph and devote some time to honing my skills. I’ve also realised that because I tend to photograph at close distances my Zone 2 would equate roughly to your Zone 1. Hopefully Allen will chip in to explain his Peace Sign perspective.
Aug 07, 2021 at 10:08 PM
p.1823 #10Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
The Diner
M240 & CV 28 f2 Ultron
M240 & CV 28 f2 Ultron
Aug 08, 2021 at 12:44 AM
|
p.1823 #11Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
genji wrote:
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.orgMitch, by zone focusing I meant that, rather than using the rangefinder to achieve accurate focus on a subject, one uses depth of field to achieve a “zone” of acceptable focus. I’m sure you’re familiar with the technique, perhaps under a different name.
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking closely at the pictures, I’d like them to be a little sharper so on my next outing I’ll lower the blur spot diameter to 20 microns, which means that I’ll need to stop down to f/11 to get roughly the same depth of field. Purists would be complaining about diffraction with these aperture values but I believe that the loss of sharpness caused by diffraction will be offset by the extra sharpness afforded by the narrower aperture. And not having to manually focus the Leica means that one can “focus” (heheh) solely on framing the picture.
Full disclosure: a couple of months ago I also started doing street photography with a Sony A7R4 and a 35/1.4 GM lens wide open, relying on Sony’s real time tracking AF. This is pretty much the polar opposite of zone focusing and produces a totally different kind of picture. I like both approaches but using the Leica is more challenging and thus more rewarding when one gets a pleasing result.+1 to Allen as being a strong advocate for Zone Focusing.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less important. It does likely mean you'll have more in acceptable focus and maybe even seem as a higher keeper rate for doing so.
Instead of having more "wiggle room" with f/11, I'm working at using f4.5 where I've got less wiggle room. That does a couple things ... it makes me be more conscious of having to develop my ability to gauge distance. Ultimately, I think that is the key to using Zone Focusing most effectively. Of course, with f/4.5 the DOF range is smaller. So, to contend with that, I've got TWO setpoints in my mind that cover two different ranges (three with infinity).
Zone One: 1-2 body lengths. I can imagine how far away something is if I "stretch out" to touch it ... and about double that.
Zone Two: 1-2 car lengths. Starts around 12 feet - 30 feet
Zone Three: Hyperfocal Infinity, starts around 15-20 (lens dependent, of course).
Other times, maybe I split the diff between One and Two. Just depends on my assessment of my relationship to my environment. But, my main point is that you may want to have a couple different zones at your pre-determined ranges, rather than trying to have one zone to cover more with more DOF at f/11. This or that, vs all. Reminds me a bit of the movie Top Gun, where the scene is switching from missiles to guns ... just recognize when to toggle between range one vs. range two.
I think part of the key to judging distance is to have something pre-established in mental reference. I also use the width of a car lane as a mental reference, for example. If I'm shooting across a two-laner, vs. a four laner ... well, you get the gist.
Depending on my traveling distance from things, I set it for one of the Zones. Then, as things (or you) move into that zone, you're there. When I transition into a different shooting environment, then I reposition the lens to the different zone. Zone Two is my "ready position" (tennis term), for me. On the fly adjustments (shorter / closer) can be made to either side from there to either Zone 1 or Hyper Zone. Then, back to Zone 2 to resume the "ready position". In that regard, it isn't a question of how far is it ... just is it closer or farther. You might also check with Allen about his "Peace Sign" perspective.
Back to shooting at f/4.5 ...
When I used to practice billiards, I would go find a snooker table. Those tiny little pockets with those dastardly rounded edges made for a terrible billiards shooting experience. BUT, when I returned to shooting on a regular billiards tables, the pockets seemed so much larger. And, when I went from a snooker table to a shorter table, it also was another level in how much easier it was.
By shooting at f/4.5, I'm forcing my eye / brain to recognize and grow with a tighter tolerance, than if I'm shooting at f/8 or f/11. That's not to say I don't or won't shoot at f/8 or f/11 for any number of reasons. BUT, as a SKILL BUILDING effort, I wouldn't hang out at f/11 too much ... or you're eye / brain distance judging abilities will soften, rather than sharpen. Kind of a "wax on, wax off" thing. That's not to suggest miss an important capture with f4.5 instead of f/11, ... but, for skill building exercises, I think pushing yourself is more beneficial (long term) to developing that distance judging thing into an autonomy ... aim small, miss small.
I'm sure others have good stuff for how to approach things, as well. But, that's where my head is on it, atm.
OTOH, if f/11 works for ya ... "f/11 and be there".Excellent post, very helpful. Thank you!
