fredmiranda.com
Login

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              end
  

Archive 2008 · So why no AF from Zeiss?

  
 
focuspocus
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #1 · So why no AF from Zeiss?


"...superior focus control is one of them. superior speed is bogus."

I'm slow on the manual focus, waiting for the green light to show up, usually involves focusing a little behind the subject then in front then I get a good feel and nail it. AF is just plain dead on. There are conditions in which AF is not so good but those are the same conditions that are not so good for manual focus, low light and high contrast. There could be some variability between users, some of you have great vision.

Where the AF really shines over MF is when you are moving around and the subject still. One can just depress the shutter release 1/2 way and the focus is still locked on the subject. Ok, now both you and subject moving. AF would win out in terms of speed and accuracy. If I tried to move around even just a tad bit while manual focusing and the subject moving my shots are out of focus and I'm dizzy. Probably trip and fall.


Edited on May 15, 2008 at 06:58 PM



May 15, 2008 at 06:57 PM
SoundHound
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #2 · So why no AF from Zeiss?


In the FTn days (30/40 years ago) I did a really good job with MF. I still have those legacy Nikkors and began using them on my D70 and 5D until I bought modern AF lenses.

For fast moving subjects AF is clearly better-with or without my glasses. I get consistent in focus shots with AF and consistent OOF with MF-in dim light. Certainly, if you have a tripod plenty of time and F 4/F16 I'm sure MF is fine.



May 17, 2008 at 02:08 PM
1       2              end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2              end
    
 

Welcome back
Log in to your account