Trying to avoid Autofocus induced GAS

[Dave H]

I love my Leica gear, but, sometimes I think “I’m sure autofocus would have made a better job of that shot”. What I’m finding as the rolls of film and time flies by, is that I’m shooting at f4 or wider, (because I like limited DOF) and most of my shots hardly give me time to focus at all. I know all about scale focus, pre-setting the focus, and out and out guesstimating, which is all good sound advice, but, someone please tell me autofocus is not as good as its made out to be and why? so that I can rid myself of this nagging “grass is always greener” issue. I’ve read all the RFF Essays over and over but to no avail. Help

 

[DaveP]

Auto focus is girly focus..........

 

[richard_l]

AF is great for snapshots.

 

[remrf]

Auto focus has screwed up more shots for me than it has ever helped. Especially in fast paced shooting situations. And especially when shooting open for limited dof. What the sensor grabs to focus on may not be what you wanted.

Earlier this year I was covering the opening days of the Minuteman Project in Tombstone,Az. and I was trying to get a shot of the co-founder Chris Simcox. He was talking to two people and I zoomed in with my digital ( Minolta Z-1) to get his face and shoulders. But a small portion of the back of the two people were still in the shot and that is what the camera focused on. His face was a soft blur. Moment lost , photo lost.

My old Minolta Maxxum had a smaller focus sensor point and did not mis track very often. But I ended up using manual focus most of the time anyway.

 

[schmoozit]

Critical focus, I've found, is just as tedious and time consuming with autofocus as with manual, and with much less assurance that you actually have achieved it. Know thy equipment. I know that the autofocus is quick, but only if you want or care about "general" focus, at least on wider apertures. Critical focus with AF and wide aperture is a lesson in frustration, in my opinion.

 

[thmk]

I once used my Minolta Dynax 5 and the 1.4/85 in a church during a wedding... Light was not that good and the noise of the camera trying to find focus for more than a second was really annoying. After a few shots I switched to manual focussing...

Cheers
Thomas-Michael

 

[rover]

I keep finding myself in a cycle of wanting to buy a new Elan 7n, they are cheap and really good, just to have, and saying that I don't want another film SLR. That of course points me to a DSLR, which I am critical that I can't buy any fast prime lenses for it in standard or wide focal lengths because of the crop factors. This circle normally leads me back to the tracks of my fellow Luddites and I stick with the RFs.

 

[Bertram2]

I someone please tell me autofocus is not as good as its made out to be and why? so that I can rid myself of this nagging “grass is always greener” issue. I’ve read all the RFF Essays over and over but to no avail. Help

AF ? Has it's place among my tools and there are times I am glad to have it !
I do not trust too much in it's abilities tho, I mean to focus on what I want it to focus, and so I use it mostly (not always) with one center patch only, suited best to point on the object of my desire and keep it stored by holding the release button until the composition is fixed.
Half a second I need to focus this way, for the RFI mostly need 1,5 or more, I know some will say I should practise harder 😉

AF does NOT work for me in low-light or no-light when the auxiliary AF light is too indiscrete or slows down the focusing to a point where it is slower than MF.
And for shooting from the hip it is too slow compared to a preset focus of a VF or RF camera, same all situations where a lightnig fast, spot on release is needed to make IT. For a dog race for example I use RF with a preset focus for a shallow DOF !

Who shoots AF and wants a real fast system should invest more than I was willing to invest once for my F80, a F100 would not be a essential improvement but a F6 would be ! In general I think the Minolta systems are faster, a Dynax7 is hard to beat, not to speak of a Dynaxx9 . Don't know the Canon speed, but I suppose it to be the same correlation of money and AF speed. The lenses play a role too, the pro lenses are faster than the consumer lenses. Good AF is expensive !

Many of the AF "haters" never ever have really understood how the AF option setup of their SLR must be to make AF work best ( I belong to those) or never had tried out a professional system, maybe their opinion would change then.
Mine HAS changed at least after having seen how a AF fast system can work.

As I said , it's got it's place, and sometimes I am glad to own one of those cameras which were a dream only in the 70s, even if it turned out that , as always , once again the techs' promises did not all came true.

