>>3458325>You don't seem to know how DOF works. It's actually harder to focus properly at close distance. The further away your subject is, the less important absolutely correct focus is. I could shoot sports at 8m+ distance with a 90mm at f/4 all day long without having to adjust focus.You're confused about the interplay between focal length, subject distance, and depth of field.
You're thinking "Depth of field is greater when the subject is farther away", which is true, but you're forgetting that that is dependent on focal length. If you're taking a tight headshot with a normal or a tight headshot with a telephoto at the same aperture, your depth of field is going to be nearly the same, which means that accurate focus is going to be just as important.
Unfortunately, with a Leica, accurate focus at long distances with long lenses is very difficult because your viewfinder doesn't adjust to let you see the scene closely.
You could probably do it at 90mm with your subject at 8m, sure--that's why 90mm is a fairly common length for rangefinders. But if you wanted to do it at 300mm for a tight headshot, probably not. At 300mm with an 8m subject distance, that's about 14cm (~5in) worth of depth of field, and the framelines would probably be smaller than your rangefinder patch.
Here's a little site you can use to play around with the numbers:
https://dofsimulator.net/en/> So, the Leica is also more versatile?Not really. A Leica + Visoflex setup is bulkier and less versatile than a Leica + full second SLR system setup, while at the same time costing significantly more and being a lot less convenient.
