Focus Fiddling

[Bill Pierce]

I have a number of third party manual focus lenses I use on a camera whose lenses from the camera maker itself only come as autofocus lenses. I didn’t acquire them because they were manual focus, but because they were both extremely sharp, allowing for heathy cropping, and rather small and unimpressive looking - a good combination for street photography.

But the manual focus turned out to have a hidden advantage. I didn’t spend a lot of time focusing, refocusing and checking focus. I actually paid attention to what was in front of the camera rather than the camera itself. All of my cameras are set up for back button focusing; so, it’s not like I automatically had to refocus every time I pressed the shutter button. Nor am I shooting the kind of fast moving action that demands refocusing. But when that little square that indicates the focusing area pops up in the viewfinder and it isn’t right on top of the important subject, I automatically refocus without thinking. That’s right. It’s a habit born of either insecurity or weak will power. Now the sad part… I talk to friends, and they do the same thing. I’m hoping that what I learned from my manual focus lenses - stop focus fiddling and pay attention to what is in front of you - I will be able to apply to working with my autofocus lenses.

Your thoughts?

 

[pthornto]

This is one of the beauties of scale focus cameras that force you to stop down a bit and use decent DOF. I find there’s less futzing with any focus and a willingness to just click when the moment is right.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Green what?

My rangefinders don't have it.
My DSLRs don't have it.
My FF mirrorless has focus peaking with colors to choose from.
Wait. If I switch to manual focus my AF lens on RP, it shows green boxes!

Between RF, DSLR and mirrorless manual focus is the best on mirrorless. With focus peaking. It is so good I could track moving objects!
Zeiss makes modern manual focus lenses for FF Sony. Those lenses are sharp comparing to old manual focus primes. And not Samyang junk.
No such lenses on Canon RF mount, but Viogtlander 35 1.4 II VM is totally awesome on my RP. Or any rangefinder 50mm lens. But I prefer native 50 1.8 RF. Don't know why, I like to switch it to MF sometimes. Maybe to see green boxes. 🙂 .


Worse I have used are old manual focus SLRs. Primitive and hard to see if lens is not f1.4.

 

[brusby]

I prefer native 50 1.8 RF. Don't know why, I like to switch it to MF sometimes. Maybe to see green boxes. 🙂 .

Yep, and the little manual focus aid thing with like 2 fingers that come together when it's in focus. Really reassuring to use for those times when autofocus gets confused by something.

 

[John Bragg]

I am a latecomer to the world of Autofocus, specifically film SLR cameras by Nikon. I have also adopted back button focus and thankfully there is none of the overly nagging software so I focus on the eyes and that's it done.

 

[zuiko85]

I only have manual focus lenses for my mirrorless. Although well behind the curve regarding modern autofocus, (have an EM10, mark 1, stone age in digital years),
am finding that I must use magnified focusing to focus accurately. And cannot rely on the DoF scale either since lenses were intended for 35mm half frame and 35mm full frame so the scales are set for a larger CoC than my little quarter frame camera requires. Have also been surprised (although I should not have been) that at magnified view there really is no DoF, even at f11.

 

[Dogman]

I have a couple of Zeiss manual focus lenses for my Nikons along with several old Nikkor manual focus lenses. Great lenses but I don't use them much because they're difficult for me with my old man eyes and the fact that I like to shoot with wider apertures. Missing focus, even with Nikon's green confirmation dot, happens occasionally. I fiddle with them more than I do AF lenses because of this.

I also use back button focus with my AF lenses, combined with the focus and recompose method. I only use the center AF sensor unless, for some reason, I decide to let the camera do the focus decisions. The focus/recompose thing seems natural to me, having used SLRs with split-image micro prisms and RFs in the past. That's probably why I almost always keep the main subject near the center of the frame but seldom in the exact center. I'm used to the center sensor light being off the main subject at the moment of exposure so I don't really fiddle with focus that much using AF.

 

[jsrockit]

Yes, I don’t want to fiddle with focus so I use autofocus! 😉 in all seriousness, I have no issue with single point af after all of these years. I’ve become super fast and I don’t even use back button af. Do anything long enough and it becomes second nature.

 

[Godfrey]

All the lenses I use on my Leica CL are manual focus from M and R mount cameras. I have three Hasselblad XCD lenses which support AF but use them with MF most of the time.

I've just not really bought into the 'superiority' of AF except in specific instances. I can focus by scale, or with a rangefinder, or on a focusing screen (whether optical or digital) with great accuracy, specificity, and speed. I don't let cameras tell me what to do ... I tell my cameras what to do. 🙂

On those of my cameras that support AF and that I have AF lenses for, I use AF like I do any other tool: when it provides the best advantage for the specific thing I'm doing at that moment.

G

 

[froyd]

For me it has gone beyond focus confirmation. I come from the blinking light SLR marvels that Minolta was putting out in the 90s, but I've made a complete 180 and I find that ANY information added to the viewfinder is a distraction from viewing the image I'm about to record. Focus indicators have become a distraction, and so is exposure data. One thing I don't mind so much is flash ready lights, but then again none of my cameras offer that.

Like you, Bill, I attribute this to a weakness of spirit of propensity to second guess myself. I just find it distracting to see a 1/125th blink angrily at me in the viewfinder when I'm perfectly happy to leave my shutter set to 1/500th because trying to capture a silhouette. Or worse, having one stop faster or slower suggested to me even though I'm in the right ballpark, causing me to focus on the exposure and possibly missing a shot with a savageale exposure.

 

[Rob-F]

I have the most confidence in the rangefinder patch of my Leicas, and the central focus area of my film Nikons. My D700 is great, too. But multi focus points confuse me. You can't really focus on 67 places at the same time, I don't know what the camera is liable to do.

 

[Pál_K]

I have the most confidence in the rangefinder patch of my Leicas, and the central focus area of my film Nikons. My D700 is great, too. But multi focus points confuse me. You can't really focus on 67 places at the same time, I don't know what the camera is liable to do.

Every few months I go to Best Buy and play with the latest cameras. I have to laugh when a half-press on the shutter release causes about 30 little squares to light up in the viewfinder. Not only am I unsure of where the focus truly is, I’ve lost the subject and surrounding area in a sea of lights. It’s surprising so many cameras are designed this way.

Whenever I use AF, it’s always a single central point. I recompose when needed.

...I've made a complete 180 and I find that ANY information added to the viewfinder is a distraction from viewing the image I'm about to record...

Likewise.

I used to love viewfinder information - but now I appreciate little or nothing. Viewfinders of the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s which had backlit shutter speed or aperture scales are still attractive to me, but I know I make better photos with just a simple viewfinder image such as with an Exakta or Spotmatic.

 

[tbhv55]

You can't really focus on 67 places at the same time

I agree. When I get a new/different camera, my first adjusment is to set it to use a single focus point - either for using back-button AF, or for focus-confirmation, if manual focus is being used.

A cynic might suggest😉 that multi-point focus is designed for marketing to those who regard more technology as necessarily better. Well, IMO, as with many things in life, some technology is worth having - and some, not so much. 🙂