Canon 5D III and Zeiss lenses: focusing screen?

[zlatko]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

 

[Eldar]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

 

[niels123]

Is there anyone who has experience with focusing with these Zeiss lenses using focus peaking from Magic Lantern? How well does it work in live view mode without magnifying the screen?

 

[feanolas]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

I hate the standard screen! S-screen is much nicer, it gives me a better feeling of what the image will look like wide open. How can you see what the picture will be like with your 1.4 lenses when the depth of filed and rendering you see in the viewfinder is 2.8 ? I am not speaking of focus, but really of DOP.

I have no problem using it with f/4 lenses, it's slightly darker than the standard, but not by that much.

 

[niels123]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

I hate the standard screen! S-screen is much nicer, it gives me a better feeling of what the image will look like wide open. How can you see what the picture will be like with your 1.4 lenses when the depth of filed and rendering you see in the viewfinder is 2.8 ? I am not speaking of focus, but really of DOP.

I have no problem using it with f/4 lenses, it's slightly darker than the standard, but not by that much.

So effectively the S-type gets your screen a little darker and it gives you de DOF at f/1.4? Is there any other 'tool' in the screen to help in confirming accurate focus? For instance, in the split prism there is the two half circles that make a full circle when you have focused correctly. How does this work in the S-type screen?

I assume that focusing on something in the dead-center works the same as focusing on smething that is on a corner (or 1/3rd) of the image. Is this correct?

 

[Eldar]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

I hate the standard screen! S-screen is much nicer, it gives me a better feeling of what the image will look like wide open. How can you see what the picture will be like with your 1.4 lenses when the depth of filed and rendering you see in the viewfinder is 2.8 ? I am not speaking of focus, but really of DOP.

I have no problem using it with f/4 lenses, it's slightly darker than the standard, but not by that much.

So effectively the S-type gets your screen a little darker and it gives you de DOF at f/1.4? Is there any other 'tool' in the screen to help in confirming accurate focus? For instance, in the split prism there is the two half circles that make a full circle when you have focused correctly. How does this work in the S-type screen?

I assume that focusing on something in the dead-center works the same as focusing on smething that is on a corner (or 1/3rd) of the image. Is this correct?

The additional focus confirmation is provided by the camera. An easy way for you to check it out is to go to a dealer and see how a 6D behaves with the Eg-S screen. Aside from the camera generated focus confirmations, you should see what the 5DIII would be with the customized focusingscreens.com screen.

 

[niels123]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

I hate the standard screen! S-screen is much nicer, it gives me a better feeling of what the image will look like wide open. How can you see what the picture will be like with your 1.4 lenses when the depth of filed and rendering you see in the viewfinder is 2.8 ? I am not speaking of focus, but really of DOP.

I have no problem using it with f/4 lenses, it's slightly darker than the standard, but not by that much.

So effectively the S-type gets your screen a little darker and it gives you de DOF at f/1.4? Is there any other 'tool' in the screen to help in confirming accurate focus? For instance, in the split prism there is the two half circles that make a full circle when you have focused correctly. How does this work in the S-type screen?

I assume that focusing on something in the dead-center works the same as focusing on smething that is on a corner (or 1/3rd) of the image. Is this correct?

The additional focus confirmation is provided by the camera. An easy way for you to check it out is to go to a dealer and see how a 6D behaves with the Eg-S screen. Aside from the camera generated focus confirmations, you should see what the 5DIII would be with the customized focusingscreens.com screen.

Checking a 6D with Eg-S is a good idea, if I can find a dealer that has them on stock here

I sent a couple of e-mails to focusingscreen.com, asking them when they have the S-type screen again for de 5D III, but I haven't received any reply in three days. This makes me a bit reluctant to order, because I have no idea how long it will take or if they will send anything at all...

 

[zlatko]

I don't care for the S screen with 2.8 lenses. No ... I absolutely can't stand it. It's way too dark for me. I bought an S screen years ago and every now and then I try it again, but I always go back to the standard screen because it's much brighter. But then I'm using AF lenses exclusively. With manual focus lenses, I guess I would have to use an S screen. I could tolerate an S screen with 1.2 or 1.4 lenses, but then the camera body would have to be reserved for use with those lenses exclusively.

The only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. The standard screen with focus confirm indication works OK from f2.8.

I hate the standard screen! S-screen is much nicer, it gives me a better feeling of what the image will look like wide open. How can you see what the picture will be like with your 1.4 lenses when the depth of filed and rendering you see in the viewfinder is 2.8 ? I am not speaking of focus, but really of DOP.

I have no problem using it with f/4 lenses, it's slightly darker than the standard, but not by that much.

I generally don't shoot wide open, so I don't need to see what the picture will look like wide open. But when I do shoot wide open, it's easy to imagine what the picture will look like even though the standard screen effectively shows the DOF at 2.8. Moreover, the LCD can show the picture and its actual DOF immediately after it's made. So no big deal.

