Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Thoughts Around Automated vs. Manual Functions
Page <prev 2 of 17 next> last>>
Aug 5, 2020 14:13:16   #
srt101fan
 
srt101fan wrote:
If your question is "why do diehard manual photographers that look down on automated shooting modes have no problem accepting automation when it comes to autofocus" then you haven't gotten any answers to your question.

You're not getting one from me either. That's because I'm not an "auto shooting mode is the only way to go" kinda guy and they're the only ones who can answer your questions.

I will say though, that for cameras like mine (Nikon D5300) manual focus is a lot harder than it was with my film cameras. Of course the eyes ain't as good as they used to be either......😡
If your question is "why do diehard manual ph... (show quote)


[In the second paragraph I should have said "manual" where I said "auto"! I guess the brain is going downhill along with the eyes.....]

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:16:59   #
srt101fan
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Go mirrorless and use the 10x zoom in the Electronic View Finder (EVF). You can manually focus better than ever imagined with film cameras.


Sounds good, Paul, but changing cameras is an expensive solution....😢

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:18:11   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
srt101fan wrote:
Sounds good, Paul, but changing cameras is an expensive solution....😢


Those mirrors are the chains holding back our photography...

Reply
 
 
Aug 5, 2020 14:27:52   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Go mirrorless and use the 10x zoom in the Electronic View Finder (EVF). You can manually focus better than ever imagined with film cameras.

I believe I could focus as needed with aid of the split-image of my Pentax {film} “Super-Program” .... it is touch-and-go using what I see unaided with my DSLR’s viewfinder.

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:29:42   #
pmorin Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs
 
larryepage wrote:
Before proceeding, I want to declare openly that I am about to ask a question which some may interpret as unnecessarily raising controversy or attempting to troll the group or provoke some of its members. Please be assured that is absolutely not my intent, and it is my hope that we can have something resembling an intelligent discussion around the topic. There are some specific elements involved, and I don't want to shy away from those. But please do not interpret them as provocation.

The thoughts behind this discussion arose as I was getting ready to do the latest firmware update for my D850. It was released in April, but I somehow missed it until yesterday. It apparently provides for improved operation with certain lenses. And no...it does not add the "Eye Focus" capability that many have been anxiously awaiting.

So the question is this...and I haven't been able to find a delicate way to ask it...for those who treasure "Manual" photography, exactly what are the boundaries of thta method of operation? And for the purposes of this discussion, let's please set aside the question of whether "Auto ISO" is or is not part of "manual exposure." It's been discussed thoroughly elsewhere without resolution. I'm passionate around my position on that subject and realize that others are equally passionate around their own, different, position.

BUT...it seems that many (and I mean many everywhere, not just here) who would never consider following anything other than manual exposure management would also never consider anything other than automatic camera focus. And preferably automatic camera focus that can identify, lock in on, and focus on the eye of their subject, whether human or animal. Why is the manual choice preferred in the one case, but the automatic choice is lusted after in the other case?

Now just for full disclosure here. I proudly use autofocus essentially all the time, except for night sky photography and a few other cases where autofocus falls short. I was initially quite concerned when some of my newest cameras no longer had an autofocus assist light. (Trust me...I learned that it's OK.) Because of some vision problems relating either from glaucoma or occupational exposure to intense light (my doctor and I don't agree on which), I shamelessly depend on autofocus. And yes, I use Program exposure mode a lot of the time also. It's just too good and too convenient if I select the correct metering pattern, and I am pretty shameless about that also.

Why do we think there is such a disparity in the acceptance of automatic exposure vs. autofocus, especially since various forms of automatic exposure have been around longer than autofocus? I am really interested in the responses here, especially if we can keep the discussion civil and thoughtful.
Before proceeding, I want to declare openly that I... (show quote)


🤷🏼

I saw this post and began to wonder if I was doing it all wrong. So I tested the cameras abilities with the same lens and focal distance, but used the Auto Setting on #1 and manually exposed for #2 in this sequence. As you can see, there is some blowout on #1 which is not there on #2. To get to the manual settings, I started at twice the focal distance for shutter speed, adjusted white balance for daylight, used the lowest setting for iso (200) and then adjusted the aperture to get the balance that I wanted. I could have let P mode do this for me, but this way in manual mode I can adjust brightness to what I like in my photos and what works for me in post.
Just to clarify, I shot in raw and let the camera make the jpeg to wirelessly transfer to my iPad.


