When you MUST get that shot: Real cameras should not be AF!

raid

raid

Dad Photographer
Local time
6:21 AM
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
36,440
Location
Florida
View My Gallery
I will be in a position when I may have only a quick shot of someone I want to have a photograph of.

While I have been favoring manual focus cameras since I started photography, and while I abhorred AF cameras when Canon switched from their FD mount away to the EF mount for AF photography, my eye sight is not 100% as good as it was when I was much younger. Errors in focusing are probable and are possible.

Before digital cameras came out, I bought a Hexar AF one year so that "just in case" I needed a sure shot, I had a great AF camera handy with me. While "everybody else" loved the Hexar, it felt like a toy to me. Real cameras shouldn't be AF, I was thinking then.

I have noticed some Leica AF cameras that RFF members seem to be enjoying and praising. Would such cameras be a good complement to my M8 and M9? I have M 4/3 cameras (E-P2 and E-PL1), but my AF lenses for the M 4/3 seem to be the low end lenses that nobody really wants to use.

There are some $1000 level new AF M 4/3 lenses on the market, but "why"?


This seems to leave me some options:
1. Use the M9 or M8 carefully with the "new" 1.25X adapter, and hope for the best.
2. Use the 10X magnification on the E-P2 or E-PL1 with a manual focus lens or with the Olympus 17mm or the zoom.
3. What else? :bang:


Thanks for your feedback. Are you also sometimes having such a thought process in your head?
 
The AF on the latest Olympus m4/3 cameras is blazingly fast with certain lenses. I've been very impressed with the E-P5 and Zuiko 25/1.8, for example. The E-P5 has the same AF as the E-M1. I struggled with the E-PL1 as a street shooter. The E-P5 is much better, IMO.
 
Pherdinand said:
sorry - if the hexar AF didn't work for you - just stay with manual focus.
Click to expand...

Sometimes, a great camera for someone else does not feel right for myself. I also thought about using a Black & White film with my M3 or M6. Your thoughts are not strange to me, Pherdinand. Manual lenses may have to do.
 
Bingley said:
The AF on the latest Olympus m4/3 cameras is blazingly fast with certain lenses. I've been very impressed with the E-P5 and Zuiko 25/1.8, for example. The E-P5 has the same AF as the E-M1. I struggled with the E-PL1 as a street shooter. The E-P5 is much better, IMO.
Click to expand...

I am trying not to go on a shopping spree for one planned photo, Steve. I may one day revisit the M 4/3 scene to buy a better M 4/3 camera than what I own and use.
 
raid said:
Sometimes, a great camera for someone else does not feel right for myself. I also thought about using a Black & White film with my M3 or M6. Your thoughts are not strange to me, Pherdinand. Manual lenses may have to do.
Click to expand...

I wasn't meaning the camera as a whole, really. I can imagine that the quirky aperture/speed interface, low mag VF and fixed 35mm lens make it very unfavorable for some.
But the AF on the hexar is top notch...
 
Hi Raid

My experience with AF was similar to yours years ago.
I've changed. Maybe you have too.
Give it an earnest try and you may find AF is a perfectly reasonable solution.

For my uses I have always wanted to try fast the m43 25mm f1.4 lens.
Maybe start there. Primes are sweet spots for AF in my opinion. Or maybe I just prefer them.

Cheers!
 
Yes, the AF worked fine in the Hexar. I got some sharp images with it. If they made one in digital, that would be cool. I sold my Hexar (maybe to FrankS?).
 
f16sunshine said:
Hi Raid

My experience with AF was similar to yours years ago.
I've changed. Maybe you have too.
Give it an earnest try and you may find AF is a perfectly reasonable solution.

For my uses I have always wanted to try fast the m43 25mm f1.4 lens.
Maybe start there. Primes are sweet spots for AF in my opinion. Or maybe I just prefer them.

Cheers!
Click to expand...

Hi Andy,
I have more than once been thinking of the 25/1.4. I like the M 4/3 format, and the cameras are inexpensive and light and well built.
 
raid said:
Hi Andy,
I have more than once been thinking of the 25/1.4. I like the M 4/3 format, and the cameras are inexpensive and light and well built.
Click to expand...

Do the m-4/3 cameras you own even qualify as autofocus bodies? Consider upgrading to something of the E-P5 generation or later - you'll find them plenty fast and accurate in most lighting conditions.

The 25mm DG-Summicron is a lovely lens if you can tolerate its chatter. Even on an E-PM1 it focuses fast and sure.
 
You could stick with the M8 or M9, guess the approximate focus, and then use the rangefinder to fine tune it. The other obvious answer, and that depends on how much light you will have, is to zone focus. That works well with Leica and Zeiss lenses because their DOF markings are clear and widely separated, especially with shorter lenses.
 
All m-4/3 cameras are autofocus bodies, starting with the Lumix G1 in 2008.

