Using magnifying hood with Zeiss glass

<p>Hi All, <br>

I've been using Zeiss glass with my Nikon DSLRs and while I've managed to set up a d700 perfectly (using a custom-made S-type focusing screen from Canon and a dk17m magnifying eyepiece) I was less successful with my d810 using the same solution - although it is now much improved over the standard focusing screen it is still not ideal. I realize the limitations may stem from a higher pixel count (12mp vs 36mp) and it seems that I get the most consistent and critical focus using live view. <br>

I've been looking at other options and I am now looking at magnifying hoods. I am looking at 2.5x - 3x magnification and here's the question: is it possible to focus accurately (using a hood) at no magnification in live view on D810?<br>

I suppose one could do without a hood if the object was stationary and there was time to zoom in, focus and zoom out but I shoot mainly portraits and this this is not really an option. I am becoming slightly disheartened by 35mm manual focus experience on modern DSLRs and even looked at Sony mirrorless as an alternative but the last time I checked (a7?) and was not convinced by the lag and lack of detail in the electronic viewfinder so a hood is my last hope! <br>

Thanks, <br>

Pat</p>

<p> </p>

I'm not sure a hood is going to help, depending on your

definition of "in focus". Bear in mind the LCD on a D810

is RGBW sub-pixels of a VGA resolution (640x480)

image. A D810 sensor captures about 117 times as

many pixels as the screen can display. Looking through

a loupe will give you bigger pixels, but they won't show

you whether the final image is sharp at the pixel level -

you're effectively zoomed out over ten times. Zooming in

is much more effective - though some other vendors

offer focus peaking, which helps as an alternative. I believe you can set the middle of the multi-selector to toggle zoom values, though, which might make it more usable to you (custom menu f2).

<p>You can magnify Live View on the D810. This should suffice for focusing. Use a hood to shield from extraneous light, but an optical magnifier won't help much.</p>

<p>I'd think the main advantage of a hood here would be its function in <em>shading</em> the image rather than its magnification.<br>

In sunlight, I, at least, have a lot of trouble seeing the screen clearly - so use the optical viewfinder most of the time.</p>

Many thanks for your responses, I was suapecting that

could be the case, I used a x8 loupe I had lying around

and it only magnified pixels. I am pretty close with the

canon s + dk17m but having been spoiled by older

analogue equipment I know this potentially could be

better. Perhaps I should consider a nikon k3

splitscreen or the equivalent from canon that focusingscreen.com in Taiwan offer.

<p>II don't understand why you are denying yourself the benefit of AF lenses. This is why they exist. You can still manually focus them when required, using magnified LV.</p>

<p>Robin - Zeiss make some good stuff, if you're dedicated to it and can afford it. If someone wants to stock up on Otus lenses, I'm not going to tell them not to! (Though I'll be interested to see what the new Sigma 85mm Art can do, given the quality of the 50mm.) Of course, if we're talking older Zeiss glass, there have been a lot of advancements in autofocus optics these days...</p>

Hi Robin, I've used both and choose to shoot zeiss due

to their image rendering. Funny story actually, I had a

set of zeiss lenses and due to frustrations with focus

and modern focusing screens (before using the custom

focus screen and magnifier) I sold off all of them and

bought the same set of nikon af prime lenses. Sure the

convenience and focus accuracy were great but they

were lifeless in comparison. I got rid of the Nikon primes

after two years later and got back to zeiss. I actually

prefer the classic (zf) series to the overly corrected

modern designs but that's not the poin of this thread. I

think I will try the split focus screen next to improve

things further. Thanks again for all your input.

<p>I use manual focus Zeiss lenses on my D800 and F6 as well as a FM2n. On the FM2n the split image works well. On the D800 and F6 I use the focus indicator and get good results. Mostly landscapes and some family. The thing I like about MF is I want to select the focus point and not the camera. I admit that moving grandchildren are a challenge. The rendering from the Zeiss is what keeps me using them.</p>

<p>I use a variety of MF lenses on my D800, PC-e 45, Voigtlander 58, Nikon 75-150 and 2 Lensbaby, mainly for landscape and studio work. I never use live view any more for the landscapes and just trust my eye through the very adequate D800 viewfinder, I occasionally take a quick look at the conformation lights, and invariably see that my concept of focus matches Nikon's. My eyesight is poor.</p>

<p>For the studio work, all done manual focus, tripod + live view, I felt I had a problem with the not particularly great D800 live view and bought 7" monitor and a whole bunch of Small Rig stuff, creating an outfit about the size of a field camera! it gave me more confidence initially, but I soon realised that it was really a waste of money. </p>

<p>I have used manual focus for events, the mind does play some silly games with you but that's about all, I'd say just trust your eye and all will be fine.</p>

<p>You can easily select the focus point using the 4-way control on the camera. Likewise in Live View, you can select the magnified portion of the frame. This works out well for portraits and closeups, since the main subject will usually be off center and the camera locked in position on a tripod.</p>

<p>I have no beef about MF lenses, but I think the whole point is that when you get them you have to accept the limitation. I don't see any way around it. The OP does not want to use magnified LV as then he can't see the whole image: there is no good solution.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I've been <i>asking</i> for a solution from Nikon for a while: split the live view into four segments (which may have to update at a reduced rate) and allow them to be positioned and scaled separately. Then one can provide a zoomed-out view of composition and the others can be used to zoom in to selected areas of the image. Three points of (confirmed) focus gives you a focal plane, meaning that you could position both the composition and the focal plane accurately for a tilt-shift lens; alternatively, you could determine the extent of defocus or the limits to the (acceptable) focal plane as you changed aperture with a conventional lens. Nikon half listened, and provided the ability to split the live view in half on recent cameras, with the two halves at the same magnification and from opposite sides of the long axis - which is just enough to let you position a tilted focal plane so long as you don't care about composition and you're swinging about the vertical axis. I assume this solution met a technical requirement to keep the refresh rate fast (since the same sections of the sensor are read to access both sides), but it actually solved a problem I didn't care about - I'd happily take 10fps or lower refresh in this mode (with bonus marks for being able to select one quadrant and selectively refresh only it at full speed when you want to) in return for extra flexiblity. I still hope Nikon might fix it properly eventually. I should probably prod them again. (Honestly, give me a couple of weeks with the firmware and I'd have a lot of fun...)<br />

<br />

Sadly, absent that and absent (on Nikon) focus peaking, as Robin says, there's no current good solution. But even a loupe doesn't really let you see the entire composition unless you remove it or move your head around a lot, so arguably there has never been a good solution to this if you really want perfect accuracy.</p>