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:35:31   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
pmorin wrote:
🤷🏼

I saw this post and began to wonder if I was doing it all wrong. So I tested the cameras abilities with the same lens and focal distance, but used the Auto Setting on #1 and manually exposed for #2 in this sequence. As you can see, there is some blowout on #1 which is not there on #2. To get to the manual settings, I started at twice the focal distance for shutter speed, adjusted white balance for daylight, used the lowest setting for iso (200) and then adjusted the aperture to get the balance that I wanted. I could have let P mode do this for me, but this way in manual mode I can adjust brightness to what I like in my photos and what works for me in post.
Just to clarify, I shot in raw and let the camera make the jpeg to wirelessly transfer to my iPad.
🤷🏼 br br I saw this post and began to wonder if... (show quote)


And, how did you focus?

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:38:00   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
rehess wrote:
I believe I could focus as needed with aid of the split-image of my Pentax {film} “Super-Program” .... it is touch-and-go using what I see unaided with my DSLR’s viewfinder.


Guessing you don't understand what "10x zoom" means?

Reply
 
 
Aug 5, 2020 14:42:32   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Guessing you don't understand what "10x zoom" means?

No, I have it on my MILC, but focus peaking works for me. Most of my photos are taken hand-held at f/5.6 or f/8, so in most cases enlarging does little for me.

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:48:58   #
pmorin Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
And, how did you focus?


It was auto focus. I could have gained the same results with manual focus, like this one where I used manual focus. I had to adjust for the changing light, but then, I could.


(Download)

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:53:36   #
Ysarex Loc: St. Louis
 
Auto focus is normally faster and more accurate than manual focus -- I use what works and is most efficient.

As for controlling exposure I have a simple single requirement. It's my photo and I make the call -- period. I insist on retaining complete control over exposure. As such for the most part I use my camera's in (P)rogram mode but will switch to any other mode as conditions require.

Joe

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 14:53:46   #
CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City
 
pmorin wrote:
It was auto focus. I could have gained the same results with manual focus, like this one where I used manual focus. I had to adjust for the changing light, but then, I could.


The absence of EXIF data, and more particularly the low pixel resolution, makes it difficult to make any detailed assessment, but the one identified as auto-focus seems to appear better focused.

Reply
 
 
Aug 5, 2020 14:56:16   #
rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA
 
Ysarex wrote:
Auto focus is normally faster and more accurate than manual focus -- I use what works and is most efficient.

I use manual focus only when I have to, namely only with old manual focus lenses.

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 15:01:54   #
pmorin Loc: Huntington Beach, Palm Springs
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
The absence of EXIF data, and more particularly the low pixel resolution, makes it difficult to make any detailed assessment, but the one identified as auto-focus seems to appear better focused.


I will put them through post and then we will see if that focus problem was the camera software or my tired old eyes. And EXIF will be included. Downloaded from the camera was just my way of showing the difference in lighting from using auto or manual.

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 15:12:31   #
R.G. Loc: Scotland
 
The pedestrian answer is that camera metering is seen as something less than reliable because it can be caught out. Auto focus can be caught out but it can easily be set up to be controllable, and it can work in situations where manual focus wouldn't be a feasible alternative.

The situations where the camera's meter can be caught out are fairly easy to spot and the workarounds aren't difficult to implement. But despite that there are some who want to stick to their manual only approach. It seems to me that they would have to be at the point where choosing settings is almost instinctive, because otherwise it would require a fair amount of careful thought with possibly some mental arithmetic thrown in. In other words for them it's not a major distraction - which is exactly what it would be for someone who can't just produce suitable values off the top of their heads.

A relative beginner can easily learn when a camera's meter can give a wrong exposure and can easily learn how to deal with those situations. And he/she can do that without those techniques turning into a distraction. Their choice is therefore determined by their desire for the least distracting alternative. It seems to me that the real mistake would be to persist in a technique that had turned into a distraction when there are less distracting alternatives. My own preference is to be able to give my undivided attention to what I consider to be the most important things, like composition, choice of viewpoint and the like. And there's always an advantage to being able to react quickly to changing or fleeting circumstances.

Reply
Aug 5, 2020 15:19:20   #
Rongnongno Loc: FL
 
CHG_CANON wrote:
Hopefully, a simple observation will clarify things for you: Just because the word 'manual' occurs in both manual focus and manual exposure does not make 'manual' equal in these two unrelated context. Action sports and all forms of BIF photography would not exist today without AF. How you expose / meter impacts the final result for experienced photographers, but any level of experience can photograph moving subjects with today's AF-enabled cameras.

It existed before, sorry.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 17 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.