manual focus lenses on af bodies...

[tomtofa]

I have a Nikon V1 kit for total AF use, and an X100 that is mixed. I tend to use it for shooting that requires manual everything for various reasons, mainly to counteract lag. Even then I prefer back button focusing, and auto is fine for snaps and a good percentage of travel.

If I add an ILC, I'll probably use it mixed like the Fuji with it's own AF lenses - don't have the money to start chasing the manual lenses I'd be interested in.

 

[Michael Markey]

Circumstances dictate whether I use AF or MF

I bought a 40d to use with my MF Zeiss C/Y lenses.
Replaced the screen with a Canon MF screen and couldn`t be happier

I mainly use it for equestrian events and pre focus on fixed points.
Tracking the action in those circumstances would probably require a large ,heavy pro body.

I did buy a 40/2.8 stm for general use which is plenty fast enough for most situations .

It has frozen on me a few times in low light but then I`ll just switch back to MF mode.

 

[lxmike]

I can remember when Pentax launched the MEF a few decades back, I can remeber at the time a lot of people saying, 'that will not catch on, to slow' and then a Canon launched an af slr, and the restnis history. Now I love talking about gear and have gas attacks like the best of us but a few years ago I decided that I should start shooting more images as opposed to buying more gear in the hunt to become a more 'happier' and 'better' photographer. My point being, at the end of the day, use what ever makes you feel good and produces the images you want, also do not discount any method or genre of photography, the image is the goal, how you get itmis up tomyou. If af lenses are you thing and they work for you then thats cool, lm new to af, and l have a lot of old pentax glass, but l will stick with the Fuji af lenses on my x pro 1 for the time being and .why because they work well, they are faster than my old eyes

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

More than once, I've seen people with dSLRs on tripods, with pinholes in the lens mount.

In my opinion, if it achieves what you want, use it.

 

[jmilkins]

the gearhead retro in me means I've done a fair bit of adapting: M43 to Nikkor, OM , lsm, M mount, M42, NEX to same plus Contax G, Minolta AF, Canon EOS to OM....

They are all fun, and focus peaking can really assist. Somehow though, I feel that they are all adaptions that lack some of the "magic" or "spirit" of the designers vision of a matched body and lens. While it is fun to experiment, some of the compromises can distract from image making.

A fun one with a film and RF nod is the Canon EOS RT with pellicle mirror (like an RF, you see the actual exposure) , beattie intensescreen and OM zuikos.

 

[daveleo]

seems like most folks who use af bodies bought into them for the express purpose of using manual focus lenses on them.
would this be an accurate assesment of your intentions?
i can understand people who already have a collection of mf lenses doing so…

for me, i wanted an af camera so i could use af lenses. very simple i think but i sometimes feel completely left out of some of the conversations around here because of it.
i love af, even slow af…which seems much faster than my manual focus ability.
other than setting hyperfocal distance with a wide or near wide lens which is the fastest way to shoot…i prefer af.

where are you all on this?

I love that my DSLR can use the old Nikkor MF lenses. They are great optics and inexpensive !! I have 2 AF lenses (for ocassional convenience) and 5 MF lenses.

I installed a Katzeye split-prism screen and eyepiece magnifier to help focusing the MF lenses.