Anyone Still Manual Focus?

[Zoesmama03]

Did you by any chance read Understanding Exposure by Bryan Peterson? In it, he describes the exposure triangle made up of ISO, Shutter speed and Aperture. He also give a lot of photographic examples of his work. He calls F8-11 his 'whatever' or 'anything goes' Aperture because everything comes out more in focus. Has to do with Depth of Field. The more wide open the Aperture (i.e. 1.8, 2.0) the more out of focus the background is going to be. You can even have the eyes in focus and the nose will be blurred if the Aperture is set wide open. (Or worse, the nose in focus and the eyes OOF!) The smaller the Aperture (larger number i.e. F8, 11,) the more crisp the background behind your subject is going to be. Of course, it also depends on available light, subject movement, etc. If you haven't had a chance to check out UE, it's a decent read. The only thing I didn't like is that he often would tell his Aperture and Shutter speed, but neglect to mention ISO. That's the 3rd part of the exposure triangle; kind of stupid to have omitted it, imo, since the book is geared toward noobs like us. Don't feel bad, I have experience shooting real SLRs in film days and the DSLR is a whole new ballgame. I don't remember struggling so much to get good low light photos w/ film. Yes it was grainier, but maybe my standards weren't as high??? I dunno...At least they came out! Going from film to DSLR is like trying to learn Hip hop dancing when all you've ever done is ballet! Good luck! The good thing with digital is that it doesn't cost you anything to see your work and keep retooling.

Yep I read it but what I'm saying is I haven't memorized the distances. I know if I go lower(more open like f/1.8) I will get less in focus unless I back up. Thats what I mean. And I will have to break down and buy the book since I checked it out from library and it always has a wait list. Might look for it used or something because I know there was info in there that I didn't understand at the time but would love to go back and revisit.

Funniest thing is I think I get low light better. I have more struggles with full sun and we sure have a TON of that here in AZ. Can't wait for some clouds and more shade(TREES beautiful TREES) in TN next month.

 

[iggbees]

i have 3 manual focus lenses. they were a gift from my boyfriend's step-dad, who just happened to have a pentax camera and lenses. i actually prefer to use the 135 mm lens as a manual focus. i feel like i have more control with it. it is not good for shooting at hockey games though (i can't wait to get an auto focus for that purpose). haha.

these are just some of the pictures i've taken with my manual focus lenses.

 

[boBQuincy]

I gave up using manual focus when I found I could not beat the autofocus. I posted a focus chart at the end of a long hall and photographed it with a Canon D30 and 70-200. It appeared to have a tiny bit of front focus so I tried adjusting it. No matter how slightly I adjusted the focus manually, it was never as sharp as the autofocus.

So I quit trying. Of course there are times when manual focus works better, like with a manual focus lens (like my Zenitar 16). The Zenitar doesn't take a lot of focusing, at f/4 almost everything is in focus anyway.

 

[manning]

It's been a long time. I still have my Canon F1. The nice thing about that camera is you could get different focusing screens for it. You could get one where you could easily see how the depth of field looked. It would literally snap in and out of focus.

I also have an old canon SLR that will calculate the proper f/stop. You focus on the main subject, then on the nearest object in the camera and then the furthest. The camera then figures out what f/stop to use for a sharp picture.

 

[YesDear]

I have not read Bryan Peterson's book on exposure, but when the comment above in this thread was made that Bryan would tell you the aperture and shutter but not the ISO, I thought I knew the answer and I think I was right!

Bryan wrote the first version of this book before Digital. In the film days ISO was dictated by the film you used. That is why many many photographers would carry multiple cameras. There was nothing more frustrating than to be somewhere with Kodachrome 25 in your camera and then go inside without a flash. 25 was the ISO. Yes 25. You were screwed! ISO 800 was about as high as you could get without paying to have a lab try to push it for you in lab. Some B&W films would go higher, but that was expensive stuff. And remember, every time you pushed the shutter release, you paid for processing the film! 36 exposures was the highest you got unless you rolled your own. NO not that kind of roll!! And the camera could only hold so much film. I used to marvel at watching a true pro, flip, open, remove, and replace film in about 15 seconds. It was something to watch. I chuckle to myself when I read threads about people complaining that they only 3-400 exposures on a given card at a certain format. ( I only get 149 exposures on my 8gb card when I shoot in loseless RAW on my D300. That is still more that 4 rolls of 36 exposure film!)

It has only been since digital that we the photographer has been given way more control about ISO as sensitivity, white balance, etc. Yes it is more for the new ones to remember.

Bryan started his photography in 1970 according to his book. That is the year I started as well. I am certain he is far more accomplished than I am. But for us old ****'s that learned that way, it is different shooting digital. It is exciting for me to see you youngsters getting into this stuff!

So I bet the reason he does not mention ISO is a throw back to the film days when your only ISO choice was when you put the film in the camera!

And don't get me started about having ectachrome in your camera and being outside or knowing the exposure differentials between slide and print film! Some things just do not need to be remembered.

Boy I feel old!

 

[bostran1]

I generally only use manual focus when I'm at the aquarium taking photographs. I have found it nearly impossible to use autofocus through the glass and water with moving fish. Consequently, I only manual focus. Here are a few examples from a recent trip to the New England Aquarium. My camera also has a manual focus assist which is great.








You can see the rest of the photos here.

 

[kaffinito]

I just recently graduated from a point and shoot to a DSLR. I love using manual focus - I find that I can take some really good shots with my 50mm.

I really like what both the lens and the manual focus can do. I like having control over the shot and I like having to work to get the shots I want. I just don't feel right using AF most of the time now so I just leave the camera set to M.

 

[Groucho]

I have actually been considering this- since all I have now is a broken-but-still-works DX 10.5 Fisheye. It looks like new ones go for around $200 on Ebay- is that where you got yours? I was worried about the MF before but after using the 105 I am thinking it would be a piece of cake. I imagine the DOF is huge stopped down a bit.

Yes indeed. In that photo of my Zenitar, you'll note that it's focused on the hyperfocal distance for F8. Basically, at that aperture, everything from about, oh, .7 of a meter to infinity is in focus! Getting blurry photos due to poor focusing is really not a concern with the lens.

I did get mine off eBay, from a seller actually called "zenitar" IIRC, who primarily sold those and some other Russian goods. It was a brand new one, which is fun in itself with the exotic packaging and smells. At the time, it was about $140 or so but they have gone up, used ones now go for more than I paid. It is a great lens, I had no complaints about mine at all except that on my cropped sensor, it wasn't fully fishy.

Here's what the packaging and contents look like.

It's been a long time. I still have my Canon F1. The nice thing about that camera is you could get different focusing screens for it. You could get one where you could easily see how the depth of field looked. It would literally snap in and out of focus.

Many DSLRs still allow you to change the focusing screen. However, I think what you're talking about is Depth of Field Preview, which stops the lens down on command to the selected aperture, giving you an idea of the DoF (and also a dimmer image.) Again, most DSLRs have this, the main exception I can think of being the Nikon entry-level models.