In a message dated 1/13/2005 8:38:48 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: It probably has more to do with a critical eye, just like someone who fully relies on the matrix meter in all cases, because most of the time it is ok. That doesn't mean it is ever optimal, just that it is liveable. It could also be that DOF is covering up your focusing errors in many cases.
Sorry to ruffle feathers - I don't think less of you as a person because you like AF more than MF. Feel free to continue down the path you are going and hopefully Pentax will improve their AF. -- Best regards, Bruce =========== Looking over my recent photos (I haven't shot that much lately, but say the last eight months or so), it seems my focus is slightly off in many cases. Or soft focused or something -- anyway, not as sharp as I would like. So I have decided to try manual focus more. (Of course, having more expensive lenses might help too. :-)) I like AF for animals -- which is why I wanted it. Sometimes that works. And sometimes it doesn't. But it works better than if I was manually focusing on a moving animal -- where you never know in which direction it will move or go or how fast it go. But, overall, I am less and less satisfied with autofocus as time passes. Long distance shots, yeah, AF is all right there. And necessary for animals as stated above (probably sports shots too, although I don't do those). I used to be a fairly strong advocate for AF because I am increasingly near sighted. (And I can't wear reading glasses when I shoot; I have found it much too difficult.) OTOH, as time passes I am increasingly critical of my own photos. The bar gets raised. Which is why you won't see any PAWs and PESOs from me anytime soon. :-) So it goes... My .02 cents. Marnie aka Doe
