Rangefinder focusing beats AF

I have always found the same, but AF fundamentalists don't seem to accept that there can be more than one way of doing things.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
I have always found the same, but AF fundamentalists don't seem to accept that there can be more than one way of doing things.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

There are always more than one way of doing things but often there's only one right way. ;)

Just kidding, of course. It all comes down to personal preference. I, for one, am not particularly fond of either focusing methods. I prefer slow, manual focussing on a ground glass. But I will use AF on a camera if it's got it because I don't trust my eyesight very much.
 
My 1DMkIV AF will perfectly track, in light that requires 8000 ISO to get 1/400 at f/4.5, a football player running straight at me and do it at 10 frames per second. Try that with an RF. :)
 
Pickett Wilson said:
My 1DMkIV AF will perfectly track, in light that requires 8000 ISO to get 1/400 at f/4.5, a football player running straight at me and do it at 10 frames per second. Try that with an RF. :)
Click to expand...

Precisely. It would totally depend on what you were shooting. A wall? Who cares. The above example? Give me AF w/tracking EVERY TIME. Unless the subject in focus doesn't matter....
 
Last edited:
While for years I resisted anything requiring batteries in a camera, I am very slowly starting to appreciate AF as my eyes get older. The key is the ability to hold the focus. I seem so far to find it okay provided I get the exposure set manually first and need not change it.
 
I don't think that video was meant to be serious. Who can't focus their Leica on a vertical bar? Try focusing on real world objects.
 
Any person can pick up a 5D and achieve the same results as the tester ... not so with a rangefinder. This guy is familiar with how a rangefinder works and used that skill to get his results. Hand the M9 to someone who's never focused this way and they'll struggle to even come close IMO which is not to put the RF method down but the test is flawed in this respect for me!
 
Ok, I stopped watching after 2 minutes.

@sepiareverb - I find walls quite difficult w/ RF. A brick wall: which grout to line up in the patch (careful you aren't a couple bricks over and everything looks right)? Perfectly smooth wall, well, we need something with contrast to line up in the patch..

I was at a family wedding on Saturday and the RF was quite a challenge with the little ones on the dance floor (especially my 2yr old niece dancing in circles!). Would have been nice to have the 5D, but quite glad to have the RF for a number of other reasons (including not being "that guy" with the same camera as the paid photog!).

I think a manually focused 5D (with good focusing screen and nice bright primes) equals or beats the RF in most cases (including low light).

Not too sure about AF though, I rarely use it, so can't offer much of an opinion.

Note: keep that VF and patch window nice and clean! Nothing like a clear patch.
 
Is that video entirely accurate? His RF focusing seems to be an order of magnitude faster than what I expected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom