Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
I read you won't reply, but I am sending it anyway.
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Graywolf wrote:
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Graywolf wrote:
fight the camera. It is not as simple as just turning off AF, for
instance, every AF camera I have ever tried to us has had its
manual focus use compromised by the changes made to the design for
the AF to work at all.
What cameras would these be (are we talking SLRs here?) and how?
A. Focus screen optimized for brightness rather than accuracy.
B. Focus on the lens loose so the AF motor does not have to be too
big, rather than optimized for smoothness and accuracy by hand.
C. Viewfinder image of low magnification.
A. I don't understand. But what does it have to do with AF.
B. has nothing to do with the body (we were talking about fighting
it), so it does not answer the question. Fit a MF lens that you like
on it and the AF camera is not compromised.
C. What does it have to do with AF.
In other words, is there a technical reason why AF tips the balance
towards brightness, rather than accuracy and is there a technical
reason why AF causes viewfinders to go small.
Not true, the viewfinder is irrelevant to auto focus. The camera
doesn't use the viewfinder for focusing, you do. Viewfinders are only
for aiming and composition in AF, that's why it's brighter, (though the
LX with a modern screen is also brighter and is very good for
focusing). Their importance in focusing is minimized. There is no
technical reason why a viewfinder needs to be smaller, the reason for
that is cost. (Well sensor size has something to do with it as well but
still cost rules).
And I won't mention my personal preference on B and C, as it't not
what we are talking about here :-)
Just trying to learn a thing or two,
Kostas
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