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet but my approach puts the emphasis on a particular subject distance whereas your system of Zones maps logically to what we’re trying to achieve: acceptable focus within a particular range. While I’m not too bad at estimating distances, it could certainly use some improvement. To that end I’ll take a laser measuring tool with me when I go out to photograph and devote some time to honing my skills. I’ve also realised that because I tend to photograph...Show more →
Sure...When using my 35mm Lux FLE when the focusing tab is in a position kinda like the left side of a peace sign and if I'm at f/11 everything form 2 1/2 ft to about 3 1/2 ft will in focus. Rarely shoot anything that close. Straight up and down 3ft to 6 ft and to the right side of the peace sign 6 ft to infinity. So when working fast on the street I don't have to even look down at the lens. If its something REAL close I just move the lens tab to the left side of the imaginary peace sign. If the subject is kinda close straight up and down and if its 6 ft or more (most of the time) to the right. One reason I really like the focusing tabs.
When using my 24 2.8 Elmarit at f/11 I just set it so everything from 3 ft to infinity is in focus using the DoF scales.
Seems to work OK for me.
RustyBug wrote
genji wrote
Mitch Alland wrote
Jonathan - This is the tonality that I really like in B&W! BTW, in zone focusing you mean that you took a Zone V reading of the pavement, or a Zone VI reading of your palm, or something more complicated than that?____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
For those two pictures I set the distance scale on the Summaron 35/2.8 to 8 feet and stopped down to f/8. Assuming a blur spot diameter of 30 microns (a commonly accepted value for 35mm full frame format), an app on my phone indicates that the depth of field extends from 5.5 feet to 15 feet. But, looking closely at the pictures, I’d like them to be a little sharper so on my next outing I’ll lower the blur spot diameter to 20 microns, which means that I’ll need to stop down to f/11 to get roughly the same depth of field. Purists would be complaining about diffraction with these aperture values but I believe that the loss of sharpness caused by diffraction will be offset by the extra sharpness afforded by the narrower aperture. And not having to manually focus the Leica means that one can “focus” (heheh) solely on framing the picture.
Full disclosure: a couple of months ago I also started doing street photography with a Sony A7R4 and a 35/1.4 GM lens wide open, relying on Sony’s real time tracking AF. This is pretty much the polar opposite of zone focusing and produces a totally different kind of picture. I like both approaches but using the Leica is more challenging and thus more rewarding when one gets a pleasing result.
Back in the day (before AF existed), it was well used by many folks. Essentially, the same as hyperfocal technique, and working your way backwards to closer distances. The old adage of "f/8 and be there" was well regarded as time honored technique.
As I am re-acquainting my skills to zone focusing, I'll share my thoughts on my re-development approach, which may seem a bit counter-intuitive at first glance.
Rather than relying on f/11 for the greater DOF (which is fine in good light), that essentially makes your distance judgment skills less important. It does likely mean you'll have more in acceptable focus and maybe even seem as a higher keeper rate for doing so.
Instead of having more "wiggle room" with f/11, I'm working at using f4.5 where I've got less wiggle room. That does a couple things ... it makes me be more conscious of having to develop my ability to gauge distance. Ultimately, I think that is the key to using Zone Focusing most effectively. Of course, with f/4.5 the DOF range is smaller. So, to contend with that, I've got TWO setpoints in my mind that cover two different ranges (three with infinity).
Zone One: 1-2 body lengths. I can imagine how far away something is if I "stretch out" to touch it ... and about double that.
Zone Two: 1-2 car lengths. Starts around 12 feet - 30 feet
Zone Three: Hyperfocal Infinity, starts around 15-20 (lens dependent, of course).
Other times, maybe I split the diff between One and Two. Just depends on my assessment of my relationship to my environment. But, my main point is that you may want to have a couple different zones at your pre-determined ranges, rather than trying to have one zone to cover more with more DOF at f/11. This or that, vs all. Reminds me a bit of the movie Top Gun, where the scene is switching from missiles to guns ... just recognize when to toggle between range one vs. range two.
I think part of the key to judging distance is to have something pre-established in mental reference. I also use the width of a car lane as a mental reference, for example. If I'm shooting across a two-laner, vs. a four laner ... well, you get the gist.
Depending on my traveling distance from things, I set it for one of the Zones. Then, as things (or you) move into that zone, you're there. When I transition into a different shooting environment, then I reposition the lens to the different zone. Zone Two is my "ready position" (tennis term), for me. On the fly adjustments (shorter / closer) can be made to either side from there to either Zone 1 or Hyper Zone. Then, back to Zone 2 to resume the "ready position". In that regard, it isn't a question of how far is it ... just is it closer or farther. You might also check with Allen about his "Peace Sign" perspective.
Back to shooting at f/4.5 ...
