bushwacker wrote:
reason I asked is i tried manual focusing on 5d3 (with the default screen ) the focus is always off. One problem is I can't see contrast difference between OOF areas... this is the reason why i am stuck with 5d2 using the precision matte.
Same here, mk2 was much easier to manual focus after replacing the focusing screen, and for the mk4 I have take a sequence of 5-8 images if I really want to make sure I nail focus.
I have been using a 1Dsmkiii with a focusing screen with great success. Unfortunately it appears that modern DSLRs are not geared towards manual focusing so I am waiting on a mirrorless version with focus peaking from Canon (which sounds like it might be a while).
Kcct82 wrote:
Same here, mk2 was much easier to manual focus after replacing the focusing screen, and for the mk4 I have take a sequence of 5-8 images if I really want to make sure I nail focus.
dimitris77 wrote:
I have been using a 1Dsmkiii with a focusing screen with great success. Unfortunately it appears that modern DSLRs are not geared towards manual focusing so I am waiting on a mirrorless version with focus peaking from Canon (which sounds like it might be a while).
dimitris77 wrote:
I have been using a 1Dsmkiii with a focusing screen with great success. Unfortunately it appears that modern DSLRs are not geared towards manual focusing so I am waiting on a mirrorless version with focus peaking from Canon (which sounds like it might be a while).
A mirrorless, like Sony A7/r/s II with IBIS will give a calmer viewfinder image, and facilitate manual focusong even more than the first generation Sony bodies. I gave up on DSLRs, because I could could never be assured of correct manual focusing. I've tried alternative focusing screen and viewfinder magnifiers, all to no avail. Just losing money. I don't miss DSLRs.
The same for me. I never use the 5DSR anymore - it sits in the closet as an emergency backup. When the A7RIII comes out, I'll sell the Canon and my A7RII will become the backup. I can't see myself ever using a DSLR again - lack of an EVF is too cumbersome in view of the fact that I only use manual focus (and nearly all actual manual focus lenses).
IBIS enables superb EVF focus acquisition and verification in even long lenses; not enough is made of this feature and its dramatic impact on focusing/using high quality manual focus lenses (faster focus, greater image quality). To accentuate the issue, the new manual focus lenses from Zeiss and CV really let you know if you miss by even a little, such is their quality. If only more people knew. The issues are showing up in reviews written for a DSLR using audience:
'I really wish they made this lens for Sony FE cameras' (Phoblographer review of Milvus 35/1.4)
'There’s no autofocus with this lens, meaning you’ll need to rely on technical focusing skill to achieve a sharp shot.' (Petapixel, same lens)
'Zeiss manual focus lenses aren’t for the faint of heart' (Phoblographer review of Milvus 85/1.4)
'..it takes some skill to get the most out of it.' (amateur photographer, Milvus 85/1.4)
Most of my shots come from my 2 Otus on a A7RII. In order to have one AF lens, I own a Sony 85 f:1.4 GM. Most of my shots are with wide aperture (f:2.0 and f:2.8). I have more misfocused shots with AF than with MF, because the AF system decides where exactly will be the focus point, and it is not always where I want it. So, granted, it can be corrected, but then you are back to using MF and with a lens that wan't designed for it the way a Zeiss is.
So, for stationary targets, I much prefer MF. And, yes, IBIS helps as well.
philip_pj wrote:
IBIS enables superb EVF focus acquisition and verification in even long lenses; not enough is made of this feature and its dramatic impact on focusing/using high quality manual focus lenses (faster focus, greater image quality). To accentuate the issue, the new manual focus lenses from Zeiss and CV really let you know if you miss by even a little, such is their quality. If only more people knew. The issues are showing up in reviews written for a DSLR using audience:
'I really wish they made this lens for Sony FE cameras' (Phoblographer review of Milvus 35/1.4)
'There’s no autofocus with this lens, meaning you’ll need to rely on technical focusing skill to achieve a sharp shot.' (Petapixel, same lens)
'Zeiss manual focus lenses aren’t for the faint of heart' (Phoblographer review of Milvus 85/1.4)
'..it takes some skill to get the most out of it.' (amateur photographer, Milvus 85/1.4) ...Show more →
I just sit back and sigh when I see those reviews. Are they trying to use them on moving targets? (semi-rhetorical question) Of course it takes some skill to use them...isn't that true of anything beyond an auto-everything wunderkamera? I have to wonder whether they've ever compared results in a meaningful way from AF vs careful MF.
This is JPEG out of camera with minor tweak. very first photo after I got the camera. I haven't touch its RAW yet before LR offer support.
ISO560 1/125 WO. Light is not great.
This is JPEG out of camera with minor tweak. very first photo after I got the camera. I haven't touch its RAW yet before LR offer support.
ISO560 1/125 WO. Light is not great.