I found the S screen to be bad with f/2.8 lenses and a nightmare with f/4 lenses. Just way too dark. It is tolerable if shooting in bright daylight, but I'm often not shooting in bright daylight.

I agree that the only reason to get the S-screen is to use with fast manual focus lenses. Then it really does offer a benefit. Other than that specific usage, I would not recommend it to anyone.

 

[niels123]

I'll post a dissenting opinion.

I've purchased just about every screen available for the 5D2. I have tried precision matte screens, split focus, the original, microprism and a few others. The prices varied from $15 to $200.

The short version is that none allowed my to achieve critical focus with my Zeiss ZE lenses.

I then tried a Zacuto Z-finder Pro loupe and mounted it to the lcd on a clip-on frame (pn Z-FRM or Z-FRM32 depending on your camera.) I can nail critical focus almost every time. Yes, it's a little unwieldy but the camera is pressed against your eye and it's stable. The second issue is that this goes through batteries, so you need a few in your pocket. It does however work.

Batteries I really don't care You just refill them with juice and use them over and over again

I just did a small test: 5D III + Zeiss 135 f/2 on tripod and some text for focussing. I focused using live view and the HoodLoupe, this one:

Focus is not completely nailed and only a tiny bit off.

- Is this hoodloupe different from the HoodMan custom finder kit 3.2?
- Does the Zacuto Z-Finder pro work better?
- It comes in different magnifications, which one do you have and what do you recommend?

Please let me know your thoughts

 

[noisejammer]

I tried the Hoodman before trying a Zacuto. I found the Zacuto to be far, far better.

Zacuto makes three Z-Finder models, the Junior, Pro 2.5x and Pro 3x. I haven't tried the Junior so I can't speak to that. Between the Pro versions, my choice was based on dioptre adjustment. If memory serves, the 2.5x version offered lower magnification but was suited to near-sighted shooters. I'm not near sighted so I chose the 3x version.

The Gorilla plate that comes packaged with some Z-Finders is a waste of space. If you can save some cash by not buying it, I recommend you do.

 

[niels123]

I tried the Hoodman before trying a Zacuto. I found the Zacuto to be far, far better.

Zacuto makes three Z-Finder models, the Junior, Pro 2.5x and Pro 3x. I haven't tried the Junior so I can't speak to that. Between the Pro versions, my choice was based on dioptre adjustment. If memory serves, the 2.5x version offered lower magnification but was suited to near-sighted shooters. I'm not near sighted so I chose the 3x version.

The Gorilla plate that comes packaged with some Z-Finders is a waste of space. If you can save some cash by not buying it, I recommend you do.

Thanx ;D
Just some small questions:
-How easy is it to see the composition (e.g. the entire screen) with the loupe attached? Can you see the entire screen only by 'hovering' with your eye over the loupe or can you still see your entire screen at once?
-What is the purpose of this gorilla plate?
-The 2.5x and 3x are different magnifications I assume? I see in some youtube videos that there are some kind of spacers that come with the package to increase the distance between loupe and screen and thus the magnification. These spacers are not related to the 2.5x and 3x versions?

Niels

 

[noisejammer]

Thanx ;D
Just some small questions:
-How easy is it to see the composition (e.g. the entire screen) with the loupe attached? Can you see the entire screen only by 'hovering' with your eye over the loupe or can you still see your entire screen at once?

I can see the entire screen without having to move my eyeball. Of course, you have to use magnified live view if you really want to nail focus. I frame the image, pick my focus area, focus, zoom out then trip the shutter.

-What is the purpose of this gorilla plate?

I think it interfaces with the other video-related things Zacuto makes. It may allow some of the parts to glom onto the camera. As I said, it's useless for stills - use the Z-FRM or Z-FRM32.

-The 2.5x and 3x are different magnifications I assume?

Yes (I assume) - I've not used the 2.5x so I can only go by what's on the Zacuto site.

I see in some youtube videos that there are some kind of spacers that come with the package to increase the distance between loupe and screen and thus the magnification. These spacers are not related to the 2.5x and 3x versions?

No - the spacers allow for greater dioptre correction. I have never used mine.

NJ

 

[niels123]

Thanx ;D
Just some small questions:
-How easy is it to see the composition (e.g. the entire screen) with the loupe attached? Can you see the entire screen only by 'hovering' with your eye over the loupe or can you still see your entire screen at once?

I can see the entire screen without having to move my eyeball. Of course, you have to use magnified live view if you really want to nail focus. I frame the image, pick my focus area, focus, zoom out then trip the shutter.

-What is the purpose of this gorilla plate?

I think it interfaces with the other video-related things Zacuto makes. It may allow some of the parts to glom onto the camera. As I said, it's useless for stills - use the Z-FRM or Z-FRM32.

-The 2.5x and 3x are different magnifications I assume?

Yes (I assume) - I've not used the 2.5x so I can only go by what's on the Zacuto site.