When I used to practice billiards, I would go find a snooker table. Those tiny little pockets with those dastardly rounded edges made for a terrible billiards shooting experience. BUT, when I returned to shooting on a regular billiards tables, the pockets seemed so much larger. And, when I went from a snooker table to a shorter table, it also was another level in how much easier it was.
By shooting at f/4.5, I'm forcing my eye / brain to recognize and grow with a tighter tolerance, than if I'm shooting at f/8 or f/11. That's not to say I don't or won't shoot at f/8 or f/11 for any number of reasons. BUT, as a SKILL BUILDING effort, I wouldn't hang out at f/11 too much ... or you're eye / brain distance judging abilities will soften, rather than sharpen. Kind of a "wax on, wax off" thing. That's not to suggest miss an important capture with f4.5 instead of f/11, ... but, for skill building exercises, I think pushing yourself is more beneficial (long term) to developing that distance judging thing into an autonomy ... aim small, miss small.
I'm sure others have good stuff for how to approach things, as well. But, that's where my head is on it, atm.
OTOH, if f/11 works for ya ... "f/11 and be there".
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet but my approach puts the emphasis on a particular subject distance whereas your system of Zones maps logically to what we’re trying to achieve: acceptable focus within a particular range. While I’m not too bad at estimating distances, it could certainly use some improvement. To that end I’ll take a laser measuring tool with me when I go out to photograph and devote some time to honing my skills. I’ve also realised that because I tend to photograph...Show more →
Sure...When using my 35mm Lux FLE when the focusing tab is in a position kinda like the left side of a peace sign and if I'm at f/11 everything form 2 1/2 ft to about 3 1/2 ft will in focus. Rarely shoot anything that close. Straight up and down 3ft to 6 ft and to the right side of the peace sign 6 ft to infinity. So when working fast on the street I don't have to even look down at the lens. If its something REAL close I just move the lens tab to the left side of the imaginary peace sign. If the subject is kinda close straight up and down and if its 6 ft or more (most of the time) to the right. One reason I really like the focusing tabs.
When using my 24 2.8 Elmarit at f/11 I just set it so everything from 3 ft to infinity is in focus using the DoF scales.
Seems to work OK for me.
Aug 08, 2021 at 02:03 AM
p.1823 #12Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
The beauty of having focus tab is that you can use muscle memory to achieve zone focusing without even looking at the lens, which explained above.
One thing I find during practicing zone focusing is that I tend to underestimate the distance. I've been trying to remind myself to err on the father distance when guesstimating. Another technique is to set the focus distance and "walk into the zone" instead of fiddling with the focusing ring/tab.
One thing I find during practicing zone focusing is that I tend to underestimate the distance. I've been trying to remind myself to err on the father distance when guesstimating. Another technique is to set the focus distance and "walk into the zone" instead of fiddling with the focusing ring/tab.
Aug 08, 2021 at 02:30 AM
p.1823 #13Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
genji wrote:
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet...
Just to say that I've found the foot to be too short a distance to learn to visualize and prefer to use the meter scale: I find it easier to estimate 1, 1½ and 2, or even 3 meters, rather than the roughly equivalent measures is feet.
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
I’d already resolved to “tweak” my distance settings on the fly between 6, 8, and 10 feet...
Just to say that I've found the foot to be too short a distance to learn to visualize and prefer to use the meter scale: I find it easier to estimate 1, 1½ and 2, or even 3 meters, rather than the roughly equivalent measures is feet.
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
Aug 08, 2021 at 02:46 AM
p.1823 #14Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
M10 | DR Summicron 50 | ISO 200 | f/4.0 | 1/45 sec | Bangkok
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
____________________
Frog Leaping photobook: https://www.frogleaping.org
Aug 08, 2021 at 02:55 AM
p.1823 #15Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
jeffersoncasey wrote:
The beauty of having focus tab is that you can use muscle memory to achieve zone focusing without even looking at the lens, which explained above.
One thing I find during practicing zone focusing is that I tend to underestimate the distance. I've been trying to remind myself to err on the father distance when guesstimating. Another technique is to set the focus distance and "walk into the zone" instead of fiddling with the focusing ring/tab.
+1 for "walk into the zone" vs. fiddling.
As to the "farther distance" when guesstimating ...
I seem to recall from my days of yore that the point of focus is not exactly centered 1/2 & 1/2 between the "ends" of the dof range. It's more like 1/3 in front, 2/3 in back ... or something like that. I haven't revisited to confirm that yet, so your point about which side of things to favor when "guesstimating" (along with personal judgment tendencies) is salient.
Here's one that was pretty easy to "guestimate".
Took a stab at some color and a little tone mapping, etc. in C1 ... I'm liking how nicely the files play along.
