On Fri, 16 Feb 2001 22:14:46 -0800, you wrote:
>As I was shooting yesterday, I was thinking about how an AF
>camera might focus in the same situation. I don't believe an AF
>camera can focus as precisely.
Sure it can - just move the little switch beside the lens mount. The
one that says AF or MF. And don't be limited by AF lens focus feel -
the current crop of AF lenses recognize the need to have good MF focus
feedback.
Is this a question hinting that AF cameras are inherently inferior
compared to MF, or conversely asking to validate the superiority of MF
bodies compared to AF bodies? Or is saying that one can achieve better
focus on static objects using manual focus, regardless whether that is
done on an AF or MF body?
Well, I'll bite.
I'll take my PZ1p, with its narrow horizontal sensor (or my cheapo
PZ10, with its almost-narrow horizontal sensor), and put the point of
focus wherever I want - and do it at full aperture and quick pace, not
at Ansel-Adams-bring-your-lunch-and F64 pace. And with the focus
assist beam I can even do it in complete darkness! With AF or MF
lenses!
If someone comes along with a fabulous ground glass, and viewfinder
magnifier, and better eyesight than me, a rock solid tripod, tons of
time, great measurement tools, fine scientific technique,
dead-motionless subject... well those folks will certainly get
measurably better focus than most anyone using AF (or MF) in
real-world situations.
Any AF sensor needs some contrast to work with. If one is hampered by
any observed AF limitations, the little switch beside the lens mount
automagically turns the AF off. Or one can use a different AF camera
that has the performance required by one's specific situation (C*
full-time-manual comes to mind...)
Personally, I am only disappointed by the PZ1p's autofocus when going
for a sudden shot, moving target, low contrast, where the subject is a
long way from my current focus point. A bird fleeing from the bush,
for example, who passes thirty feet overhead whilst I am focusing on
something six feet in front of me. But even then I get some of those
shots with PZ1p autofocus.
Getting back to your example of working with a cooperative subject,
I'm almost never disappointed with Pentax AF (PZ1p, PZ10) when working
with cooperative subjects. Front of nose, middle of nose, left or
right side of eye, middle of cheek - bang and the AF focuses there.
Can't say the same for the MZ series - but only because I haven't used
them much.
I got rid of my Spotmatics because the viewfinder was too dark - I
never learned to live with those finders. Maybe I would have similar
complaints about the finders on other cameras, even newer ones (my
daughter's C* AF body has a finder that sucks big time). I do know the
PZ1p and PZ10 finders are a good tool for me, and their small
horizontal AF segments work well in a whole lot of situations.
My wife seems to have a hard time with AF, and an easy time with MF.
She goes for the slow, static shot. She started with the PZ10, then
the MZ10, then she cast both aside for an ME Super, then last week
returned to using the PZ10.
So whatever floats one's boat - AF or MF body, AF body in manual
focus, AF body in autofocus - any of that is okay with me. Since
manual focus bodies occasionally please my lovely wife, one will
always find an ME Super or K2 somewhere in our kit.
--
Happy Trails,
Texdance
http://members.fortunecity.com/texdance
http://members1.clubphoto.com/john8202
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
