The people who simply accept the AF systems and the corresponding compromises are more like those unfortunate, brainwashed people of the Third Reich who submitted to the propaganda.
Oh........now I get it.
Are you serious? That\'s even more condescending than your original statement.
Marty
That is not my intention. It is a bad analogy to begin with, and a worse one to extrapolate from. My mistake.
The first point is, very accurate manual focus is very much a real possibility and, once it is achieved on a consistent basis it can be far more pleasurable and rewarding than an average AF system.
This assumes that the photographer has gained a certain level of proficiency through plenty of practice.
I have. Several others here have. Hence, we love MF and as time goes on we have less and less use for AF systems.
I had a relapse and tried AF again (at the start of this thread, you see what happened). This event reminded me of why I hate AF so much, and why I should never doubt myself again.
The second point is, it is the AF systems that impose compromises and limitations on those of us who would choose to use MF. If a camera manufacturer spent as much R&D on implementing a MF system that allowed us as much manual control of focus as possible, rather than on yet another implementation of an AF system that can never be \"just right\", then MF would become much more \"mass consumable\". There are all sorts of things they could do today for MF that would make AF systems nearly irrelevant and hand the control back to the photographer.
So, I hate AF because a) it almost invariably lets me down if I use it and b) the existence of the technology in my camera reduces my ability to fully exploit its manual focus function.
If this makes AF shooters feel like they are being attacked, I will not apologize. That feeling is much more of a reflection on the AF shooters than it is on me.
The people who simply accept the AF systems and the corresponding compromises are more like those unfortunate, brainwashed people of the Third Reich who submitted to the propaganda.
Oh........now I get it.
Are you serious? That\'s even more condescending than your original statement.
Marty
That is not my intention. It is a bad analogy to begin with, and a worse one to extrapolate from. My mistake.
The point is, very accurate manual focus is very much a real possibility and, once it is achieved on a consistent basis it can be far more pleasurable and rewarding than an average AF system.
This assumes that the photographer has gained a certain level of proficiency through plenty of practice.
I have. Several others here have. Hence, we love MF and as time goes on we have less and less use for AF systems.
I had a relapse and tried AF again (at the start of this thread, you see what happened). This event reminded me of why I hate AF so much, and why I should never doubt myself again.
The second point is, it is the AF systems that impose compromises and limitations on those of us who would choose to use MF. If a camera manufacturer spent as much R&D on implementing a MF system that allowed us as much manual control of focus as possible, rather than on yet another implementation of an AF system that can never be \"just right\", then MF would become much more \"mass consumable\". There are all sorts of things they could do today for MF that would make AF systems nearly irrelevant and hand the control back to the photographer.
So, I hate AF because a) it almost invariably lets me down if I use it and b) the existence of the technology in my camera reduces my ability to fully exploit its manual focus function.
If this makes AF shooters feel like they are being attacked, I will not apologize. That feeling is much more of a reflection on the AF shooters than it is on me.
The people who simply accept the AF systems and the corresponding compromises are more like those unfortunate, brainwashed people of the Third Reich who submitted to the propaganda.
Oh........now I get it.
Are you serious? That\'s even more condescending than your original statement.
Marty
That is not my intention. It is a bad analogy to begin with, and a worse one to extrapolate from. My mistake.
The point is, very accurate manual focus is very much a real possibility and, once it is achieved on a consistent basis it can be far more pleasurable and rewarding than an average AF system.
This assumes that the photographer has gained a certain level of proficiency through plenty of practice.
I have. Several others here have. Hence, we love MF and as time goes on we have less and less use for AF systems.
I had a relapse and tried AF again (at the start of this thread, you see what happened). This event reminded me of why I hate AF so much, and why I should never doubt myself again.
If this makes AF shooters feel like they are being attacked, I will not apologize. That feeling is much more of a reflection on the AF shooters than it is on me.
The people who simply accept the AF systems and the corresponding compromises are more like those unfortunate, brainwashed people of the Third Reich who submitted to the propaganda.
Oh........now I get it.
Are you serious? That\'s even more condescending than your original statement.
Marty
That is not my intention. It is a bad analogy to begin with, and a worse one to extrapolate from. My mistake.
The point is, very accurate manual focus is very much a real possibility and, once it is achieved on a consistent basis it can be far more pleasurable and rewarding than an average AF system. This assumes that the photographer has gained a certain level of proficiency through plenty of practice. I have. Several others here have. Hence, we love MF and as time goes on we have less and less use for AF systems. I had a relapse and tried AF again (at the start of this thread, you see what happened). This event reminded me of why I hate AF so much, and why I should never doubt myself again.
If this makes AF shooters feel like they are being attacked, I will not apologize. That feeling is much more of a reflection on the AF shooters than it is on me.
The people who simply accept the AF systems and the corresponding compromises are more like those unfortunate, brainwashed people of the Third Reich who submitted to the propaganda.
Oh........now I get it.
Are you serious? That\'s even more condescending than your original statement.
Marty
That is not my intention. It is a bad analogy to begin with, and a worse one to extrapolate from. My mistake.
The point is, very accurate manual focus is very much a real possibility and, once it is achieved on a consistent basis it can be far more consistent and accurate than an average AF system. This assumes that the photographer has gained a certain level of proficiency through plenty of practice. I have. Several others here have. Hence, we love MF and as time goes on we have less and less use for AF systems. I had a relapse and tried AF again (at the start of this thread, you see what happened). This event reminded me of why I hate AF so much, and why I should never doubt myself again.
If this makes AF shooters feel like they are being attacked, I will not apologize. That feeling is much more of a reflection on the AF shooters than it is on me.
Feb 12, 2010 at 09:15 PM
Previous versions of cogitech's message #8126734 « Why I hate AF. »