For my purposes AF is not universal enuff, but RF isn't either so the true luxury for me is to have it both now ! 😀

Regards,
Bertram

 

[Richard Black]

I use AF when shooting pics of my grandsons. They move too fast from my 59 y/o eyes and reflexes to keep them in focus. The Minolta Maxxum 4 does a decent job of that. All other shots are with manual focus when I can take the time to compose the pic. It has its place in my tool box.

 

[ch1]

I love my Leica gear, but, sometimes I think “I’m sure autofocus would have made a better job of that shot”. What I’m finding as the rolls of film and time flies by, is that I’m shooting at f4 or wider, (because I like limited DOF) and most of my shots hardly give me time to focus at all. I know all about scale focus, pre-setting the focus, and out and out guesstimating, which is all good sound advice, but, someone please tell me autofocus is not as good as its made out to be and why? so that I can rid myself of this nagging “grass is always greener” issue. I’ve read all the RFF Essays over and over but to no avail. Help

Is it because many of us like to shoot monochrome film that we get these kind of "black and white", "either/or" posts?

I shoot RF, SLR (both manual and AF) and DSLR (of course, AF) at different times and for different purposes.

Seems to me that if you are seeking to expand your photography experiences then why not try AF? So long as it doesn't "break the bank" and leave you and your loved ones hungry and homeless you will not be committing a "sin".

To be honest, as much as I enjoy RF - I cannot focus either my Bessa R2S or Nikon S2 nearly as quickly as I can a manual SLR, much less an AF one. Part of this is because I am new to RF and still trying to get the hang of it. But also, that S2 is a very "basic" camera and requires much more attention than my F5 or D70. When I have the time RF is fun. But for rapid shots or quickly changing situations - sometimes it's nice to "just go auto".

Figure out if you can afford an AF camera. Not just in terms of the $$ but in terms of the time it will take from you current photograhic activity. And then decide.

But, please, it is not an "either/or" kind of thing.

Regards,
George

 

[bobofish]

As always, Bertram is a voice of reason. I'm astounded at how often I find him jumping in and putting some moderation on things.



Autofocus, even in low end bodies is leaps and bounds above what it was just a few years ago. If you know how to use it, it is so fast in normal situations, that you will never have a problem, and I honestly can say it's much more accurate for many things than any kind of manual focus.

As Bertram and Copake Ham said, those who complain about autofocus have usually not mastered the techniques it requires...there is a learning curve, just like with anything else. The mistake many people make is to assume that the autofocus has a brain, and then they stop using theirs. When the shots are not good, they give up and throw it away.

A better body will have better focus, it's quite simple. I'm not too familiar with Minolta, which is supposedly for many things the best autofocus...I can't say anything about it.

Often on the other brands, like Nikon and Canon, there will be a pair of autofocus sensors on the better bodies: one for fast lenses, one for slower zooms. Lower end bodies often only have the slower lens sensor, for obvious reasons. The simple logic goes that a sensor has to be optimized for either fast, shallow depth of field, or dim lenses.

Most pro's don't actually use all the autofocus points, rather they go the old route, and focus with the middle patch only, and recompose. That way, the focus will always and forever be on that middle patch. Critical focus is quite easy that way, and only depends on what your camera can do, and further what your eyes can see. If you don't have good eyesight, you will not be able to focus as well on anything manual.

As people have said, the more you're willing to spend, the better your autofocus will generally be. A Canon 1v focusses much faster than my Elan II, likewise an F6 focusses much faster than an N80. The difference for all intents and purposes is a matter of milliseconds however, and on one of the pro bodies, you can literally focus a formula 1 race car as it passes by you. Set to continuing focus, some cameras will continue to focus as the mirror goes up, and it will blow your mind that you got the shot.

If you are really missing shots, then my advice is just like most people's in this situation...go out and borrow or rent a high end body, and see if you like it. If you are in love with it, but can't afford the high end body, go putz around with a slightly lower end body. For all intents and purposes, all the big brands have excellent focussing, it will only be a matter of trying what you like. Incidentally, a Nikon F5 can be had these days for $5-800 used, a paltry sum for the quality of the camera.

I personally am somewhat of a luddite as well as a technophile...I would never be without both manual focus and autofocus cameras...the advantages they bring are just so complementary.

 

[Bertram2]

. The mistake many people make is to assume that the autofocus has a brain, and then they stop using theirs. When the shots are not good, they give up and throw it away.
.

