Hi,
Herb Chong wrote:
you're deliberately conflating two entirely different field's terminologies to make your point, just like JCO's pointless argument that no lens can possibly show anything 3D because the imaging surface is a flat plane. locking on in autofocus cameras means what i said.
But _as Jens said_ it is not the same as locking on in weaponry, which is an "active" system compared to autofocus. Not the correct terminology, I know, but is the best descriptor I can use.
IAC, I suspect we agree that a system where the photographer decides what is to be focused on is best. If we cannot have a system that will work to maintain focus (no matter where the focus point goes afterwards) once the "lock" is enabled, then present systems are the best we can hope for.
Herb....
----- Original Message ----- From: "mike wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 3:49 PM
Subject: Re: *istD AF performance (was Re: Sigma 2.8 Zoom lens comments)
Herb Chong wrote:
you obviously haven't done any lately then. even the *istD locks onto
flying
birds. and it's one of the slowest out there nowadays at continuous AF.
That's not the same as "locking on".
