Very true. And very well said. As far as I'm concerned, autofocus is largely reserved for snapshots at a social event or when I'm feeling lazy and playing. Manual focus is almost always a better choice. Paul
> Hi Bruce, > > Quite some time back in a discussion here about autofocus a question was > posed concerning the specificity of the area that the camera will focus on, > specifically the eye and a very precise part of the eye. Comments from > some of the AF devotees were that, while the camera probably couldn't focus > on the pupil, it would focus well enough for all practical purposes - and > that there would be no problem as long as the lens was stopped down enough > to give adequate DOF. Peter's shot clearly shows that AF may not work well > enough in such circumstances, especially if the photog wants to minimize > DOF. > > If there were a pair of glasses in front of those charming, doe-like eyes > where would the camera focus? On the eyes or on the lenses of the glasses? > Stopping down to let the DOF handle the focusing inaccuracy gives two > problems. First, it reduces the creative elements that the photographer > has to work with , namely the soft focus or OOF areas, and, secondly, any > minor focusing error is greatly magnified when the print is made larger, > so, in some instances, AF could well limit creativity and the viability of > making a large print. > > Shel > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Shel Belinkoff <[email protected]> > > Date: 1/12/2005 4:45:40 PM > > Subject: Re: PESO--The Girl Living in the Accountants Spare Room > > > > This is exactly what I mean about AF. The sensor area may be larger > > than the target you want in focus. This means that it will pick > > within the area. That doesn't make the autofocus wrong, just the > > application of it. Not much different really than using a reflective > > meter poorly with snow or coal. > > > > I still don't get why so many people use AF when there is no benefit. > > This image is what many of my niece's (pro photog using D1X AF) pictures > look like. The focus > > isn't bad, but it's not great either. If you can't see to focus, > > either get a camera that you can see out of, or get your eyes > > corrected enough to see. > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Bruce > > > > > > Wednesday, January 12, 2005, 4:36:36 PM, you wrote: > > > > SB> Hi Peter, Frank ... > > > > SB> I'd not noticed the softness in the eyes as the dark strip grabbed my > > SB> attention, but you're right Frank ... the eyes are a bit of a problem > here. > > SB> Just a thought - and it'll work - sharpen each eye individually until > > SB> they're both equally sharp to a satisfactory degree. I played with > it a > > SB> bit in PS, gave it a little crop, and voila - the true genius of the > > SB> portrait becomes perfectly obvious. > > > > SB> Lose the autofocus, Peter ... not needed at all on such a subject, > and that > > SB> 43mm focuses manually quite nicely. > > > > SB> Shel > > > > > > >> [Original Message] > > >> From: frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > >> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:13:33 -0500, Peter J. Alling > > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >> > http://www.mindspring.com/~pjalling/PESO_--_tglitasr.html > > >> > > > >> > In case anyone cares: > > >> > > > >> > Pentax *ist-D 1/30 sec (ISO -- 400) > > >> > SMC Pentax FA 43ltd f1.9 @ f2.8 > > >> > Autofocus (Autofocus sucks no matter how good the camera IMHO). > > >> > > > >> > > >> I gotta agree with Shel; that dark stripe down the right side is a > > >> needless distraction. I was going to wonder aloud (or however one > > >> wonders on a keyboard) if maybe you focused on the wrong eye - her > > >> left eye (the one on the right of the frame) seems just a tad soft, > > >> but I think that's the one which should be sharpest (since it's > > >> closest to the camera, no?). Then, I noticed that you autofocused, so > > >> that's (likely) that. > > >> > > >> Well, here I am, starting off with negative stuff, when really, it's a > > >> lovely portrait. I like that she looks very relaxed and comfortable. > > >> There's something about the placement of her hand on the vertical > > >> thing (is it a frame of some sort?) that I like - it seems rather > > >> "unposed" and natural looking. > > >> > > >> Overall a very nice photo. Can't do anything about the softness, but > > >> you can crop. I think it would be a better photo if you did. > > > > > > > > > >