Well said ! The same mistake was made when the first AE cameras came and some detected there was no brain built in, tho the marketing had promised exactly
THAT ! 😀
Let me add a thought : It is much more important to have the "right" camera than to have the "best" one. The latter does not exist anyway 😉

Bertram
Thanks for the compliments, but I really I do not earn them 😱

 

[Theo-Prof]

AF is fine if you know HOW it works and how to control it. The cameras do focus automatically but they are clueless as to what YOU want to be in focus. The typical mistake I often see is when the shooter takes a picture of two people side-by side. The people are out of focus but the background is sharp. The camera focused as it was designed to focus, in the center of the frame. Even with multiple AF points this can still happen since the center AF sensor is usually the most sensitive, or, the "multiple" AF points do not extend out far enough from the center to catch the subjects. Either way, the moral of the story is the same--you must use AF as deliberately as you do MF.

Kevin

 

[bobofish]

Theo Prof,
So just how many angels actually dance on the head of a pin? 😀

 

[Socke]

Don't put the brains in the cameras down!

I'm going through some older shots and this is from New Year 2005 3:00 in the morning, it was on my camera and they told me I shot it, I can't remember it so AF and TTL flash aren't that bad, definitly better than my intoxicated brain was at that time 🙂

Again, the bigger picture is here

 

[Bertram2]

I, it was on my camera and they told me I shot it, I can't remember it so AF and TTL flash aren't that bad, definitly better than my intoxicated brain was at that time 🙂

Again, the bigger picture is here

Wow, a true keeper, and an amazing flash result ! I always suspect my Tamron zoom not to co-operate properly with the F80 built in flash which I use for fill in occasionally, so I shoot it all non TTL with a semi-auto flash. Not very satisfying.. But I use the flash to seldom to justify a dedicated flash and an original Nikon zoom.

Regards,
bertram

 

[Socke]

Bertram, that was a Sigma 17-35 on a D60 with dedicated 420ex flash. It was set to full manual at 30mm, f6.7 and 1/15th, flash exposure compensation -0.33 EV. Exif is nice, isn't it?

To get back to rangefinders, I shoot my G2 and G1 with flash in full manual, too. Then I ride TTL flash with FEC by the seat of my pants, minus 1/3 for bright clothes and +1/3 for dark clothes. Add another 1/3 stop for dark skinned girls in bright clothes. This works well with C-41 film and, although I haven't tried it yet, it should be in the range of slides, too.

 

[ch1]

Don't put the brains in the cameras down!

I'm going through some older shots and this is from New Year 2005 3:00 in the morning, it was on my camera and they told me I shot it, I can't remember it so AF and TTL flash aren't that bad, definitly better than my intoxicated brain was at that time 🙂

Again, the bigger picture is here

My goodness Socke!

Do really mean to tell us that you and yours imbibe in alcoholic beverages on New Year's Eve? 😕

Here in America we are much wiser. We "nibble" on NutriBars and sip glasses of Soya Milk!

Have a Happy New Year!

George

 

[DougK]

I'm American and I drink soy milk, but not on New Year's 😀

Back on topic, I've found the AF on my Sigma SA-7n to be both fast and accurate even in low light, but you must pay attention to what the sensor is pointed at. Reviewers have scoffed a bit over Sigma SLRs because they only have one central AF sensor, but honestly, I think it was a brilliant design decision (based on surveying photographers on how they actually use cameras, or so I've been told). The matrix metering is very good as well and I've never blown an exposure with this camera. They still might be crappy photos, but at least they were focused on what I wanted and well-exposed. 🙂

That said, I'm not against autofocus but I still prefer manual focus cameras.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Bertram has the most intelligent perspective.

Tell James Nachtwey that AF is 'for girls.' Those systems go to war. Steve McCurry's results are better than those of anyone above expressing such ridiculous prejudice. And, nobody shoots Formula 1 with a rangefinder.

A good AF system is far quicker and more accurate than pure manual focus, and every good AF system also allows manual focus. It's unfortunate that some of you have had poor experiences with AF. Too many people don't know how to use it, and/or settle for certain 'default' setups, such as allowing the multi-sensor array to determine focus. The accurate way, the way the pros and knowledgeable users set it up is to choose one focus sensor. Either stick with the Central point, or use the cursor or wheel to choose one of the others, as necessary. Then, there's no guessing what's being focused upon. And, there's still a huge difference between AF on something like a sophisticated EOS versus a Contax G2 or Hexar AF.