I see in some youtube videos that there are some kind of spacers that come with the package to increase the distance between loupe and screen and thus the magnification. These spacers are not related to the 2.5x and 3x versions?

No - the spacers allow for greater dioptre correction. I have never used mine.

NJ

Do you consider the loupe to be good enough to focus on the eyes for a close-up (from top head to including shoulders) portrait at f/2 or do you get better results when you do zoom in (the camera button) on liveview?

 

[noisejammer]

Do you consider the loupe to be good enough to focus on the eyes for a close-up (from top head to including shoulders) portrait at f/2 or do you get better results when you do zoom in (the camera button) on liveview?

Head and shoulders at what focal length? I'll guess 85mm / 1 m.

The worlds great optimist-sage, DofMaster, says at f/2 is 85 mm lens, 1 m -> 2cm ... that's assuming the CoC is 30 microns (which is quite crappy.) You would do better to try for CoC around 15 microns which means the DoF is 1 cm.

To achieve this, you and your subject have to stand still so that neither of you sways by more than 5 mm. I wish you luck - you will need it.

It's not for nothing that pro's shoot portraits at f/4. If you want more bokeh, separate the subject from the background or use a green screen.

 

[niels123]

Do you consider the loupe to be good enough to focus on the eyes for a close-up (from top head to including shoulders) portrait at f/2 or do you get better results when you do zoom in (the camera button) on liveview?

Head and shoulders at what focal length? I'll guess 85mm / 1 m.

The worlds great optimist-sage, DofMaster, says at f/2 is 85 mm lens, 1 m -> 2cm ... that's assuming the CoC is 30 microns (which is quite crappy.) You would do better to try for CoC around 15 microns which means the DoF is 1 cm.

To achieve this, you and your subject have to stand still so that neither of you sways by more than 5 mm. I wish you luck - you will need it.

It's not for nothing that pro's shoot portraits at f/4. If you want more bokeh, separate the subject from the background or use a green screen.

I just like to have only the eyes in focus in the face, so subject-background-seperation will not help here. From Zeiss I only own the 135 f/2, and I wish to get it tag sharp at least 90% of the time at f/2 without zooming the live view on the camera.

 

[noisejammer]

I just like to have only the eyes in focus in the face, so subject-background-seperation will not help here. From Zeiss I only own the 135 f/2, and I wish to get it tag sharp at least 90% of the time at f/2 without zooming the live view on the camera.

You can easily calculate the distance to the subject by using
D = F * H / h where F = focal length (in your case 135mm), H = subject height or width ( I'll guess 450 mm width) and h = sensor height or width (if you're in portrait orientation it would be 24 mm width. From this, I get your subject distance is going to be about 2500 mm.

Now go to www.dofmaster.com and do your own calculations. I got that the total DoF will be 3.9 cm split nearly equally between front and back. That assumes the circle of confusion is 0.03 mm. If you want the image to be a fair reflection of your lens' capabilities, you can set the CoC at 0.015 mm and you'll find the total depth of field is 1,9 cm. That's 1 cm in front and 1 cm behind. If you're human, you will sway by several mm (as will your model - even if he / she is trying to stand absolutely still.

The result is that even if your focus is perfect, you might only get 50% of your images sharp but you should get about 25% sharp. This is why it's far smarter to stop down the lens a little and make sure you nail every image.

It's easy to test this - focus on something that's difficult to see then shoot off several images. You can even use this to estimate how much you sway which should inform how fast an aperture you should be using.

 

[niels123]

I just like to have only the eyes in focus in the face, so subject-background-seperation will not help here. From Zeiss I only own the 135 f/2, and I wish to get it tag sharp at least 90% of the time at f/2 without zooming the live view on the camera.

You can easily calculate the distance to the subject by using
D = F * H / h where F = focal length (in your case 135mm), H = subject height or width ( I'll guess 450 mm width) and h = sensor height or width (if you're in portrait orientation it would be 24 mm width. From this, I get your subject distance is going to be about 2500 mm.

Now go to www.dofmaster.com and do your own calculations. I got that the total DoF will be 3.9 cm split nearly equally between front and back. That assumes the circle of confusion is 0.03 mm. If you want the image to be a fair reflection of your lens' capabilities, you can set the CoC at 0.015 mm and you'll find the total depth of field is 1,9 cm. That's 1 cm in front and 1 cm behind. If you're human, you will sway by several mm (as will your model - even if he / she is trying to stand absolutely still.

The result is that even if your focus is perfect, you might only get 50% of your images sharp but you should get about 25% sharp. This is why it's far smarter to stop down the lens a little and make sure you nail every image.

It's easy to test this - focus on something that's difficult to see then shoot off several images. You can even use this to estimate how much you sway which should inform how fast an aperture you should be using.

Thanks a lot, that makes a lot of sense I hope to get a Zacuto soon and then start shooting with it ;D