A simple poll to learn different ways of archiving better focusing with MF lenses. Also please comment your hit-or-miss ratio with an option you had expirience with.
I use either an OV with Mag or LV, depending on situation, but I couldn't vote twice, so I voted for the former, which I use more often. With the OV plus Mag it depends very much on the lens and light, so it is impossible to give a meaningful number. It feels like about 1/3-1/2 of the shots are in focus the first time (I usually repeat until I get what I want). The LV works every time, the first time. D800 and Zeiss lenses.
With the EOS 5D with EE-S screen and manual lenses from 14/2.8 to 800mm/5.6 less than 5% images are unsharp because of focussing - when I have enough time to focus.
But with moving subjects like two small childs the miss rate is much higher - with FD 24/1.4, Zeiss 35/1.4, Minolta 58/1.2, Canon FD 85/1.2 wideopen. When I would take the same high standards as for my photography of non moving objects it would be a miss rate >50%.
With the Canon EF 50/1.4 the miss rate is probably smaller - but also the numers of pictures made. With that lens and my 5D I have problems to get images in focus at the available light I have, and the childs moving how the do normaly. With the manual lenses it is much, much better, and much less stressful. And I can focus where I want, not where focus points are located..
With AF I do probably miss fewer times right focus, but I miss the right point in time.
But even for my nude / portrait photography I allow some few images with slightly missed focus to be good enough for publication. There I have a miss rate probably about 10% with those fast lenses.
With AF (and studio flash) some time ago I had problems to find enough contrast for the AF, only skin is not enough, for manual focus this is no problem.
The difference beween standard and EE-S screen for the fast lenses wideopen I learned a bit on weddings with avialiable light. I think with standard I have ~50% miss rate, with EE-S ~10%.
At a falconry show I had a miss rate of 100% for birds in flight with FD 300/2.8. I suppose with a EF 300/2.8L this would be better :-)
At that show the birds flew on head level of the audience, and somtimes lower. It was a very fast show, great for showing, not so much for photographing. An eagle touched my lens during flight.
Those miss-numbers are guessed, I have no statistics. And I do not exactly differ if the focus is missed, or the shutter speed was to slow for the movement. Most of my photography is with avialable light and longer shutter speeds.
I find a decent rear LCD with LV and magnification works extremely well, when you have the luxury/discipline/time to use a tripod. I also have a Zacuto finder for my 5DII, but don't use it for still photos.
Depends on the use. For tripod work liveview on the real LCD works pretty well. For handheld it sucks. EVFs aren't quite there yet imo but that's just a matter of time now.
I use the EE-s screen with good results. Also agree lenses are a big part of it. The better the lens is wide open the easier it is to focus. I tried the Canon focus magnifier/angle finder thingy and it was a nightmare to use. Didn't attach very firmly, constantly needed to be refocused and with reduced eye point no fun for glasses-wearer like me.
I have Nikon D3 cameras. I bought the new miracle D800(36mp); returned the D800 due only to the inferior focusing screen/ finder optics. Eye-focusing doable with the lower line camera, but easier and less torture for the eye with the "pro" camera. Eye focusing, done accurately, is slower than autofocus. Thankfully, I'm usually not in a hurry.
a good evf works best for me with second best being an improved matte focus screen intended for fast glass. evf gives me 100% accuracy on stationary objects and 90% on subjects that move in a steady fashion. a good optical focus screen gives me ~95% and ~90% respectively in those situations. with erratically moving subjects it doesn't make much difference, whether i get the shot depends on how well i can anticipate the subjects movement. i guess i can probably get dead on quicker with an evf and close enough quicker with an optical finder. lcds don't typically have enough resolution to focus without using magnification, so they are awkward for moving subjects.
I voted focus screen, seems the best option on my 5D. one day I'd like to try a split style screen. I would assume LV/peeking would be better for bodies with that option, but that style of shooting would be cumbersome for me and the type of shots I'm often after. I really have no experience with EVF and I should also mention my hit rate is probably sub-par. most often lenses used are 28 to 85mm, nothing over 135.
>EOS 5D (MkII): manual focus using liveview & tripod - always spot on, a delight to use! Handheld liveview, off the rear LCD, does not work - too shaky (too much coffee?). However, with the viewfinder & EE-S screen, manual focus is pretty easy - works good even for moving subjects in good light, if not to close (or did, I recently have had problems with my contacts, I may have to try a new brand perhaps?)!
>Nex-5N: manual focus off the LCD never worked good, a bit shaky with magnification, and focus peaking (without magnification) I never liked, no matter the settings! Autofocus, only manual focus when on tripod.
>Fuji X-Pro1: with the latest firmware (2.0), manual focus off the EVF is very easy - for close subjects I use the 3x magnification, and far away subjects the 10x (with the OVF one has to zone focus). Fast and easy, very steady. Actually, so fast & good I now prefer manual focus over autofocus - dramatic change to firmware 1.0!! Liveview off the LCD for tripod work is not as good as the 5D, simply because one cannot scroll the focusing point, very disappointing, and strange!!
Less accurate to most accurate. IMO
OVF that is out of calibration. DUH, but still common.
OVF and LCD(with no magnification) I find the accuracy about the same
a precision focus screen in an OVF
EVF/LCD + focus peaking
EVF/LCD + zoom
EVF/LCD + zoom + peaking, If the lens is sharp enough to see peaking while zoomed, you can't miss.
I find higher rez screens will be more accurate, I think the EVF in my NEX-7 is more accurate than the LCD.
I reach my highest MF accuracy rate with rangefinders. As long as they are well calibrated, they are the best even for longer lenses.
The second best thing is a nice 3" LCD screen with LV, focus peaking, and for critical focus, magnified view. I found the implementation in the GXR-M to be perfect. I don't like EVF for focusing purposes. LCDs are larger, have higher resolution, more brilliance and contrast. The only use of the EVF is when the LCD is difficult to view, but in almost one year that I had the GXR, I have never encountered such situation.
I haven't missed much at all compared to my 1DIII, which is not quite as nice as an Olympus OM film camera. The most common complaint I hear is shadow blocking, but I'm not bothered by it.
Never used one, so I don't really know if my other points will hold. Is the image as large as, say, a FF OVF?