Edited on Aug 08, 2021 at 10:16 PM · View previous versions
The beauty of having focus tab is that you can use muscle memory to achieve zone focusing without even looking at the lens, which explained above.
One thing I find during practicing zone focusing is that I tend to underestimate the distance. I've been trying to remind myself to err on the father distance when guesstimating. Another technique is to set the focus distance and "walk into the zone" instead of fiddling with the focusing ring/tab.
+1 for "walk into the zone" vs. fiddling.
As to the "farther distance" when guesstimating ...
I seem to recall from my days of yore that the point of focus is not exactly centered 1/2 & 1/2 between the "ends" of the dof range. It's more like 1/3 in front, 2/3 in back ... or something like that. I haven't revisited to confirm that yet, so your point about which side of things to favor when "guesstimating" (along with personal judgment tendencies) is salient.
Here's one that was pretty easy to "guestimate".
Took a stab at some color and a little tone mapping, etc. in C1 ... I'm liking how nicely the files play along.
 |
||
 |
||
 |
Edited on Aug 08, 2021 at 10:16 PM · View previous versions
Aug 08, 2021 at 06:41 AM
p.1823 #16Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Don't get me wrong I am not talking about fiddling. I am trying to see what is happening in real time and responding to that more than anything else. Those that know my work it is about the moments that in some instances if I were to wait to walk into it it is over.
Aug 08, 2021 at 06:45 AM
p.1823 #17Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
airfrogusmc wrote:
if I were to wait to walk into it it is over.
Right, which is why having the muscle memory to the peace sign and pre-established mental awareness of distance / zone relationships is so crucial. That and the "f/8 (or f/11) and be there" for the timing of the capture weighs more greatly than uber-critical focus.
For more static or consistent motion applications, the "walk in" (you toward subject, or subject toward you) works fine. For those instantaneous, fleeting moments ... it's gotta be either pre-focused in the zone, or immediate muscle memory. Imo, there can't be any "thinking" about anything (fiddlin' is thinkin'). It has to be entirely reactionary ... on the shutter release, and on the lens (if needed).
Now, just gotta get to workin' those muscles.
Wax On, Wax Off.
if I were to wait to walk into it it is over.
Right, which is why having the muscle memory to the peace sign and pre-established mental awareness of distance / zone relationships is so crucial. That and the "f/8 (or f/11) and be there" for the timing of the capture weighs more greatly than uber-critical focus.
For more static or consistent motion applications, the "walk in" (you toward subject, or subject toward you) works fine. For those instantaneous, fleeting moments ... it's gotta be either pre-focused in the zone, or immediate muscle memory. Imo, there can't be any "thinking" about anything (fiddlin' is thinkin'). It has to be entirely reactionary ... on the shutter release, and on the lens (if needed).
Now, just gotta get to workin' those muscles.
Wax On, Wax Off.
Aug 08, 2021 at 06:58 AM
p.1823 #18Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
I tend to have the subject framed before I even bring the camera up. I sometimes spend time checking focus which helps with zone or pre-focusing. Sort of re-familiarizing myself with the lens. I adjust aperture to control depth of field depending on the desired framing so I have an idea what is going to be in focus and what isn't. Micro back and front focus adjustment if needed... Test focus often, check the distance, prefocus for the framing, adjust, bring the camera up... If I'm in the moment, I can set the camera up without looking through the viewfinder.
Aug 08, 2021 at 07:09 AM
p.1823 #19Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
If its static I just use the scales. Don't need really fast shutter speeds. See in the scene how much DoF I might need then set accordingly. If there is something in a foreground say 4 1/2 ft away and say mountains in the distance that needs to be sharp, if I have my 35mm lens, then I would set the scale so the distance on the left side by the 16 on the DoF scale lines up with about 4 1/2 ft and the infinity symbol lines up with the right side of the DoF scale. Srop down to f/16 then make my exposure. If the lens is woking properly I should be good to go. If I look through the view finder it will probably look out of focus. But I know, because I trust the scales, it will be just fine and I should have exceptable focus from about 4 1/2 ft to infinity. So the stuff at 4 1/2 ft will be sharp and the mountains in the background should be also. In that situation it is how much DoF I need that determines what aperture I will choose. If I don't need as much DoF then I will pick a different aperture and still use the scales to make sure I get what I need in focus.
Edited on Aug 08, 2021 at 12:23 PM · View previous versions
Edited on Aug 08, 2021 at 12:23 PM · View previous versions
Aug 08, 2021 at 07:09 AM
p.1823 #20Leica M/X/T/S/Q/CL/SL Picture Thread
Another shot of the barn. From a distance and look there is a still standing grain elevator too. 
M10M + 135 APO
M10M + 135 APO
Aug 08, 2021 at 08:02 AM