Raid, I can't figure out if your problem is soft lenses or poor AF. Most every kit lens for the m-4/3 format are more than adequately sharp at mid-apertures like f/4-5.6 range.

I've always had good luck with the Lumix G series of bodies using center AF, half-press on shutter button and recompose method.

Is your real problem AF or shutter response in dim room lighting? Try S-mode (shutter speed priority), manual focus mode at a preset distance and bump up the ISO to at least 1600.

For quick shooting in bright outdoor light, it's hard to beat the Olympus 15mm-f/8 body cap lens, preset at its hyperfocal detent position. No, it's not the best lens optically, but I compensate in post with a custom development taste that corrects the geometric and chromatic distortion. For smaller sized prints, the image quality is more than adequate.

Really, with its intrinsically wider DOF, I can't see you having focus problems with m-4/3 cameras. Everyone complains how with m-4/3 you can't get adequately shallow DOF. Both Olympus and Lumix have some of the fastest-focusing bodies/lenses in the mirrorless world.

~Joe
 
I think there is a place for AF, my iPhone comes to mind. I'm not sure it would be as much fun with MF.

I'm a big lover of zone focusing (e.g. CV Snap-Shot 25 Skopar), RFs for medium wides and SLRs for macros, 85 and above. But all manual focus for my style of shooting.

If I was going to try and make money shooting sports these days it would be AF for the 85 and above stuff. A lot has to do with getting used to the way AF tracks what it decides it should focus on.

I think the key really is knowing your tools like the back of your hand. Digital has freed us from the cost of burning film and processing as you get to know your system.

B2
 
As this thread is in the Photography General Interest Forum, the solution to the problem of how to quickly and reliably obtain an in-focus photograph has a simple, proven solution.

Any reasonably recent Nikon or Canon DSLR with a decent AF lens can accomplish this task.

My personal experience is with The D300 and D700 bodies and older AF-S and newer G prime lenses. When the appropriate AF system menu parameters were used, focus for moving subjects (action photography) or subjects in low light was utterly reliable. For example, I used a D300 with an inexpensive 50/1.8 AF-S lens for a gig photographing an amateur gymnastics competition. My assignment was the parallel bar station. Flash was forbidden. The D300 AF could focus on the athletes during their dismounts. The athletes were moving quickly and parents would buy photos that showed the athletes in the air during the dismount. I typically used a f 2.8 aperture. Because the photos were sold immediately after the event, there was not time for the sales people to crop. So I had to be relatively close. Even the ancient D300 with a mediocre AF lens would find focus on the first frame and then refocus flawlessly inbetween 1/200 sec shutter bursts. Of course this sort of performance only occurred when the AF menu options were optimized for this type of work.

On the opposite end of the spectrum were weddings I did with the D700 in low light. Here again, the AF menu parameter selection was critical. The focus success rate was close to 100%... even in rather low light.

Of course it took some time to study the menu system and do a bit of on-line research to find recommendations for optimizing the menu parameters. It took a bit of practice as well.

No doubt other DSLR bands are equally capable of "must have" AF performance.

Beyond my experience all one has to do is consider the countless pros and semi-pros who make a living using DSLRs for sports and event photography. If these people culd not produce "must have" shots at every gig, they would go out of business.

I never enjoyed using those DSLRs. I preferred the Zeiss Ikon M body I owned at that time. I enjoyed using that camera everytime I picked it up. But when I was being paid to get "must have" shots, I always used the unpleasant DSLRs.
 
Hi Raid - While I've had the same thoughts as you, I cam to a very different conclusion.

I'm a big fan of manual focus (ZI, FM2N, M-glass on my A7R), not just for the images (when I get it right) but primarily for the experience -- there is sense of connection when the images overlap when shooting an RF.

Where we are different is the use of a DSLR. Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that you're not a big DSLR user. I use DSLR's extensively. I've had Nikon film SLR's and DSLR's for a long time, and the key to nailing the focus and exposure with a DSLR is understanding how the metering works -- for Nikon, that means matrix, center and spot.

So, primarily because I have more experience and feel more comfortable with a Nikon SLR or DSLR, I would choose it over an RF if I absolutely need to nail the focus and exposure.

I realize that's probably sacrilege here at RFF. 😱
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

peterm1
Leica SL (first version) AF adapters for Canon mount lenses?????????
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
trix4ever
T
B
Best Monochrome Options 2025 - Leica? Converted Files? Converted Cameras?
2 3
Replies
53
Views
4K
Ko.Fe.
Ko.Fe.
B
Lenses: Best of Breed/Cross Platform Dream Kit? Post Yours
2
Replies
21
Views
2K
sojournerphoto
S
J
  • Article Article
What exactly is a point & shoot camera? Glad you asked!The Kodak of 1888 may have been the first, and even Leica got into the act!
Replies
17
Views
1K
Mos6502
Mos6502
Miles.
Olympus OM Lens Repair - Is this a unique problem?
Replies
9
Views
504
Joao
Joao
Back
Top Bottom